Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

supchina.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 49 posts

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#21

Post by hinkley »

rmah wrote: post #19
RealityVoid wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was applicable to modern war, it would talk about logistics and technology, whereas it talks about merely tactics.

Um, Art of War does indeed cover the importance of logistics and supply. And espionage (from using deception to spies to scouting). And morale (both yours and the enemies). And many other factors. Tech not so much because armies don't generally develop new tech in the field.

I had a history teacher whose thesis was that advancements in information asymmetry attended nearly every major military upset in recorded history. Often that was improvements in, or exploits of, communication technology.

See also Alan Turing, or radar (wasn't the carrots and nightvision myth started as misinformation to conceal the perfection of radar technology?)

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#23

Post by danharaj »

hinkley wrote: post #20
danharaj wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's abstract advice, not generic advice. You don't understand what is being said unless you can instantiate it in concrete situations.

Is it abstract, or esoteric? Conversations like this remind me of the phenomenon of books that people say have a lot of re-reading value. There was either too much going on the first time through. So you reread it many times and see things you missed. When you watch a professional athlete or a master of anything, you can only 'see' the things that are within your horizon of comprehension. If someone is narrating they…

I personally think Sun Tzu is very readable and has layers of meaning. Some of its lines hit like lightning bolts but much of it is very subtle. I think a lot of Chinese philosophy of the era in this style is about how you approach, not what you're approaching.

This is one of my favorite lines (standing in for the whole chapter). I don't think it's very obvious what it means or how to apply it but after taking it to heart it helps me avoid bad fads and bad orthodoxy alike:

... Thus the battles of the skilled are without extraordinary victory, without reputation for wisdom, and without merit for courage.

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#24

Post by crpatino »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #17
chrisseaton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sun's writings are not used as guidance for war You're ignorant - they are used as guidance for war. For just one example - British Army Doctrine Land Operations, the current core document for how the British think about fighting war on land, quotes Tzu: > The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

> The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. This illustrates my pointer perfectly. This quote is just a fancy way of saying "It's great if you can get what you want without fighting." While true, pretty much every leader since the dawn of time has known that. Darius I, sent a mission to Sparta demanding earth and water for this very reason. The advice is nicely stated, but it isn't all that prac…

No wonder you cannot apreciate Sun Tzu's work if you fail to grasp the difference between >>subduing your enemy without fighting>getting what you want without fighting.It's not even subtle. One requires, but is not limited, to activelly foreclose the enemy's opportunities to deploy their assets against you; the other simply consists of siting on your hands and waiting for the good life to happen to you.

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#25

Post by twic »

> “Like a whetstone hurled at eggs.”

The translation i read has this as "like a grindstone hurled against eggs", and i'd always understood that to mean a millstone, rather than a whetstone. That makes the analogy far from anti-climactic: it's a perfect illustration of a huge force meeting entirely unequal resistance.

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#26

Post by harimau777 »

There's a quote that's apparently not actually by Sun Tzu but a similar/related source that says:

    The skillful employer of men will employ the wise man, 
    the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man.

    The wise man delights in establishing his merit
    The brave man likes to show his courage in action
    The covetous man is quick at seizing advantage
    And the stupid man has no fear of death

    - Su-ma Ch’ien
I wonder if a similar strategy could be applied to software teams. There was an article on Hacker News a while back talking about how developers can be broken down into camps depending on whether they care most about elegant code (artists), performance (hackers), or solving practical problems (makers). Perhaps one could say something like:

    The skillful employer of programmers will employ the artist,
    the hacker, the maker, and the tester.

    The artist delights in writing code that is elegant
    The hacker likes to show that his code is performant
    The maker is quick at meeting the spec
    And the tester has no fear of integration errors

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#28

Post by empath75 »

harimau777 wrote: post #26

There's a quote that's apparently not actually by Sun Tzu but a similar/related source that says: The skillful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man. The wise man delights in establishing his merit The brave man likes to show his courage in action The covetous man is quick at seizing advantage And the stupid man has no fear of death - Su-ma Ch’ien I wonder if a…

> I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and diligent -- their place is the General Staff. The next lot are stupid and lazy -- they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions. One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent -- he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.

— General Kurt von Hammerstein-Equord

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#29

Post by thaumasiotes »

chrisseaton wrote: post #4
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #2

Sun Tzu’s Art of War is one of the most overrated pieces of military advice. The writing is beautiful, the analogies are nice, and it is easily comprehensible to an outsider, but the advice is so generic as to be useless while sounding profound.

I disagree. You often see soldiers making mistakes that Tzu warns against. Some of what he says has only been put into practice over the last hundred years as we have developed doctrines like manoeuvre warfare. The advice sounds generic because it’s been given for so long! Everyone knows it - it turns out it’s difficult to have the discipline to apply it which is why it’s important to keep saying it. As a concrete ex…

> many other things Tzu said

Tzu, 子, is an honorific title along the lines of "Mister". The name is Sun, 孫.

It would be more normal to call him Sunzi, along the lines of Mozi, Xunzi, Confucius (the "ci"), or Mencius (ditto).

Re: Water rabbits and logs: The nature of Sun Tzu’s war, reexamined

#30

Post by NetToolKit »

empath75 wrote: post #28
harimau777 wrote: post #26

There's a quote that's apparently not actually by Sun Tzu but a similar/related source that says: The skillful employer of men will employ the wise man, the brave man, the covetous man, and the stupid man. The wise man delights in establishing his merit The brave man likes to show his courage in action The covetous man is quick at seizing advantage And the stupid man has no fear of death - Su-ma Ch’ien I wonder if a…

> I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and diligent -- their place is the General Staff. The next lot are stupid and lazy -- they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the…

For extra mischief points, you get to map these four groups to the four groups of developers listed above :)
Post reply on HN