Art of War

12/01/2025

Sun Tzu 9.37:

“To begin by bluster, but afterwards to take fright at the enemy's numbers, shows a supreme lack of intelligence.”

***

Why does Sun Tzu say this?

When a general begins by bluster and later falls into fright, you can know that he failed to understand even the basic outline of the situation.

He did not spy out the enemy.

The job of the general was to gather the facts and determine a good plan. He has not done it.

This is like forgetting to look before you leap.

Gather information first. Then make your move.

To do otherwise is a recipe for disaster.

If you find yourself leaping first, it is time to reconsider your whole approach.

Review your habits.

Set in your mind a standing order that you must always discern before deciding.

Resolve to look long and to look well until you know the limits of what must be known about the matter at hand.

10/01/2025

I found this online:

The Donkey said to the Tiger: “The grass is blue.” The Tiger replied: “No, the grass is green.”

Their discussion heated up. So they submitted it to arbitration before the Lion, the King of the Jungle. Even Before reaching the clearing where the Lion king was sitting on his throne, the Donkey shouted out loud: “Your Majesty, the grass is blue, right?” The Lion responded: “Yes, you’re correct, the grass is blue.”

The Donkey continued: “The Tiger contradicts and annoys me, please punish him.” The Lion punished the Tiger with 5 years of silence. The Donkey cheerfully went on his way repeating: “The grass is blue.”

The Tiger accepted his punishment, but asked the Lion: “Your Majesty, why have you punished me? Everyone knows the grass is green.” The Lion said: “Yes, you’re very true but you are being punished because a brave and intelligent creature like you wasted time arguing with a Donkey and, on top of that, bothered me with a silly question that doesn’t even deserve attention.”

The worst way to waste your precious time is to argue with the fool and fanatic who is least bothered about truth or reality but believes only in his own beliefs and unrealistic illusions.

Don’t involve yourselves in pointless arguments. There are people who, no matter how much evidence we present them, are not in the capacity to understand, and others are blinded by ego, hatred, as well as resentment. All they want is to be right even if they are not.

When ignorance screams, intelligence is silent. Your peace and quiet are worth more.

(Source in comments)

09/01/2025

Common Post Format:

-This is what other people are saying.

-But look at me and how I see things.

-I’m one of the good guys, and I see things so much more clearly than some people. Haha.

-I.

-Me.

-Look at Me.

***

It can be hard to avoid creating this impression.

Some ideas:

Avoid a tone of “talking down.”

Avoid a tone of “chatty smugness.”

Avoid being artificial and performative. (Be a good person; don’t just pretend to be one.)

Post in order to add value, not to extract value by pulling the spotlight onto yourself for its own sake.

Focus mainly on establishing what is true and false, good and evil, etc—not on how it reflects upon you or how it positions you.

Post from a place of personal security, not insecurity. (You have to achieve this in the rest of your life and then bring it to social media. You cannot gain it here.)

09/01/2025

09/01/2025

Understand what “Sealioning” is.

Many people on social media will try to act like they are not trying to discredit you and waste your time, but their entire goal is to do exactly that.

See below for an example of this behavior and what to do about it.

08/01/2025

Sun Tzu 9.24:

“Humble words and increased preparations are signs that the enemy is about to advance. Violent language and driving forward as if to the attack are signs that he will retreat.”

***

Since your opponent is probably not a fool and probably not incompetent, and since he is trying to destroy you in an efficient way, anticipate that he is lying to you.

When the enemy takes time to convince you to be passive, it may be that he is being active.

When he tries to convince you to organize your retreat, it may be that he wants you to fail to notice that he is also conducting one.

Take the time to think about not only what the opponent is saying in public, but also why he is saying it.

What does the opponent want?

Can you put yourself into his place?

Until you have discerned the intentions of your opponent, you do not understand the most important factor on the battlefield: your opponent’s mind.

Even in intellectual persuasion and debate, you need to find out what motivates your opponent and what outcome he wants to achieve.

That sets the context for all of your plans.

06/01/2025

Sun Tzu 9.20:

If his place of encampment is easy of access, he is tendering a bait.

***

Your opponent is probably not a fool. He is probably not incompetent.

Anticipate that he knows how battles work. He knows what will seem to you to be an opportunity too good to pass up.

You are not the only person capable of being creative.

When your opponent sees your actions, he will look for ways to push you into a bad position. He will look for ways to deceive you.

You cannot anticipate all of your opponent’s deceptions. Make your plans with this fact in mind.

Do what you can to mitigate the risk of surprising reversals.

Always have a contingency plan.

When you discover that your opponent wants you to take some action, find out why.

Until you know your opponent’s mind, you are in no position to begin making plans.

03/01/2025

Two instances of the "Drunken Master" approach to social media:

24/12/2024

Merry Christmas everyone!

