Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Effects based Warfare

Expand Messages
  • Douglas Henderson
    Does anyone have any information on this? At first glance it sounds a bit like Sun Tzu. Regards Douglas
    Message 1 of 17 , Mar 20, 2003
      Does anyone have any information on this? At first glance it sounds
      a bit like Sun Tzu.

      Regards
      Douglas
    • Vic Williams
      Hi, Effects based Warfare ??? ... What is it in your terms? Just from the basic term I d say all warfare is effects based, so the term might be a way of
      Message 2 of 17 , Mar 20, 2003
        Hi,

        "Effects based Warfare" ???

        Douglas Henderson wrote:
        > Does anyone have any information on this? At first glance it sounds
        > a bit like Sun Tzu.
        >
        What is it in your terms?

        Just from the basic term I'd say all warfare is effects based,
        so the term might be a way of recognizing that.

        bye,
        vic
        --
        Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
        -- www.strategicprocess.com --
        "The trick to flying is to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
        -- Douglas Adams (Hitchhiker's Guide)
      • Wolgang
        The one Sun Zuish thing I have being impressed about the U.S. military is that they have being both emailing the Iraqi top commanders and political leaders
        Message 3 of 17 , Mar 20, 2003
          The one Sun Zuish thing I have being impressed about
          the U.S. military is that they have being both
          emailing the Iraqi top commanders and political
          leaders into surrendering in some rather specific
          terms.

          The incoming early intelligence reports saying that it
          is actually working so we'll see how effective such
          tactics will be.

          Wolfgang


          __________________________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
          http://platinum.yahoo.com
        • Vic Williams
          Hi, This doesn t explain Effects based Warfare . What you re quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I. Some describe Military Methods and similar Arts of
          Message 4 of 17 , May 7, 2003
            Hi,

            This doesn't explain "Effects based Warfare".
            What you're quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I.
            Some describe "Military Methods" and similar Arts of
            War as a form of feng shui. But this still doesn't
            explain "Effects..."

            Darren wrote:
            > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams <process-
            > facilitator@s...> wrote:
            >>"Effects based Warfare" ???
            >
            > in Sun Pin's book "Military Methods" he writes in chapter 30
            > Unorthodox and Orthodox

            > In turn flourishing, in turn declining, these are the four seasons.
            > Having those they conquer, having those they do not conquer. These
            > are the five phases.

            The "five phases" part is particularly interesting. Other recent
            work indicates that the integration/differientation five phase cycle
            is intrinsic to the human/mammal mind. Much recent literature that
            celebrates exploring 'Paradox' in various ways can be interpreted
            as unknowingly following the same cycle.

            Any large military project will likely follow the five phases
            in several ways. And defects in the results will likely come
            from unknowingly trying to follow the cycle when another more
            dominant form of the cycle (eg weather) is suppressing the lesser
            events. The ancient Chinese mind habitually considered a map
            or network of things at one time, and your chopped quote shows the
            battered remains of such a map.

            bye,
            Vic
            --
            Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
            -- www.strategicprocess.com --
            Define your business goals clearly so that others can see them as you do.
            --George F. Burns
          • Darren
            ... sounds ... In Sun Pin s book Military Methods he writes in chapter 30 Unorthodox and Orthodox The patterns of Heaven and Earth, reaching an extreme and
            Message 5 of 17 , May 7, 2003
              --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, "Douglas Henderson" <kueikutzu@h...>
              wrote:
              > Does anyone have any information on this? At first glance it
              sounds
              > a bit like Sun Tzu.
              >
              > Regards
              > Douglas

              In Sun Pin's book "Military Methods" he writes in chapter 30
              Unorthodox and Orthodox

              The patterns of Heaven and Earth, reaching an extreme and then
              reversing, becoming full and then being overturned these are yin and
              yang.
              In turn flourishing, in turn declining, these are the four seasons.
              Having those they conquer, having those they do not conquer. These
              are the five phases.
              Living and dying, these are the myriad things.
              Being capable, being incapable, these are the myriad living things.
              Having that which is surplus, having that which is insufficient,
              these are from and strategic power.... (It continues for a couple of
              pages) The verse has a very Taoist in feeling. At the end it reads...
              Thus to realize strategic combat power, increase the victorious;
              alter the defeated; rest the weary; feed the hungry. Accordingly the
              people will see the enemy's men but not yet perceive death; they will
              tread on naked blades and not turn their heels. Thus when one
              understands patterns of flowing water, he can float rocks and break
              boats. When, in employing the people, one realizes their nature, then
              his commands will be implemented just like flowing water.

