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

Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

thestrategybridge.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 211 posts

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#11

Post by bruce511 »

As with all advice, context matters. It is good to know the rules, the best practices, the proven strategies. But it is also good to understand the context of those strategies to understand when the context has changed.

SQL is clearly the right way to store large quantities of data (some would say the only way.) Until some folk realised their context was different, and NoSql was born.

Strategy is hard because it plays out in the long term. Two roads diverge in a wood,and you have to pick one. But the consequences if that decision may be felt 20 years later, or next week, or never.

Advice from those who went before is valuable. But care must be taken to understand the context of that advice.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#12

Post by rippercushions »

PostOnce wrote: post #6

There is a reason people still read Sun Tzu 2500 years later, and it's not because he's been on a press tour promoting his book. The man was a consummate master of his art, if he was indeed one man. My favorite reading of The Art of War, because Baldermort has an awesome voice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDlW3WqXisM

The article notes that Sun Tzu's celebrated victory over the Chu was very short-lived, since the Chu remnants promptly allied with the Qin and the Yue to roll them back within two years, and his Wu clan was entirely exterminated within three decades.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#13

Post by jltsiren »

_8j50 wrote: post #4

From what little I know Sun Tzu has a lot of "good rule od thumb" wisdom but you shouldn't stick to what he says as if he is infallible. For example: > The greatest victory is that which requires no battle He says a lot of stuff like that but this is only true if your aim is peace in the near term and appearances of victory. The carnage of war, the worse it is the more it avoids even more war. If you win without batt…

The main point of that quote is that a battle is a negative-sum game. Reaching the same ultimate outcome without a battle is better than fighting for it, because both sides will suffer losses in the battle.

Trying to achieve a lasting peace through a decisive victory rarely works, because people don't work like that. In a more likely outcome, you are simultaneously not aggressive enough to prevent future conflicts and too aggressive, creating enemies motivated by revenge. Revenge is a dangerous motive, because it can turn battles into positive-sum games. Any enemy losses – both combatant and civilian – become victories, while your losses only matter by reducing your ability to kill more enemies.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#14

Post by PostOnce »

rippercushions wrote: post #12
PostOnce wrote: post #6

There is a reason people still read Sun Tzu 2500 years later, and it's not because he's been on a press tour promoting his book. The man was a consummate master of his art, if he was indeed one man. My favorite reading of The Art of War, because Baldermort has an awesome voice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDlW3WqXisM

The article notes that Sun Tzu's celebrated victory over the Chu was very short-lived, since the Chu remnants promptly allied with the Qin and the Yue to roll them back within two years, and his Wu clan was entirely exterminated within three decades.

I think this is like applying the "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" logic to war; it's a multifaceted thing, you can do everything right and still lose.

It wouldn't still be mandatory reading at war colleges the world over if it didn't still have merit, or if it had no merit to begin with.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#16

Post by lordnacho »

Finally. I remember reading Sun Tzu and thinking "hmm all this stuff is either very specific to ancient China, or unsubstantiated". As in, everyone sounded like distilled wisdom, but it smelled. The thing that was missing I think was that normally when you read a text about something that's trying to make a general point, it cites a whole bunch of historical precedents. "Always drive deep into enemy territory, like X, Y, and Z times where they won decisively" would work better than just a bunch of "do this, do that".

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#18

Post by mrbungie »

_8j50 wrote: post #4

From what little I know Sun Tzu has a lot of "good rule od thumb" wisdom but you shouldn't stick to what he says as if he is infallible. For example: > The greatest victory is that which requires no battle He says a lot of stuff like that but this is only true if your aim is peace in the near term and appearances of victory. The carnage of war, the worse it is the more it avoids even more war. If you win without batt…

Sabotage and propaganda are examples of making war without direct combat. I've always interpreted that as what Sun Tzu was referring to.

I'm also sure that said position is not absolute, but rather just the idea that one should not look into prolonging battles (except when you're consciously participating in a war of attrition, obviously) and to hopefully evade them altogether as they at least reduce morale and exhaust resources.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#19

Post by thaumasiotes »

PostOnce wrote: post #14
rippercushions wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article notes that Sun Tzu's celebrated victory over the Chu was very short-lived, since the Chu remnants promptly allied with the Qin and the Yue to roll them back within two years, and his Wu clan was entirely exterminated within three decades.

I think this is like applying the "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" logic to war; it's a multifaceted thing, you can do everything right and still lose. It wouldn't still be mandatory reading at war colleges the world over if it didn't still have merit, or if it had no merit to begin with.

> It wouldn't still be mandatory reading at war colleges the world over if it didn't still have merit, or if it had no merit to begin with.

Spoken like someone with absolutely no idea how mandatory reading is chosen.

Re: Notes from a Sun Tzu Skeptic (2019)

#20

Post by ggm »

PostOnce wrote: post #14
rippercushions wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article notes that Sun Tzu's celebrated victory over the Chu was very short-lived, since the Chu remnants promptly allied with the Qin and the Yue to roll them back within two years, and his Wu clan was entirely exterminated within three decades.

I think this is like applying the "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" logic to war; it's a multifaceted thing, you can do everything right and still lose. It wouldn't still be mandatory reading at war colleges the world over if it didn't still have merit, or if it had no merit to begin with.

"infamous army" by Georgette Heyer (she pretty much invented the bodice-ripper genre which Barbara Cartland drove a long way afterward) was on the reading list at cranwell college. Best description of the battle of waterloo ever, alongside the romance. The lead characters include Harry Smith and his Wife, who are the stars of "the spanish bride" which is about the campaign in Spain, when not about smooching and teenage love affairs. She became Lady Smith.. of Ladysmith (south Africa) fame. Nothing like doing "the crown" before fictionalised fact was on netflix

Sometimes, the reading list is quite varied.

They could have chosen the first 2 chapters of Stendhal's "charterhouse of parma" if you want a vibe from down at the platoon level (for much the same reasons as Heyer's book was chosen for an overall view at Wellington's level)

Post reply on HN