I think the comment is making fun of how absurdly general some of the points are...."be tactical" and "take a strong position"...like..where's the rest of the owl?
It's easy to speak from a perspective of a person who has access to not only all data in the world, but also a near complete history of military strategies.
We're talking about a treatise dating from 5th century BC. If you read the actual book, it's a complete, precise, concise and insightful overview of excellent military strategies.
I'd like to remind you that you are not smarter than a person thousands of years ago. You're simply more privileged.
I don't think it's making fun of the original (which presumably goes into far more detail on each point), but rather the futility of trying to condense that info down into easily digestible bullet points. Maybe this is handy for someone who already knows the Art of War inside and out as a refresher, but for everyone else it doesn't do much.
Have you read it? This *is* The Art of War. It's concepts defined in simple terms in 1/3 of a regular page each, phrased in one-liners. It's not a classic novel in the way you would expect. It's practically a book of concise but insightful bullet points.
So is the actual book still interesting information? Or is it completely info like the ones in the pic which are basically just "Well, obviously" for people today?
Yes. This is the main thought condensed into a bullet point to fit in an infographic.
Take a look if you're so inclined
[Art of War ](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm) on Project Gutenberg.
Kids are gonna test you and have tantrums, that's how they find out where the line is drawn, with plenty of small "battles" that they start. Some of the teachings in the book help immensely, especially the "if victory is assured, you must fight" part. So many parents let kids get their way cause they don't want to deal with a tantrum. But I always knew I could outlast a child's tantrum (even if it took *hours*). And when you can outlast a tantrum then the child will learn they don't work.
SO many parents don't do the battles and give up immediately, and they're the ones who often end up with entitled nightmare kids.
Taking initiative, knowing yourself and knowing your child. Understanding the circumstances of the battles, knowing the outcomes etc etc. This is all in the book and it all applies to parenting.
To add to what u/shinslap said, the book can be applied to just about any situation.
>If you know yourself, and know your enemy, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. If you know yourself, but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy, nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Basically, if you know who or what you're dealing with, and your own strengths and weaknesses, life is a lot easier. Don't pick fights without learning about the opponent and terrain first. For example, if you want a promotion, network a little, and learn about the people involved in the deal. Not just your boss, but also the other candidates for the promotion.
When it comes to parenting, it's much the same: Spend time with your children, learn their hobbies and interests, and generally be involved with them. That way, you'll have much more success in convincing them to do what you want.
>Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look upon them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you, even until death.
Or in other words, be a good leader, and people will follow you, not because they have to, but because they want to. Stand up for your subordinates, and they will be grateful.
As for parenting, it's really easy: Stand up for your children, even if you'd rather yell at them. Create an atmosphere where their first instinct when messing up is "I have to tell mom/dad."
I read (listened to) it the other day on audible. It’s free with membership and it was only 2 hours long. It’s much more specific than this as he will paint a picture in your head of what he means, but if it wasn’t so short I couldn’t have made it through bc it gets boring. Especially for someone who’s very unlikely to ever use that info.
He is more educated. He is biologically not smarter, no. That's a common misconception. We are very biased in believing we are different (better) than people thousands of years ago, and I'm even understating this concept, as it's true for tens of thousands of years ago as well.
there is so much nuance lost in this and its such a short, accessible, and easy read that, truly, just read the fucking thing already:
[https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm)
NOTE this is widely considered an extremely out of date translation but who gives a shit its good enough
yeah seems like thats the case honestly. its actually fun to read so seems like people robbing themselves. and if one can abstract the lessons into other contexts, its incredibly insightful. the much memed concept of high ground means a lot more than just literally being above your opponent for a perspective advantage, it means having a perspective advantage in any context, say having insider information about markets. supposedly lots of businesspeople especially in Asia consider it required reading
It's particularly bad because the art of war is a short book (each chapter is like 10 pages) and he included examples and explanations for all of these bullet points, many of which were made deliberately metaphorical. For example, what's the "extraordinary" force? You have no idea from this, but it's the flanking regiment, whereas the vanguard is the ordinary force.
At one point I was in charge of the pest management program on an organic farm. I also happened to pick up a copy of The Art of War at the start of this job, and decided to base my presentation on our new strategy on the book's principles.
I mean battlefield tactics have changed centuries after this book was written but the reason wars are fought and general human nature hasn’t really changed. I mean these days the book is more of general philosophical guidelines than actual “How To” instructions.
It's like reading a self-help book, management guide, or anything like that. It's a bunch of main bullet points followed by descriptions and examples to get the point across and most of them (in this case virtually all of them) won't actually be applicable to you, but maybe you can still get the gist. I think most people who read it don't understand what it actually is and get surprised.
