Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The Art and Science of War
War is as much an art as it is a science. There is in fact a science to art. Mathematical certitude, line, color, shape, the use of space, the logic of the mindit is all there in any artistic endeavor. One must understand the laws of physics and how the eye apprehends beauty to create marvels of architecture like the dome of St. Peters. War is no less a science or an art. The science of war is found in the way one must strategize and calculate according to logistics, resources, support, and knowledge of the enemy. Its art is found in the way one must be flexible, able to adapt at a moments notice, able to interpret the mission command and implement the spirit even if the objective must change on the fly. The art of war and the science of war must find alignmentbut too much science and not enough art could lead one to failure, just as too much art and not enough science could as well.
The art of war incorporates philosophy, knowledge of human nature, knowledge of the role that diplomacy plays in war, knowledge and skilled use of soft power...…of war: from weapons advancements such as progression from ancient catapults to todays hypersonic missiles and drone warfare, to psychological warfare and economic warfare, progression and advancement in tactics and application of pressure has as much science behind it in terms of technical understanding and skill as it does art in terms of application and realizing how things will play out. As in any scientific inquiry or artistic endeavor, however, there is always more room for greater understanding and knowledge of the factors and variables that can go into what affects outcomes. That is as true for war as for anything…
Sun Tsu Art of War Sun Tzu as Confucian Scholar-Soldier Sun Tzu and his famous book The Art of War cannot be understood apart from the Chinese cultural and historical context that produced them, although his concepts were widely borrowed and imitated over the past 2,000 years. He was a contemporary of Confucius, after all, and his assumptions about warfare were harmonized within that philosophical tradition. Warfare was an evil, a waste
Sun Tzu -- Art of War In his famous book The Art of War, Sun-zi (Sun Tzu) was evidently influenced by Confucian ideals, such as his statements about the avoiding prolonged war if possible and the most successful generals being those who could win without fighting at all. He was from the Southern, semi-barbaric state of Wu, and his book was probably written in the Warring States period or perhaps during
254). Evans wondered if in fact the two organizations have not heeded advice from the likes of Tzu: "…Can we be more proactive, anticipating and knowing what our 'enemies' are planning?" he wondered (p. 254). Evans (p. 254) also wonders if Tzu has a relevant point -- "When it is advantageous move; when not advantageous, stop" -- and explains that perhaps his organizations would be better off if they realize
" (XII) but even if employees are paid, they must still be loyal for other reasons, as quite often talented employees can just find a job elsewhere. "Therefore, "the arms with which a prince defends his state" must be "his own," counsels the author of the Prince still ads that "the chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms; and
If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected. These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged beforehand." (Tzu) But the true wisdom in this book is that it suggests constant preparation for all situations. "Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple
Sun Tzu and Military Classics Sun Tzu believed in freedom of action, mobility, surprise, deception and indirect attacks rather than frontal assaults. His method was always to "entice the enemy, to unbalance him, and to create a situation favorable for a decisive counter-stroke," while avoiding sieges and prolonged wars of attrition (Harvey, 2008, p. xlii). This was the opposite type of strategy from the commanders of the First World War or