War Philosophy: Strategic Maneuvers, Tactics, Ethics, and the Art of Conflict

By Fouad Sabry

What is War Philosophy

The philosophy of war is the area of philosophy devoted to examining issues such as the causes of war, the relationship between war and human nature, and the ethics of war. Certain aspects of the philosophy of war overlap with the philosophy of history, political philosophy, international relations and the philosophy of law.

How you will benefit

(I) Insights, and validations about the following topics:

Chapter 1: Philosophy of War

Chapter 2: Consequentialism

Chapter 3: Carl von Clausewitz

Chapter 4: Jurisprudence

Chapter 5: On War

Chapter 6: Political Philosophy

Chapter 7: World

Chapter 8: Teleology

Chapter 9: Philosophy of History

Chapter 10: Anarcho-pacifism

(II) Answering the public top questions about war philosophy.

Who this book is for

Professionals, undergraduate and graduate students, enthusiasts, hobbyists, and those who want to go beyond basic knowledge or information for any kind of War Philosophy.

• Language: English
• Publisher: One Billion Knowledgeable
• Release date: May 30, 2024

Book preview

Chapter 1: Philosophy of war

The study of conflict's causes, its connection to human nature, and its ethics is the focus of the field of philosophy known as the philosophy of war. There are several areas where the philosophy of war and the philosophy of history, politics, international relations, and law intersect.

Carl von Clausewitz's On War, which was published in 1832, is arguably the best and most important treatise on the philosophy of war. It blends strategic insights with inquiries into human nature and the point of combat. Clausewitz focuses on the teleology of war, namely whether or not it can serve as an end in and of itself. He comes to the conclusion that this cannot be the case and that war is politics by various methods, meaning that it cannot exist just for selfish reasons. It must benefit the state in some way.

War and Peace, written by Leo Tolstoy in 1869, frequently veers off into philosophical tangents about the nature of war (as well as more general metaphysical theories stemming from Christianity and Tolstoy's observations of the Napoleonic Wars). It had an impact on how people afterwards viewed war. Gandhi's non-violent resistance ideology was directly affected by Tolstoy's Christian-centered war philosophy, especially in his works A Letter to a Hindu (1908) and The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894).

Genrikh Leer [ru] highlighted the benefits of war for nations in a piece he wrote in 1869, saying that [...] war appears as a potent tool in the subject of improving the internal, moral, and material lives of peoples [...].

While The Art of War by Sun Tzu (5th century BCE), concentrates more on tactics and weapons than philosophy, Many commentators have expanded his observations to include philosophies that are used in contexts far outside of actual combat, like competition or management (for a discussion of how Sun Tzu's philosophy is applied in contexts outside of actual combat, see the main Wikipedia article on The Art of War).

Early in the 16th century, parts of Niccolò Machiavelli's masterpiece The Prince (as well as his Discourses) and parts of Machiavelli's own work titled The Art of War discuss some philosophical points relating to war, despite the fact that neither book can be regarded as a study on the philosophy of war.

The Mahabharata, an Indian Hindu epic, contains the first documented discussions of a just war (dharma-yuddha or righteous war). One of the five governing brothers (Pandavas) poses the question of when the misery brought on by war can ever be justified. The siblings have a lengthy discussion about the rules, establishing things like proportionality (chariots can only attack other chariots; do not attack people in need), just means (do not use poisoned or barbed arrows), just cause (do not attack out of rage), and fair treatment of prisoners and the injured. The fair war theory hypothesizes which features of armed conflict are ethically acceptable.

The just authority standard refers to whether going to war is decided to be legitimate, and whether the idea of going to war and pursuing it has been legally processed and justified.

War is an acceptable and essential response when there is just cause for it. According to the philosophy of just war theory, it is first necessary to ascertain whether or not war can be prevented.

Before starting a war, one must decide if the motivations are morally justifiable. Finding out whether or not a war reaction is a quantifiable strategy to address the conflict being addressed is necessary for the right intention criteria.