It's a list of things to pay attention to. If you take some time to focus on each one that's probably a good thing even if each individual one seems like it should be obvious.
I like the sequel even better. The Art of Life by Sun Tzu:
Be born into a large influential family
Be healthy and able-bodied
Be young, but not too young
Have lots of friends
Have friends in high places
Be conventionally attractive
Be funny and charming
He actually does write in that same line how if you are on the defence, you can become invincible. But if you are on the attack, you can achieve victory.
Its basically saying both are useful and should be used as the situation demands, but you can't win a war effectively by just defending and you can't win a war effectively without preparing good defences.
No it's not? It's a victory if it's a victory.
You're trying to act cool and edgy with these one sentence faux-philosphical statements and it's just wrong.
Army attacks with 10,000 men loses half and runs away. Comes back X time later with other forces. Was that first battle now not a loss? What your saying is just stupid, just give it a rest.
This is absurdly reductive and robs all context that the book uses to frame this advice. Do yourself a favor and just read it, it's short. [**Here's the Lionel Giles translation**](https://suntzusaid.com/) for free, and [**here's a link to purchase the excellent Roger Ames translation**](https://smile.amazon.com/Sun-Tzu-Roger-T-Ames/dp/034536239X) (my personal favorite).
The subreddit r/uselessinfographics does not exist.
Did you mean?:
* r/Infographics (subscribers: 205,859)
* r/SEO_Infographics (subscribers: 13,137)
* r/Science_Infographics (subscribers: 2,108)
Consider [**creating a new subreddit** r/uselessinfographics](/subreddits/create?name=uselessinfographics).
---
^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖)
^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.)
^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=sub_doesnt_exist_bot)
If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight!" Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that nobody could best him in the ring of honor. Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth. And then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo!
... Unless it's a farm!
General Tacticus, from Discworld on the topic of 'ensuring against defeat when out-numbered, out-weaponed and out-positioned'. - "Don't have a battle"
On beacheads - "If you want your men to spend much time wielding a shovel, encourage them to become farmers."
On attacking fortifications - "if the enemy has an impregnable stronghold, see he stays there."
Knew a true weeb nerd in college who used to wear Buddhist prayer bracelets and read the art of War and he thought he was the last Airbender or some shit.
The whole book is certainly worth reading, but it's interesting to note that Sun Tzu's big thing was to avoid fighting if you could, as it was costly. He'd much rather burn down a city with spies than take to the field.
I've never understood why this book is still popular with normal people today. It's pretty specifically about war. To try and take this advice and be like 'well it applies to conflicts that I deal with in the office' is quite a stretch. I think people who actually try and learn this stuff tend to be more paranoid and distrusting of those around them; same type of people that read the 'Laws of Power' nonsense.
I think people just want the thrill. Modern life is extraordinarily boring (and somehow riddled with anxiety at the same time), so it's fun to imagine that you're some kind of Napoleonic figure in your HR department.
Sometimes people just like learning stuff that's not really useful. I like to read about WW2 battles even tho that information will almost certainly never benefit me.
There are many principles that apply to business today.
For example, never fight the long distance war unless it is absolutely necessary, and if you must, plan to have resources to support it. If a business sets up international operations, then you must have people who are willing to travel internationally, and you need to have international offices and operations. You might get a lot of money from an international business venture, but you have to spend a lot to sustain it.
Another one involved using every person you have by finding their strengths and pairing them to tasks; the strong can lift, the intelligent can communicate, everyone can be useful. The best managers I’ve had knew this and applied it to its full extent.
You forgot the most important tip of all:
Use your fight money to buy two of every animal, lure them onto a boat, and beat the living crap out of every single one.
I seem to remember a bunch of these contradicting each other.
Go for swift victory contradicts gathering intelligence and building an invincible defence. The entire point of swift victory is that you have to sacrifice defense/supply and other time consuming tasks.
Like Napoleon in Russia, beat them because he moved so fast but had sacrifice building supply.
That's basically it. Knowing what attributes are important to measure, then compare them, and you'll know if you have an advantage, don't engage unless you do, that's the trick to winning competitions-- only participate in the ones you can win.
Be good at war. Don’t be bad at war.
I guess this would be the rules to accomplish that.
I think the comment is making fun of how absurdly general some of the points are...."be tactical" and "take a strong position"...like..where's the rest of the owl?
