Is The Art of War considered literature? It is written in fragmented

>>9545386

Yes, The Art of War is an absolute must and relatively short. Even if you are a pacifist, The Art of War is a good read. Tzu from the very beginning highlights that war should be an absolute last resort. He especially highlighted how siege warfare was the lowest form of war, costing the besiegers the most in terms of time, effort, money, and manpower- often leading to a defeat if faced by a relatively equal force.

>>9545396

Thanks, I mean I've already read it, I was wondering about the rest of you guys. If you enjoy the Western Canon do you also enjoy this book?

>>9545403

Its pretty old but unprecedented. Tzu knew how to wage a war. I'd say its worth a look.

>>9545386

I'm not sure why people tend to gloss over military strategy on this board. I mean, it IS literature. It just so happens to have practical applications. The same could be said for Philosophy, but that's clearly talked about everywhere on this board.

>>9545409
>old is a bad thing
>unprecedented things are good

if you're not capable of critical thought i suggest leaving this board and focusing on school, and hopefully you won't drop out

>>9545419

>implying I was stating that old literature is bad
>implying I wasn't implying myself that this book had set the precedent for generations of future war theorycrafting
>implying implications

Jesus dude, how could you miss the Mark that much?

>>9545425
You posted an incoherent string of words without much depth. If you're this illogical on a board for pseuds like yourself, I am fully confident you will continue to encounter many obstacles in your squalid life.

>>9545446

I am fully confident that you can suck my dick, hombre.

>>9545449
>being this mad over an objectively right appraisal.

what little you have will be sucked by a lawnmower. leave this board, faggot.

>>9545386

Deception as a tenet is the second thing Tzu lays out in his book. That's how highly he valued it. That said, he seemed a pretty noble guy. He used deception to win, and that's it.

>>9545463

>implying I'm mad

Lol, go fuck yourself. I'm laughing at you.

>>9545419
>>9545446
>>9545463

Shut up you stupid faggot. Go see a therapist. Leave this emotional shit off /lit/ before you ruin another thread with retarded pedantry.

>>9545471
You are mad. You're laughing at your own weakness.

>>9545475
Yes, exactly. Cold logic is emotional shit. Are you new to arguing and about to break into tears? You're not good at this.

>>9545476

>some guy is telling me what I'm doing

Whoa man, settle down. I don't know if I can handle your superior intellect.

>>9545469

Always thought it was purposeful that this was listed pretty early on in the text. Its use is obvious, and I did enjoy the story that was used to demonstrate its worth.

>>9545469
>>9545482
That's not it at all. He didn't value deception at all. Why are you guys so bad at reading Sun Tzu?

>>9545491

>A military operation involves deception. Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear ineffective.

This is taken literally from the book. Would you like to support your point?

>>9545501
Because there are biographical records that give details about his life and personality, and in them, he is noted to have thought quite poorly about deception and violence.

>>9545386

I bought the book recently down in Rochester around 2 weeks ago. I really enjoy it. In fact, I did see that it's philosophy on war could be applied to certain areas in daily life at one point, especially sports (albeit less intense). The tactics and stratagems explained by Tzu usually are centered on conservation of energy, be it physical or economical, such as avoidance of sieges.

>>9545507
>>9545501

I don't need to say anything different because I don't need to repeat myself. Its in his book. In the first chapter. He valued it. Come to think of it, you'd have to be pretty fucking stupid not to.

>>9545491

Sun Tzu was actually an excellent general and his book is a literal account of his thought in war.

>>9545518
>Translations give an accurate rendition of a person's thought.
Nice reductive thinking dumbass. I'm guessing you're a B- student?

>>9545535

You're just trying to be a little cunt aren't you? Fuck off.

>>9545557
No, I'm more pleasant in threads where the OP isn't a fucking idiot.

My problem with you is that you're wrong and a pleb. Plain and simple.

>>9545573

(You)

>>9545516
Yes, Tzu was adamant: siege warfare was to be avoided at all costs. It is the lowest form of war, as he described it. If you think about it, its true. Sieges are expensive. They make you look bad. They're more and more exposed the longer they go on. Its hard to keep a siege a secret.

>>9545516
Get out of my state.

Are there any more books like Art of War?

>>9545823

On War by Clausewitz

Its as big as a textbook, so kind of a step up from The Art of War in terms of light v. heavy.

>>9545386
Which hardcover is best hardcover of the art of war?

>>9545419
He never said old was bad, anon. Please calm down.

>>9545622
How about you get off this board? No need for any more tards leaving nu-/b/ and /b/ to mark their dumping grounds here.
Seriously, if you can't accept criticism without making an arbitrary statement, no need to keep posting here or on this thread.

>>9545481
>Cold logic
go back

>>9546491

That sperg was just going on a samefagging rampage itt. I wonder what made him so asshurt

>>9545507
>Because there are biographical records that give details about his life and personality
The Spring and Autumn Annals discusses him briefly, and the Zuozhuan doesn't mention him at all, even when it covers events he was supposedly central to such as the Battle of Boju.
Sima Qian's history, written three centuries later, has different biographical details and mainly features a cute story about concubines.

The biggest defense of Sun Tzu is that it was almost certainly edited and added to over time.

I do enjoy the Western Canon and I think this book is essential as well.

>>9545386
Sun Tzu wasn't really that popular in the West until the late 1800s/early 1900s

Off the top of my head, Clauswitz "On War" might be what you're searching for

>>9545386
Because he went to war using all these ideals in this book and he utterly failed and died using them them. They're proven not to work by his example

>>9546976
Uhm no sweetie, try again ;)

>>9546995
Look it up

I feel like The Art Of War doesn't matter to anyone who isn't a pseud that drinks kombucha and wants to make it on the stock market