              (Note) If you haven't read Sun Pins "Military Methods" this Taoist
              type of verse is frequent in his writings and is obviously
              influenced from the outside. No doubt from the Tao Te Ching.

              I find his writing a little contradictory in some areas, I feel by
              applying the Tao Te Ching, a passive philosophy and does not totally
              work with writing on war which is almost obviously a more aggressive
              way of thinking. (I just started reading it and may have to do some
              more study before I reach this conclusion.)
            • Darren
              Maybe I need a clear definition of effects ? What is your source for this phrase would be a good start?
              Message 6 of 17 , May 7, 2003
                Maybe I need a clear definition of "effects"? What is your source for
                this phrase would be a good start?

                --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams <process-
                facilitator@s...> wrote:
                > Hi,
                >
                > This doesn't explain "Effects based Warfare".
                > What you're quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I.
                > Some describe "Military Methods" and similar Arts of
                > War as a form of feng shui. But this still doesn't
                > explain "Effects..."
              • Vic Williams
                This list. It seems that you re asking what I m asking. ... -- Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189 -- www.strategicprocess.com -- Define your
                Message 7 of 17 , May 7, 2003
                  This list. It seems that you're asking what I'm asking.

                  Darren wrote:
                  > Maybe I need a clear definition of "effects"? What is your source for
                  > this phrase would be a good start?
                  >
                  > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams <process-
                  > facilitator@s...> wrote:
                  >
                  >>Hi,
                  >>
                  >>This doesn't explain "Effects based Warfare".
                  >>What you're quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I.
                  >>Some describe "Military Methods" and similar Arts of
                  >>War as a form of feng shui. But this still doesn't
                  >>explain "Effects..."
                  >
                  >

                  >
                  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                  >
                  >


                  --
                  Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                  -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                  Define your business goals clearly so that others can see them as you do.
                  --George F. Burns
                • boz
                  I believe effects based warfare is the modern way of looking at the principle of Mass. Firepower no longer needs to be physically massed in one spot.
                  Message 8 of 17 , May 8, 2003
                    I believe "effects" based warfare is the modern way of looking at the
                    principle of "Mass." Firepower no longer needs to be physically massed in
                    one spot. Because of the preponderance of long range, smart weapons, it is
                    the "effects" of the weapons systems that are massed (massing fires) and not
                    the weapons systems and troops themselves.

                    The utility of this concept is disputed. For a discussion of this read
                    Robert Leonard's The Principles of War for the Information Age.

                    Mike

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Vic Williams" <process-facilitator@...>
                    To: <Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 10:28 AM
                    Subject: Re: [Sun_Tzu] Re: Effects based Warfare


                    > Hi,
                    >
                    > This doesn't explain "Effects based Warfare".
                    > What you're quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I.
                    > Some describe "Military Methods" and similar Arts of
                    > War as a form of feng shui. But this still doesn't
                    > explain "Effects..."
                    >
                    > Darren wrote:
                    > > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams <process-
                    > > facilitator@s...> wrote:
                    > >>"Effects based Warfare" ???
                    > >
                    > > in Sun Pin's book "Military Methods" he writes in chapter 30
                    > > Unorthodox and Orthodox
                    >
                    > > In turn flourishing, in turn declining, these are the four seasons.
                    > > Having those they conquer, having those they do not conquer. These
                    > > are the five phases.
                    >
                    > The "five phases" part is particularly interesting. Other recent
                    > work indicates that the integration/differientation five phase cycle
                    > is intrinsic to the human/mammal mind. Much recent literature that
                    > celebrates exploring 'Paradox' in various ways can be interpreted
                    > as unknowingly following the same cycle.
                    >
                    > Any large military project will likely follow the five phases
                    > in several ways. And defects in the results will likely come
                    > from unknowingly trying to follow the cycle when another more
                    > dominant form of the cycle (eg weather) is suppressing the lesser
                    > events. The ancient Chinese mind habitually considered a map
                    > or network of things at one time, and your chopped quote shows the
                    > battered remains of such a map.
                    >
                    > bye,
                    > Vic
                    > --
                    > Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                    > -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                    > Define your business goals clearly so that others can see them as you do.
                    > --George F. Burns
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > Sun_Tzu-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                    >
                    >
                  • Vic Williams
                    Hi, All war can be explained in terms of effects or the lack. Firepower has been distributed since the nuclear age started, and Napoleon routinely distributed
                    Message 9 of 17 , May 8, 2003
                      Hi,