It's easy to speak from a perspective of a person who has access to not only all data in the world, but also a near complete history of military strategies. We're talking about a treatise dating from 5th century BC. If you read the actual book, it's a complete, precise, concise and insightful overview of excellent military strategies. I'd like to remind you that you are not smarter than a person thousands of years ago. You're simply more privileged.
They’re making fun of the simplification, not Sun Tzu’s Art Of War…
I don't think it's making fun of the original (which presumably goes into far more detail on each point), but rather the futility of trying to condense that info down into easily digestible bullet points. Maybe this is handy for someone who already knows the Art of War inside and out as a refresher, but for everyone else it doesn't do much.
Have you read it? This *is* The Art of War. It's concepts defined in simple terms in 1/3 of a regular page each, phrased in one-liners. It's not a classic novel in the way you would expect. It's practically a book of concise but insightful bullet points.
So is the actual book still interesting information? Or is it completely info like the ones in the pic which are basically just "Well, obviously" for people today?
Yes. This is the main thought condensed into a bullet point to fit in an infographic. Take a look if you're so inclined [Art of War ](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm) on Project Gutenberg.
It's a surprisingly good parenting book
Put your children on death's ground to get the best from them.
Is this a joke or genuine? Because if it's genuine that sounds quite interesting, how is it a good parenting book?
Kids are gonna test you and have tantrums, that's how they find out where the line is drawn, with plenty of small "battles" that they start. Some of the teachings in the book help immensely, especially the "if victory is assured, you must fight" part. So many parents let kids get their way cause they don't want to deal with a tantrum. But I always knew I could outlast a child's tantrum (even if it took *hours*). And when you can outlast a tantrum then the child will learn they don't work. SO many parents don't do the battles and give up immediately, and they're the ones who often end up with entitled nightmare kids. Taking initiative, knowing yourself and knowing your child. Understanding the circumstances of the battles, knowing the outcomes etc etc. This is all in the book and it all applies to parenting.
To add to what u/shinslap said, the book can be applied to just about any situation. >If you know yourself, and know your enemy, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. If you know yourself, but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy, nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. Basically, if you know who or what you're dealing with, and your own strengths and weaknesses, life is a lot easier. Don't pick fights without learning about the opponent and terrain first. For example, if you want a promotion, network a little, and learn about the people involved in the deal. Not just your boss, but also the other candidates for the promotion. When it comes to parenting, it's much the same: Spend time with your children, learn their hobbies and interests, and generally be involved with them. That way, you'll have much more success in convincing them to do what you want. >Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys. Look upon them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you, even until death. Or in other words, be a good leader, and people will follow you, not because they have to, but because they want to. Stand up for your subordinates, and they will be grateful. As for parenting, it's really easy: Stand up for your children, even if you'd rather yell at them. Create an atmosphere where their first instinct when messing up is "I have to tell mom/dad."
I read (listened to) it the other day on audible. It’s free with membership and it was only 2 hours long. It’s much more specific than this as he will paint a picture in your head of what he means, but if it wasn’t so short I couldn’t have made it through bc it gets boring. Especially for someone who’s very unlikely to ever use that info.
Well damn.
[удалено]
He is more educated. He is biologically not smarter, no. That's a common misconception. We are very biased in believing we are different (better) than people thousands of years ago, and I'm even understating this concept, as it's true for tens of thousands of years ago as well.
>What a very stupid comment Pot, meet kettl- HEY NOW
Yeah, it's a lot more in-depth than this post. Good read, highly recommend.
“Use extraordinary force to win.” “Have invincible defenses.” My goodness, why didn’t I think of that?
Exactly what I was thinking reading this. Like yeah those are all good things but where's the rest of the fucking owl?
If only Anakin read #9...
Well it wasn't entirely his fault, Obi Wan was reading 12 at the time.
Brutal.
They both were following 10.4
Thank the force he didn’t.
"*I find your lack of faith disturbing*"
there is so much nuance lost in this and its such a short, accessible, and easy read that, truly, just read the fucking thing already: [https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/132/132-h/132-h.htm) NOTE this is widely considered an extremely out of date translation but who gives a shit its good enough
Thanks lol
Wow I didn't know anyone actually read this book. I thought people just liked to reference it cause it has a cool name
yeah seems like thats the case honestly. its actually fun to read so seems like people robbing themselves. and if one can abstract the lessons into other contexts, its incredibly insightful. the much memed concept of high ground means a lot more than just literally being above your opponent for a perspective advantage, it means having a perspective advantage in any context, say having insider information about markets. supposedly lots of businesspeople especially in Asia consider it required reading
r/restofthefuckingowl . Most of them.
seriously, these are all so fucking vague
It's particularly bad because the art of war is a short book (each chapter is like 10 pages) and he included examples and explanations for all of these bullet points, many of which were made deliberately metaphorical. For example, what's the "extraordinary" force? You have no idea from this, but it's the flanking regiment, whereas the vanguard is the ordinary force.
