It is sometimes difficult to correctly appraise various occurrences in the world because of their differences in time, place, historical background, development, and end result. But it is often possible to prove the correctness of some relative truth from the success or failure of what has happened in accordance with the rule of historical development.
From a philosophical point of view, “materialism is man’s practical knowledge of the objective world which has been developed on the basis of his social practice.” It is praiseworthy for Sun Tzu to have written The Art of War by synthesizing different social phenomena (mainly related to war) more than two thousand years ago, and learning from books on the art of war written by his predecessors.
Sun Tzu’s Art of War brings to light many common laws of war, discusses rather comprehensively factors leading to victory in a war, and reflects the thought of naive materialism and primitive dialectics.
During the Spring and Autumn Period, China was going through the transitional stage from slave society to feudal society. In the duration of its five hundred years, different schools of thought—developed by Confucius, Mencius, Yangzi, Mozi, Zhuangzi, Laozi, and Sun Tzu—spread widely. With the development of society, some of them died out, but some continued to spread. Sun Tzu’s doctrine is among those which have been popular since then. This fully demonstrates its practical value.
Sun Tzu’s Art of War contains thoughts of naive materialism and primitive dialectics that are reflected in many of his statements. The following are some of the obvious ones: “Thus, the reason the enlightened ruler and the wise general conquer the enemy whenever they strike and their achievements surpass those of ordinary men is foreknowledge. This foreknowledge cannot be elicited from spirits, nor from gods, nor by analogy with past events, nor from deductive calculations. It must be obtained from men who know the enemy situation.” Sun Tzu did not believe in gods, spirits, or divination; nor did he rely upon astrology for his actions. It is the pride of our national culture that Sun Tzu was an atheist even more than two thousand years ago.
There has been long rivalry between the two world outlooks—atheism and theism—and that has obviously been reflected in military affairs. We know from inscriptions on bones and tortoise shells of the Shang Dynasty and on bronze objects that in ancient times divination was frequently practiced in China before fighting to forecast the result of war.
In ancient times, there were debates between generals with materialist ideas and those who were superstitious over whether or not it was favorable to move troops on the day of Jiazi. The argument the former gave in refutation of the latter was that the Battle of Muye (1098 B.C.) was launched on the day of Jiazi. It was a victory for the King Zhou Wu and disaster for King Ying Zhou. This was a powerful argument.
In spite of the fact that Sun Tzu refuted superstitions, there still have been quite a few fatuous generals and commanders who practiced divination before moving troops. That has been so not only in China, but also in the West. About half a century before the Christian era, the Roman Julius Caesar was having a war with the Germanic people. In one of the battles, only half of the main force of the Germanic army was fighting. This resulted in a big victory for the Roman army, which would have surely been defeated if its enemy’s main force had joined the fight. According to a statement made by a Germanic prisoner of war, the reason that the Germanic main force did not join the fight was because its leaders believed that the gods did not wish the Germanic army to fight before the crescent moon rose, or else they would suffer defeat.
All this illustrates how commendable Sun Tzu’s materialistic thought of atheism was. His principle that “must be obtained from men who know the enemy situation” did not apply only to the use of spies. In fact, his emphasis upon the role of men was reflected in his exposition of political, diplomatic, and economic factors that bore upon a war. His materialistic doctrines reflected that the ruler should have “the people in harmony with them” and “calculations in temple.” The enemy’s strategies and alliances should be disrupted. “After one thousand pieces of gold are in hand, one hundred thousand troops may be raised.”
There are also many statements in Sun Tzu’s Art of War that reflect his primitive dialectical thought. We can easily pick out some of his remarks that are in accord with the law of the unity of opposites. For example: extraordinary and normal, void and actuality, circuitous and straight, strong and weak, victorious and defeated, favorable and unfavorable, enemy and oneself, numerous and scanty, fatigued and at ease, well fed and hungry, turbulence and peace, noisy and quiet, advance and retreat, far and near, gain and loss, and brave and cowardly.
While expounding on void and actuality, he held that there must be void in actuality and vice versa. In the chapter entitled “Posture of Army,” he wrote: “In battle there are only the normal and extraordinary forces, but their combinations are limitless; none can comprehend them all.” And he added: “To ensure your army will sustain the enemy’s attack without suffering defeat is a matter of operating the extraordinary and the normal forces. . . . For these two forces are mutually reproductive; their interaction as endless as that of interlocked rings. Who can determine where one ends and the other begins?”
He strongly maintained that one must consider both favorable and unfavorable factors while making judgments. He pointed out in the chapter entitled “The Nine Variables”: “The wise general in his deliberations must consider both favorable and unfavorable factors. By taking into account the favorable factors, he makes his plan feasible; by taking into account the unfavorable, he may resolve the difficulties.”
He again pointed out in the chapter “Maneuvering”: “Those skilled in war avoid the enemy when its spirit is keen, and attack it when it is sluggish and the soldiers are homesick. This is control of the moral factor. In good order, they await an enemy in disorder; in serenity, an enemy in clamorousness. This is control of the mental factor. Close to the field of battle, they await an enemy coming from afar; at rest, they await an exhausted enemy; with well-fed troops, they await a hungry enemy. This is control of the physical factor. They do not engage an enemy advancing with well-ordered banners, nor one whose formations are in impressive array. This is control of the factor of changing circumstances.”
From the above-mentioned doctrines of Sun Tzu, it can be seen that he was full of dialectical ideas in line with the universal law of unity of opposites.
In exploring Sun Tzu’s theories, we also find that his thinking was systematic and objective. Judging from the way in which he looked at the nature and law of the world, his logical thinking was quite rigorous and, therefore, worthy of esteem.