There is an error I made in a tree in one of my first forum posts that I haven’t returned to:
You replied:
My thoughts now are that the fragment ‘to be’ means something like ‘in order to be’. From some reading ‘in order to’ is a subordinating conjunction, that relates a subordinate clause.
I think I see why you think “to be” is a child of “do have” when I think about it like this:
In order to be rational, you don’t have to copy me.
or
To be rational, you don’t have to copy me.