Here are some tips on wording choices for social media.

Think about these:

“downright ignorant”
“you’re brighter than this”
“only a fool”

😂

These might be true… but they are only for rare situations.

(At least, that is what I keep reminding myself 😅)

These are not the expressions used by a person wanting to be a friend or ally.

They tend to undermine any chance at respect, friendship, or cooperation.

Now, there are some people we may have no intention of ever cooperating with.

It might sometimes be appropriate to call such people wicked or foolish.

(This is a point of some debate.)

We also should keep in mind the secondary consequences.

By alienating one person, we might also give others the impression that we are not being objective or that we are not safe to be around.

There is much here worth thinking about.

23/12/2024

Sun Tzu 9.11:

All armies prefer high ground to low and sunny places to dark.

**

The reasons for this idea seem obvious. But the point is worthy of study.

An army prefers to be high up and in the sun for the following reasons:

1. The army can see a greater distance to know about the arrival of threats.

2. The army knows that its position is difficult to scale, and it makes an ideal place from which to shoot arrows.

3. The army will be able to enjoy the sun’s light and heat and be better protected from diseases that infest places that are low, dark, and damp.

4. Knowing all this, the army can better rest and restore its spirit.

A wise general will position his camp in favorable spots.

Also, he will consider ways to put the enemy into a bad position—a place with no high ground and little sun.

And the wise general will watch out against the enemy attempting to do the same to him.

He ought to give thought to these issues when he makes calculations in his temple.

The idea should extend not only to where an army sets camp, but also to where it travels, and, in a broader sense, what kinds of campaigns it conducts in the first place.

The enemy is enough of a threat to you; why place your army on ground that increases the danger if you do not need to?

These ideas also apply to polemics and to debates.

Be cautious about which battles you choose to fight.

Why place yourself or your allies on ground that will needlessly make life more difficult?

Survival matters. Living to fight another day matters.

Keep a sense of proportion, and do not be goaded into wasting your strength in any old place.

The whole campaign matters. Therefore, efficiency matters.

Think ahead about whether a given piece of ground is worth occupying at this time.

Is every heated “discussion of the day” worth your energy?

Do you need to take a stand on this or that perennial debate?

You cannot be everywhere at the same time.

Identify the paths and the lands most necessary to your own mission, and stay away from everywhere else.

Like one who takes a dog by the ears is he who passes by and meddles with strife not belonging to him (Proverbs 26:17).

22/12/2024

How To Give a Perfect Answer

“The tongue of the righteous is choice silver;
The heart of the wicked is of little worth.”
-Proverbs 10:20

How do you communicate wisely? Especially when writing online in a blog or on social media?

The perfect answer is not some “end-all” retort.

The perfect answer is the mature answer.

So our basic question is: “How can we be more mature when we communicate online?”

If you’ve ever discussed important ideas on a social media or a blog, you’ll know why this is important and why it is difficult.

To communicate effectively in writing is a special, learnable skill.

Before you can learn it, you must want it.

You must admit you don’t have it all together. It is too easy to say something in the moment and to think your words are “choice silver” — only later to realize the words ring of tin.

(Don’t ask me how I know!)

Link below.

15/12/2024

Sun Tzu 9.3-4:

3. After crossing a river, you should get far away from it.

4. When an invading force crosses a river in its onward march, do not advance to meet it in mid-stream. It will be best to let half the army get across, and then deliver your attack.

***

Why would it be wise to stay far away from a river?

A river blocks an army’s movement and makes it vulnerable to being surrounded.

A wise general does not camp in such a place.

But, when he finds that his opponent is crossing a river, he might take advantage of the situation.

He can bring the attack at the moment of the enemy’s greatest vulnerability, when his army is evenly divided (and also wet).

The van of the army will be forced to enter battle ill-prepared or to retreat.

The rear of the army will be unable to join the battle at all.

This creates an opportunity for “defeat in detail”—your whole army can be brought against a far smaller force, leading to a rout.

Rout:

“A chaotic and disorderly retreat or withdrawal of troops from a battlefield, resulting in the victory of the opposing party, or following defeat, a collapse of discipline, or poor morale”

(source below)

Does the above concept apply in persuasion and polemics?

Yes. When you see that the opposing intellectual camp is somehow split, you may have an opportunity to disrupt their campaign.

Here, we are not talking about a situation where the opposing camp is having an internal squabble. You should let that kind of thing happen and try to stay out of sight while they argue with each other.

This brings to mind the aphorism attributed to Napoleon.

“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Rather, the river principle would refer to cases in which the opposing force is simply incapable of forming a united resistance to your advance.

For instance, suppose that a major disagreement has arisen in your opponent’s camp and two sides have formed within it, each with clear statements marking out their views and distinguishing them one from one other.

