/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17196088]

Is this worth a read for a brainlet? or should it be categorized as a meme

[Anonymous No.17196099]

It's pretty short.

[Anonymous No.17196113]

>>17196099
>It's pretty short.
Is it dense though

[Anonymous No.17196144]

it's a classic and it's short, so yeah check it out

[Anonymous No.17196151]

>>17196144
How short? Is it worth my time

[Anonymous No.17196157]

>>17196151
if you have time to shitpost on 4chan you have time to read a book

[Anonymous No.17196167]

>>17196157
You're not doing a very good job of convincing me to read it

[Anonymous No.17196170]

>>17196167
why would I care if you read it or not?

[Anonymous No.17196192]

>>17196088
You should read the commentaries of Zhuge Liang and Liu Ji on the Art of War.

[Anonymous No.17196209]

>>17196088
Classic of Chinese philosophy. Definitely not just about war. Background knowledge of i ching will help.

[Anonymous No.17196214]

>>17196192
oh shit I didn't know kongming wrote a book. buying this now

[Anonymous No.17196215]

It's like 100 pages of low density text, at most you could read it in a couple of hours

[Anonymous No.17196222]

>>17196192
thanks mate i will check it out

[Anonymous No.17196235]

>>17196215
>It's like 100 pages of low density text, at most you could read it in a couple of hours
Low density meaning easy to understAnd?

[Anonymous No.17196239]

>>17196088
If you read it as a mystical text, it's pretty kino.

[Anonymous No.17196244]

>>17196235
No its not easy to understand lol, that's why there's a shitton of commentary on it
Traditionally you would read like seven commentators along with or some bullshit
Its similar to the Bible where there's a lot of depth to the sayings and there's a thousand scholars all with their own takes on what the fuck Jesus meant when he said "Let the dead bury their own dead" or any other saying
So basically you can read the book in a couple hours and if you want you can study it more to get more depth out of it, or you know, you could not

[Anonymous No.17196248]

>>17196088
>do the opposite of what your enemy expects
there u go brah i just saved you 30 minutes of reading

[Anonymous No.17196250]

>>17196235
also as a side note China is notoriously shit at military combat relative to the size of their military so I would take anything a chink has to say on war with a huge grain of salt

[Anonymous No.17196276]

>>17196235
this is literally the first chapter of 13
(1) Laying Plans
1.Sun Tz ̆usaid: The art of war is of vital importance to the State
.2.It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.
3.The art of war, then, is governed by five constant factors, tobe taken into account in one’s deliberations, when seeking to determine the conditions obtaining in the field.
4.These are: (1) the Moral Law; (2) Heaven; (3) Earth; (4) theCommander; (5) method and discipline.
5, 6.The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.
7.Heaven signifies night and day, cold and heat, times and seasons.
8.Earthcomprises distances, great and small; danger and secu-rity; open ground and narrow passes; the chances of life anddeath.
9.The Commanderstands for the virtues of wisdom, sincerity,benevolence, courage and strictness.
10. By method and disciplineare to be understood the marshalingof the army in its proper subdivisions, the graduations of rankamong the officers, the maintenance of roads by which supplies may reach the army, and the control of military expenditure.
11.These five heads should be familiar to every general: he whoknows them will be victorious; he who knows them not will fail.
12.Therefore, in your deliberations, when seeking to determine themilitary conditions, let them be made the basis of a comparison, in this wise: —
13. (1)Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral Law?(2) Which of the two generals has most ability?(3)With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven andEarth?(4) On which side is discipline most rigorously enforced?(5) Which army is stronger?(6) On which side are officers and men more highly trained?(7)In which army is there the greater constancy both in rewardand punishment?
14.By means of these seven considerations I can forecast victory or defeat.
15.The general that hearkens to my counsel and acts upon it, will conquer: — let such a one be retained in command! The general that hearkens not to my counsel nor acts upon it, will suffe rdefeat: — let such a one be dismissed!
16.While heeding the profit of my counsel, avail yourself also ofany helpful circumstances over and beyond the ordinary rules.
17.According as circumstances are favourable, one should modify one’s plans.
18. All warfare is based on deception.
19.Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, wemust make him believe we are near.
(cont --->v)

[Anonymous No.17196279]

>>17196276
(please ignore some possible copy formatting mistakes)
20.Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crushhim.
21.If he is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him.
22.If your opponent is of choleric temper, seek to irritate him.Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant.
23.If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united,separate them.
24.Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
25.These military devices, leading to victory, must not be divulged beforehand.
26.Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculationsin his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses abattle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.

[Anonymous No.17196830]

>>17196276
>>17196279
Though don't a lot of printings have like 20% Sun Tzu and then 80% other scholars offering interpretations and annotations of Sun Tzu

[Anonymous No.17196847]

Your x is either y or z. When others expect y be z.

[Anonymous No.17196909]

Ohh yeah. What the world definitely needs is more dumbshit opinions on the art of war.
I honestly feel bad for Sun Tzu.

[Anonymous No.17196987]

>>17196088
It has some interesting ideas even now. For example, rather than surrounding your enemy completely, purposefully leave them an exit so they feel they can retreat. People who feel cornered will fight to the death, people who feel retreat is possible may surrender with less bloodshed.

You can apply this same principle to business negotiations, politics, rhetoric, etc.

Definitely worth a read imo. However, reading a commentary is necessary to understand it in its full context.

[Anonymous No.17197030]

>>17196167
It's less than 3 hours in audiobook form. In other words, it's about the same length as a classic, Western poem.

[Anonymous No.17197041]

>>17196235
>easy to understand

It's about as easy to understand as any classical text (i.e. so goddamn hard to understand that you can write a Ph.D paper on interpreting it).

Good luck, nigger. All I got from it was that sometimes, slapping someone is all it takes to cure them from their delusions.

[Anonymous No.17197149]

The book itself is fine enough to read once, but holy shit it does not deserve to be memed into some sort of life changing book. It’s not even the text’s fault, it’s just people who have never read it spreading misinformation based on reputation.

[Anonymous No.17197154]

>>17197149
>he only read it once