                      All war can be explained in terms of effects or the lack.

                      Firepower has been distributed since the nuclear age started,
                      and Napoleon routinely distributed groups for march and surrounding,
                      then concentrated them to crush opposition.

                      Modern war has had a significant individual and small group component
                      since the nuclear bomb put a tether on conventional large scale operations.
                      These small group / individual operations are often long range & smart.
                      911 is only one of many such "effects" small group operations that have
                      taken place in the past 50 years.

                      boz wrote:
                      > I believe "effects" based warfare is the modern way of looking at the
                      > principle of "Mass." Firepower no longer needs to be physically massed in
                      > one spot. Because of the preponderance of long range, smart weapons, it is
                      > the "effects" of the weapons systems that are massed (massing fires) and not
                      > the weapons systems and troops themselves.
                      >
                      The British claim to be 'ahead' in being able have one spotter call on
                      large amounts of artillery and immediately direct it to hit one location.
                      This advantage is in communications not smart weapons. I've noticed that
                      their modern heavy artillery deliberately keeps a man in the loop in the
                      machine and avoids making the weapon too automated.

                      "Effects" reads to me to be more a developing awareness that much of
                      the mass in a Western/Soviet massive approach to warfare is waste, that
                      can be avoided with good communications and good awareness of the battlefield.

                      bye,
                      vic
                      --
                      Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                      -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                      "the best foundation for happiness is self-importance" -- Edward de Bono
                    • Wolgang
                      ... I agree almost completely as information dominance of total battle awareness has taken the place of brute force per say. The U.S. would do things like
                      Message 10 of 17 , May 8, 2003
                        >> Firepower no longer needs to be physically massed
                        >>in one spot . . .

                        I agree almost completely as information dominance of
                        "total battle awareness" has taken the place of brute
                        force per say.

                        The U.S. would do things like call someone from the
                        leadership in the Iraqui goverment directly to their
                        cell phone, invite them to look out their window so
                        that they could witness a tomahawk missile flying by
                        to destroy a building next door. Then ask them point
                        blank where Hussein was. If they could corroborate
                        the intelligence, they would send not one or two, but
                        42 missles including those bunk buster two ton
                        monsters to annihiliate that building / structure.

                        So in as much as firepower is not thrown in the same
                        manner as it was before; these days is all synchronize
                        so that even though those 42 missles were coming from
                        5 different sources and locations, they would hit
                        their target at the same time, creating a total point
                        of coordinated destruction.

                        Wolfgang

                        __________________________________
                        Do you Yahoo!?
                        The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
                        http://search.yahoo.com
                      • Douglas Henderson
                        ... for ... Actually, because of time pressure I was hoping that others already knew about effects based warfare and could give some insight. The BBC article
                        Message 11 of 17 , May 8, 2003
                          --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams
                          <process-facilitator@s...> wrote:
                          > This list. It seems that you're asking what I'm asking.
                          >
                          > Darren wrote:
                          > > Maybe I need a clear definition of "effects"? What is your source
                          for
                          > > this phrase would be a good start?
                          > >
                          > > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams <process-
                          > > facilitator@s...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > >>Hi,
                          > >>
                          > >>This doesn't explain "Effects based Warfare".
                          > >>What you're quoting is Taoist, and so what? So am I.
                          > >>Some describe "Military Methods" and similar Arts of
                          > >>War as a form of feng shui. But this still doesn't
                          > >>explain "Effects..."
                          > >
                          > >
                          >
                          > >
                          Actually, because of time pressure I was hoping that others already
                          knew about effects based warfare and could give some insight. The BBC
                          article and one web resource sounded suggestive in a suntzuish sort of
                          way.