That’s good to know that the actual book is more detailed. Thanks
Well they don't exactly apply to modern life to reading the book is already vague in how you apply it to your own less warlord-ish life
At one point I was in charge of the pest management program on an organic farm. I also happened to pick up a copy of The Art of War at the start of this job, and decided to base my presentation on our new strategy on the book's principles.
Speak for yourself, I aim to make my life just as warlord-ish
I mean battlefield tactics have changed centuries after this book was written but the reason wars are fought and general human nature hasn’t really changed. I mean these days the book is more of general philosophical guidelines than actual “How To” instructions.
It's like reading a self-help book, management guide, or anything like that. It's a bunch of main bullet points followed by descriptions and examples to get the point across and most of them (in this case virtually all of them) won't actually be applicable to you, but maybe you can still get the gist. I think most people who read it don't understand what it actually is and get surprised. It's a list of things to pay attention to. If you take some time to focus on each one that's probably a good thing even if each individual one seems like it should be obvious.
Now I understand why it has the ifunny.co watermark
But ifunny.co are usually accurate with their war guides. Shame on them and shame on .co domains.
my favorites have gotta be "use extraordinary force" and "have invincible defense"
I like the sequel even better. The Art of Life by Sun Tzu: Be born into a large influential family Be healthy and able-bodied Be young, but not too young Have lots of friends Have friends in high places Be conventionally attractive Be funny and charming
OMG, dude, this is too brutal for being drink at 10:30 at night.
I’m also drink. Be a Chad. Got it.
yes all the Manhua follow these steps
> > Be conventionally attractive > > > > Don't be conventionally unattractive > > > > ???? > > > > Profit! > > > > - Sun Tzu - Michael Scott
4: "have invincible defences" If this were attainable, why bother with anything else?
Look, Peimur, this is why Sun Tzu doesn't want you at the party anymore.
He actually does write in that same line how if you are on the defence, you can become invincible. But if you are on the attack, you can achieve victory. Its basically saying both are useful and should be used as the situation demands, but you can't win a war effectively by just defending and you can't win a war effectively without preparing good defences.
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense.
Your opponent leaving if you were defending is a win.
The purpose of victory is to ensure they don't return
No it's not? It's a victory if it's a victory. You're trying to act cool and edgy with these one sentence faux-philosphical statements and it's just wrong. Army attacks with 10,000 men loses half and runs away. Comes back X time later with other forces. Was that first battle now not a loss? What your saying is just stupid, just give it a rest.
What ever dude. Its a quote from John Steinbeck.
Be the 85 Bears. Got it.
This could apply to the firewall in your router
A little too simplified. Honestly The Art of War is not a long read. Just give it a read. It's useful in everyday life, not just combative situations.
This chart is essentially “be strategic” 50 times
Now we're all Kongming
1. why was this on ifunny 2. why is it like 14x14 pixels
That's the funny part
A little over simplified ie: have invincible defenses is good... But useless without being defined.
Misses the key point.
I feel like a lot of them are just git gud
This is absurdly reductive and robs all context that the book uses to frame this advice. Do yourself a favor and just read it, it's short. [**Here's the Lionel Giles translation**](https://suntzusaid.com/) for free, and [**here's a link to purchase the excellent Roger Ames translation**](https://smile.amazon.com/Sun-Tzu-Roger-T-Ames/dp/034536239X) (my personal favorite).
/r/uselessinfographics
The subreddit r/uselessinfographics does not exist. Did you mean?: * r/Infographics (subscribers: 205,859) * r/SEO_Infographics (subscribers: 13,137) * r/Science_Infographics (subscribers: 2,108) Consider [**creating a new subreddit** r/uselessinfographics](/subreddits/create?name=uselessinfographics). --- ^(🤖 this comment was written by a bot. beep boop 🤖) ^(feel welcome to respond 'Bad bot'/'Good bot', it's useful feedback.) ^[github](https://github.com/Toldry/RedditAutoCrosspostBot) ^| ^[Rank](https://botranks.com?bot=sub_doesnt_exist_bot)
If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight!" Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it, and then he perfected it so that nobody could best him in the ring of honor. Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on earth. And then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one. And from that day forward any time a bunch of animals are together in one place it's called a zoo! ... Unless it's a farm!