This might be the perfect to time to press forward.

Find some topic of debate that meets this criteria:

1. Part of the opponent’s camp will feel compelled to debate you.
2. Another part of the camp will be in a poor position to enter the debate.

Perhaps this second half of the camp has to remain silent due to their pre-existing statements on the issue.

Another implication is this:

Never let your opponent do the same to you.

Therefore, you must work to maintain intellectual unity within your own camp.

It might seem like this kind of effort is a distraction, but it is necessary.

You need to know who is in your camp and where they stand.

You need to clarify your intellectual positions to your allies ahead of time so that they will not accidentally allow a vulnerability to develop.

13/12/2024

Basic approach:

-Point out when they act like emotional manipulators.

-Then go straight to the logical issue.

That’s where they have no credibility or competency.

03/12/2024

On Honesty and Lying

Q: Is it moral to lie to a violent aggressor in order to protect yourself or other people?

A: I take a fairly conventional position on this topic:

Lying in war (or some war-like situations) is okay in some cases.

The idea is supported in the Bible with cases such as the Hebrew midwives, Ehud, David, and others deceiving people in war, etc.

The philosophical reasoning is as follows:

It is not moral to attempt to gain a value by trying to create a fake reality for yourself. That is what immoral lies do. (See Ayn Rand on this topic.)

But there are some moral lies. These are rare.

They have to do with special cases such as when a N**i would knock on the door of someone in WW2 and would ask if they are hiding Jews in their house.

The innocent people here are not trying to gain some value by creating a fake reality they can live in.

Instead, they are refusing to offer information that the aggressor has no moral right to have, and that will aid the aggressor in harming an innocent person.

The aggressor is the one who is faking reality—acting on a false principle. He has no moral right to do what he is doing, but he fakes it like he does.

The person who tells a lie in this case is making a rational choice.

They owe the aggressor nothing and may do what is most likely to protect innocent people.

It is as if they were dealing with a wild animal. That is how brutes deserve to be treated if they physically threaten you.

Likewise, it can sometimes be moral in war to deceive.

There are some similar minor cases, but they are pretty rare.

03/12/2024

There is a diminishing return on answering lazy questions.

The sooner you give up fighting the wrong fights, the sooner you can start winning the right ones.

Q: Why do you do the weird intermittent blocking thing?

A: Thanks for asking.

See the image attached for an indication of my thought process.

Also see this:

A faithful witness does not lie,
but a false witness breathes out lies.
A scoffer seeks wisdom in vain,
but knowledge is easy for a man of understanding.
Leave the presence of a fool,
for there you do not meet words of knowledge.
The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way,
but the folly of fools is deceiving.

(Proverbs 14:5-8)

Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
but his delight is in the law of the Lord,
and on his law he meditates day and night.

(Psalm 1:1-2)

I believe there is a lot of power in moral sanction--either given or withdrawn.

I block people if I don't want to be interacting with them in public for the time being.

Sometimes I might change my mind on that.

An analogy would be how I might invite someone to one party at one time, but not to another party later on.

People's impressions of each other and relationships with each other change over time.

(See this related article:
https://medium.com/christian-intellectual/why-does-cody-block-everyone-e008bbe2391b)

I'm modeling an approach I have put a lot of thought into. I want people to imitate me in it.

At a given time, I'd rather not be seeing the posts of certain people. Muting is good for that.

But blocking is different.

Blocking gives the other person the ability to see that they are being blocked. That communicates something to them.

The meaning is essentially:

"I don't appreciate what you do on twitter or facebook, and I don't want any part of it. I don't want to discuss things with you in public right now."

When I block people, it is because I want people to know that this is my evaluation. (And I want to remember it, myself. Blocking is my filing system.)

Secondarily, I want to make it less convenient for them to engage me in a public discussion.

They can still get my attention. I have a public email address, and I unblock people when they ask me to, typically.

(At least for a while. I might block again if I keep seeing the person posting repulsive material.)

People often claim I block too fast due to having thin skin.

That is not how I see it. I block for strategic purposes.

I am taking a course of action designed to collect around me a group of people who are capable of having discussions that I judge to be valuable.

If I see people clicking like on things I find reprehensible, I might block them for the like, even if it has nothing to do with me.

The goal is to shift the kind of experience that good, honest people have when they interact with me. People will be able to interact with me without having to deal with gross losers.

Short term, this approach makes a lot of people angry at me, and it hurts my reach. But I do not care.

Long term, it makes it so I can have a strong influence on a small group of people that I want to invest in.

Some people sort themselves out as being up to the level of the standards I hold. They get more access to me--and to each other--because other people get less access.

Access to oneself is one of the most valuable things a person can offer to another person. We should take it very seriously.