                          It is also interesting when Sunzi (book and, to a lesser degree,
                          person) is described as Taoist. The common conception of a warrior
                          Taoist is one that takes up arms as a last resort. Surely that cannot
                          person cannot be a professional general?

                          Also, I wondered about the description of the Sunzi as a daoist work.
                          Ralph Sawyer cited several articles on this which I hope some day to
                          have time to read <grin>. But the emphasis on naming and regulations
                          that also occur in the Sunzi have suggested a more Confucian aspect to
                          some. Remember that Dao or Tao is not the sole preserve of Daoists,
                          Confucians and others also use it.

                          So, is the work Daoist? One thing that I think must be factored into
                          this question is exactly what do we mean by Daoist? A generation ago,
                          one convenientyl lumped Daoism into a religious or a philosophical
                          basket. Then we started learning about Huang Lao Daoism which has a
                          fairly strong Legalist feel to it (I am not a linguist, but I wonder
                          if the "Fa" in the Sunzibingfa is that same as the Legalists Fa or
                          laws or order. Shendao is considered by some to be a Daoist according
                          to the sources and to be a founder of legalism according to other
                          sources.

                          You also have circumstance like the recent Guodian finds, where you
                          have a shortenedd Tao Te Ching (either truncated or in an early form)
                          accompanied by a good number of Confucian texts, so in at least one
                          case Taoism and Confucianism were not considered inimical and one
                          might have been able to pick and choose (this model also appears in
                          later China as well, with Confucian Taoists and Confucian Buddhists
                          and philosophical and religious Daoists all wrapped into one.

                          Remember that although Confucianism came to be associated with anti
                          military sentiment, Confucius espoused some martial virtues and came
                          from the Shi or warrior class himself. Some commentators of the Sunzi
                          thought that what was there was a Confucian slant.

                          It may be that we are trying to force the ancient Chinese into more a
                          dualistic existance than they might, in fact, have lived.

                          Regards
                          Douglas
                          PS
                          nice to see some activity here, my semester ends this month so I hope
                          to have more time to post, having completed writing up notes on the
                          David Li translation, the Minford translation and DC Lau's criticism
                          of the Griffith translation.
                        • boz
                          ... A book that gives a detailed description of the use of this method in Afghanistan is The Hunt for Bin Laden by Robin Moore. Mike
                          Message 12 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                            >>The British claim to be 'ahead' in being able have one spotter call on
                            >>large amounts of artillery and immediately direct it to hit one location.


                            A book that gives a detailed description of the use of this method in
                            Afghanistan is The Hunt for Bin Laden by Robin Moore.

                            Mike
                          • Vic Williams
                            Hi, ... Common conceptions don t necessarily have anything to do with reality. Half the U.S. population believes the world was created about 6000 years ago.
                            Message 13 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                              Hi,

                              Douglas Henderson wrote:
                              > The common conception of a warrior
                              > Taoist is one that takes up arms as a last resort.

                              Common conceptions don't necessarily have anything to do with reality.
                              Half the U.S. population believes the world was created about 6000 years
                              ago.

                              Taoism is based on natural patterns, and war is natural in the human
                              context, with minimal fighting being most apt.
                              >
                              > Remember that Dao or Tao is not the sole preserve of Daoists,
                              > Confucians and others also use it.

                              The Tao of a confucian is different than the Tao of a Daoist.
                              Zen is a Taoist adaptation of Buddhism. The trickster snippets are
                              natural to mammals.


                              > A generation ago,
                              > one convenientyl lumped Daoism into a religious or a philosophical
                              > basket.

                              Still both true. Either or both.

                              > Then we started learning about Huang Lao Daoism which has a
                              > fairly strong Legalist feel to it (I am not a linguist, but I wonder
                              > if the "Fa" in the Sunzibingfa is that same as the Legalists Fa or
                              > laws or order. Shendao is considered by some to be a Daoist according
                              > to the sources and to be a founder of legalism according to other
                              > sources.
                              >
                              And?