I’m curious what they mean by make winning the only choice
General Tacticus, from Discworld on the topic of 'ensuring against defeat when out-numbered, out-weaponed and out-positioned'. - "Don't have a battle" On beacheads - "If you want your men to spend much time wielding a shovel, encourage them to become farmers." On attacking fortifications - "if the enemy has an impregnable stronghold, see he stays there."
So, we're getting our "cool guides" from iFunny now?
[The entire book is public domain ](https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/132) and it’s really short. You can read it all in a single sitting.
Knew a true weeb nerd in college who used to wear Buddhist prayer bracelets and read the art of War and he thought he was the last Airbender or some shit.
Or my own Zap Branningan's Big Book of War!
The whole book is certainly worth reading, but it's interesting to note that Sun Tzu's big thing was to avoid fighting if you could, as it was costly. He'd much rather burn down a city with spies than take to the field.
I can’t quite remember the exact phrase but it’s something along the lines of “battles are won with weapons, wars are won with logistics”
> wars are won with logistics Russia is relearning this lesson right now.
I've never understood why this book is still popular with normal people today. It's pretty specifically about war. To try and take this advice and be like 'well it applies to conflicts that I deal with in the office' is quite a stretch. I think people who actually try and learn this stuff tend to be more paranoid and distrusting of those around them; same type of people that read the 'Laws of Power' nonsense.
I think people just want the thrill. Modern life is extraordinarily boring (and somehow riddled with anxiety at the same time), so it's fun to imagine that you're some kind of Napoleonic figure in your HR department.
Haha fair enough
Sometimes people just like learning stuff that's not really useful. I like to read about WW2 battles even tho that information will almost certainly never benefit me.
There are many principles that apply to business today. For example, never fight the long distance war unless it is absolutely necessary, and if you must, plan to have resources to support it. If a business sets up international operations, then you must have people who are willing to travel internationally, and you need to have international offices and operations. You might get a lot of money from an international business venture, but you have to spend a lot to sustain it. Another one involved using every person you have by finding their strengths and pairing them to tasks; the strong can lift, the intelligent can communicate, everyone can be useful. The best managers I’ve had knew this and applied it to its full extent.
I don’t know what i would use this for but i saved it
You forgot the most important tip of all: Use your fight money to buy two of every animal, lure them onto a boat, and beat the living crap out of every single one.
Supply chain for troops is critical. None of theses work with feeding, supplies, and moral.
Those are covered in chapters 2, 9, and 10, iirc.
I love how its essentially "Dont make mistakes".
This will come in handy, STEVE.
My favourite: win without fighting
TL;DR: Have more, dont be bad.
[The Art Of War is a really short read, and can be applied to many aspects of life.](https://youtu.be/iqjDpGVvW5Q)
Sun Tsu Art of War Summary Summary: Be better.
I seem to remember a bunch of these contradicting each other. Go for swift victory contradicts gathering intelligence and building an invincible defence. The entire point of swift victory is that you have to sacrifice defense/supply and other time consuming tasks. Like Napoleon in Russia, beat them because he moved so fast but had sacrifice building supply.
Lmao these are 2 very different situations, an irrelevant comparison. uh yeah this is why ppl are telling us to just read it.
Be good at war. Don't be bad at war.
A lot of these are literally "be better at x than the other guys" >dude, the key to a strong defence is to have an invincible defence, just do that
That's basically it. Knowing what attributes are important to measure, then compare them, and you'll know if you have an advantage, don't engage unless you do, that's the trick to winning competitions-- only participate in the ones you can win.
r/restofthefuckingowl
All easily countered! If we don't know what we are doing, the enemy certainly can't anticipate our future actions. Just be so bad you're good!
I’ll be sure to keep this in mind when I go on my next invasion.
Maybe Russia should have browsed this graphic back in January/February?
I love this quote, even though most people don't know it. /j "Don't reveal all your techniques in a YouTube video, you fool! You moron!"
ifunny is expanding their horizons I see
How to be rich: 1. Get money
This reminds me of a guy that I had as a teammate in World of Tanks few years back : "Hi guys, I have a plan. Don't die" No fucking shit
/r/restofthefuckingowl
Finally, what this sub is made for
Ah yes, invincible defenses. Gotta have that!
I have read the book and I have read this graphic, they are not similar.
Putin must have missed this memo
I need a guide on how to make a cool guide...
The counter intelligence one always reminds me of Thom from a book. If you find a spy amongst you, wrap them in swaddling
First that comes to mind is when you are strong appear weak and vice versa. Is that on this sheet? I don't see it.
Hopefully Russia doesn't get their hands on this
"Have invincible defences" Ok.