                              > so in at least one
                              > case Taoism and Confucianism were not considered inimical and one
                              > might have been able to pick and choose (this model also appears in
                              > later China as well, with Confucian Taoists and Confucian Buddhists
                              > and philosophical and religious Daoists all wrapped into one.
                              >
                              That mixing was normal. Check out the "Journey to the West."
                              You can see the same mixing in the Christian stories describing the
                              birth of Jesus and his being in a cave for days - those are ancient
                              pagan stories 'taken over' by Christians to help sell/persuade pagans.

                              > It may be that we are trying to force the ancient Chinese into more a
                              > dualistic existance than they might, in fact, have lived.
                              >
                              Who is we? Dualistic is particularly interesting viewed in light
                              of their common usage of yin yang, the five phases, and the YiJing.
                              Much of their thinking was web-based and dualistic is simple when
                              viewed from the interweavings of a web of living connections.

                              bye,
                              vic

                              --
                              Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                              -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                              "It is in the interest of those who control our energy to make it seem
                              that the status quo is natural, right, and impossible to change. It
                              is in our interest to figure out that this is not always true."
                              -- Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi in "The Evolving Self"
                            • Douglas Henderson
                              ... call on ... location. ... in ... Thanks for the tip, but isn t this technique rather old in the form of TOT, time on target, which I remember SLA Marshall
                              Message 14 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                                --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, boz <mboz@c...> wrote:
                                > >>The British claim to be 'ahead' in being able have one spotter
                                call on
                                > >>large amounts of artillery and immediately direct it to hit one
                                location.
                                >
                                >
                                > A book that gives a detailed description of the use of this method
                                in
                                > Afghanistan is The Hunt for Bin Laden by Robin Moore.
                                >
                                > Mike

                                Thanks for the tip, but isn't this technique rather old in the form of
                                TOT, time on target, which I remember SLA Marshall writing about,
                                although I am sure the speed with which it can be laid on has been
                                drastically reduced thanks to technology?

                                Doug
                              • Douglas Henderson
                                ... reality. ... years ... Good point, but since the common conception is based on the Tao Te Ching, it may have some validity ... I find it amusing
                                Message 15 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                                  --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams
                                  <process-facilitator@s...> wrote:
                                  > Hi,
                                  >
                                  > Douglas Henderson wrote:
                                  > > The common conception of a warrior
                                  > > Taoist is one that takes up arms as a last resort.
                                  >
                                  > Common conceptions don't necessarily have anything to do with
                                  reality.
                                  > Half the U.S. population believes the world was created about 6000
                                  years
                                  > ago.
                                  >

                                  Good point, but since the common conception is based on the Tao Te
                                  Ching, it may have some validity <grin>

                                  > Taoism is based on natural patterns, and war is natural in the human
                                  > context, with minimal fighting being most apt.

                                  I find it amusing when various groups adopt the Yin Yang symbol as a
                                  sort of peace symbol. Some folks hold that Taoism is pacificstic and
                                  passive, which I think is a misreading. It avoids concious striving,
                                  but if a blitzkrief is part of your tzu jan or naturalness, go for it
                                  <grin>. but just be aware that the strength also contains the elements
                                  of weakness, as in when the blitzkrieg means that you can get to the
                                  gates of Moscow, but also means that you outrun your logistics and
                                  infantry support. Or the speed of the military success in Irag means
                                  that the civil/policing/relief functions that were probably put on a
                                  back burner while the military component went forward become more
                                  noticible by their absence (it's sort of interesting in terms of
                                  effects based warfare: If it means the coming together of different
                                  elements at a specific time for maximum effect, the US seems to have
                                  gotten the hang of it only for the military part of the war. It would
                                  have made things much more easy for the US if we were able to lay in
                                  the other elements much more quickly)

                                  > >
                                  > > Remember that Dao or Tao is not the sole preserve of Daoists,
                                  > > Confucians and others also use it.
                                  >
                                  > The Tao of a confucian is different than the Tao of a Daoist.
                                  > Zen is a Taoist adaptation of Buddhism. The trickster snippets are
                                  > natural to mammals.

                                  Yes, but sometimes people just focus on the term and assume Daoism.
                                  For instance, in Sun Tzu, is the Tao of a commander the natural order
                                  of things, or the moral (human oriented) principle?
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > > A generation ago,
                                  > > one convenientyl lumped Daoism into a religious or a philosophical
                                  > > basket.
                                  >
                                  > Still both true. Either or both.
                                  >
                                  > > Then we started learning about Huang Lao Daoism which has a
                                  > > fairly strong Legalist feel to it (I am not a linguist, but I
                                  wonder
                                  > > if the "Fa" in the Sunzibingfa is that same as the Legalists Fa or
                                  > > laws or order. Shendao is considered by some to be a Daoist
                                  according
                                  > > to the sources and to be a founder of legalism according to other
                                  > > sources.
                                  > >
                                  > And?
                                  When you talk about Daoist elements there is overlap with Confucianism
                                  and with legalism. So, on the one hand the term is broader than was
                                  once was thought, on the other hand it blends into other things making
                                  it less clear which strand belongs to which.

                                  > > so in at least one
                                  > > case Taoism and Confucianism were not considered inimical and one
                                  > > might have been able to pick and choose (this model also appears
                                  in
                                  > > later China as well, with Confucian Taoists and Confucian
                                  Buddhists
                                  > > and philosophical and religious Daoists all wrapped into one.
                                  > >
                                  > That mixing was normal. Check out the "Journey to the West."

                                  I just don't know enough to say that it was "normal" at all periods.

                                  > You can see the same mixing in the Christian stories describing the
                                  > birth of Jesus and his being in a cave for days - those are ancient
                                  > pagan stories 'taken over' by Christians to help sell/persuade
                                  pagans.
                                  >
                                  > > It may be that we are trying to force the ancient Chinese into
                                  more a
                                  > > dualistic existance than they might, in fact, have lived.

                                  > Who is we? Dualistic is particularly interesting viewed in light
                                  > of their common usage of yin yang, the five phases, and the YiJing.
                                  > Much of their thinking was web-based and dualistic is simple when
                                  > viewed from the interweavings of a web of living connections.

                                  >
                                  > bye,
                                  > vic
                                  >
                                  Regards,
                                  Doug
                                • Vic Williams
                                  Hi, ... No. The current technique can direct every gun in the army at very short notice, with the direction coming from the man out where the confusion and
                                  Message 16 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                                    Hi,

                                    Douglas Henderson wrote:
                                    > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, boz <mboz@c...> wrote:
                                    > ... isn't this technique rather old in the form of
                                    > TOT, time on target,

                                    No. The current technique can direct every gun in the army
                                    at very short notice, with the direction coming from the
                                    man out where the confusion and noise are worst.
                                    --
                                    Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                                    -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                                    "It is in the interest of those who control our energy to make it seem
                                    that the status quo is natural, right, and impossible to change. It
                                    is in our interest to figure out that this is not always true."
                                    -- Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi in "The Evolving Self"
                                  • Vic Williams
                                    Hi, ... Taoism is a way, not a book. Once you have the fish you don t need the fishtrap. And similarly once you have the meaning you don t need the words.
                                    Message 17 of 17 , May 9, 2003
                                      Hi,

                                      Douglas Henderson wrote:
                                      > --- In Sun_Tzu@yahoogroups.com, Vic Williams

                                      > Good point, but since the common conception is based on the Tao Te
                                      > Ching, it may have some validity <grin>
                                      >
                                      Taoism is a way, not a book. Once you have the fish you don't
                                      need the fishtrap. And similarly once you have the meaning you
                                      don't need the words.

                                      Another way to look at it:
                                      Some describe Sun Tzu's work as a form of feng shui. There are
                                      many kinds of feng shui, starting with a Taoist/shamanist influence
                                      and adding on buddhist/confucian/christian over time.

                                      bye,
                                      vic
                                      --
                                      Vic Williams - process facilitator (604)433-5189
                                      -- www.strategicprocess.com --
                                      "It is in the interest of those who control our energy to make it seem
                                      that the status quo is natural, right, and impossible to change. It
                                      is in our interest to figure out that this is not always true."
                                      -- Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi in "The Evolving Self"
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.