War is a last resort answer, so if there is a dispute between opposing parties, all other options must be explored first.

It would be challenging to categorize any distinct schools of thought in the same way that, for example, Existentialism or Objectivism can be described as distinct movements because the philosophy of war is frequently treated as a subset of another branch of philosophy (for example, political philosophy or the philosophy of law). Carl von Clausewitz is referred to as the only (so-called) philosopher of war in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, which suggests that he is the only (significant) philosopher to create a philosophical framework that focuses solely on warfare. However, distinct schools of thinking on war have emerged over time, allowing some writers to distinguish between broad categories (if somewhat loosely).

Three important teleological traditions in the philosophy of war are identified by Anatol Rapoport in his introduction to his edition of J. J. Graham's translation of Clausewitz's On War: the catastrophic, the eschatological, and the political. (On War, introduction by Rapoport, 13). These are just three of the more prevalent teleological theories of war; there are others. Rapoport explains, In a figurative sense, The philosophy of politics compares conflict to a game of strategy (like chess); in the philosophy of eschatology, to a mission or the dénouement of a drama; catastrophic philosophy, a pandemic or a fire. Such don't, of course, exhaust all of the war-related viewpoints that exist at all times and in all places.

For example, War has occasionally been seen as a sport or an adventure, being the sole acceptable profession for a nobleman, as a matter of honor, for instance, the chivalric era), as a ritual (e.g.

between the Aztecs, as a way to express one's irrational aggression or as a manifestation of a death wish, as a means through which nature ensures the survival of the fittest, as a ridiculousness (ex.

among Eskimos), as a persistent custom, Doomed to disappear like servitude, as well as a crime.

(On War, Rapoport's introduction, 17)

Leo Tolstoy's epic novel War and Peace, which advanced the Cataclysmic school of thought, argues that war is a curse on humanity, whether it is preventable or inevitable, and that it serves little purpose other than to inflict pain and suffering. It may also result in significant social change, but not in a teleological sense. Tolstoy's perspective can be categorized as a part of the worldwide apocalyptic philosophy of war. The ethnocentric cataclysmic school of thought is another subcategory of the cataclysmic school of thought, which focuses specifically on the plight of a particular ethnicity or nation. One example is the belief in Judaism that war is God's punishment for the Israelites in some of the Tenakh's books (Old Testament). Tolstoy emphasizes that war is something that befalls man and is in no way influenced by man's free will, but is instead the outcome of unstoppable world forces, just as the Tenakh (in some volumes) sees war as an ineluctable act of God. (On War, Rapoport's opening paragraph, 16)

According to the Eschatological school of thinking, all wars (or all major conflicts) have a purpose and that purpose will eventually be achieved by a final struggle that will cause a great upheaval in society and a new society free from war (in varying theories the resulting society may be either a utopia or a dystopia). The Messianic theory and the Global theory are two divisions of this viewpoint. One example of a global theory is the Marxist idea of a communist world ruled by the proletariat after a final global uprising, and another example of a theory that could be classified as global or messianic is the Christian idea of an Armageddon war that will usher in the second coming of Christ and the ultimate defeat of Satan. (On War, introduction by Rapoport, 15) In accordance with the messianic eschatological worldview, which derives from the Jewish and Christian idea of a Messiah, battles would eventually result in the unity of humanity under a single religion or a single ruler. Crusades, Jihads, the Nazi idea of a Master Race, and the American idea of Manifest Destiny from the 19th century may also be included in this category. (On War, introduction by Rapoport, 15) (For more details, refer to the main entries on Christian and Jewish eschatology.)

War is viewed as a tool of the state according to the Political school of thought, which Clausewitz supported. Rapoport writes on page 13:, War, in Clausewitz's opinion, is a logical tool for pursuing national objectives. The three elements rational, instrument, and national make up his paradigm's core ideas. According to this perspective, the choice to go to war ought to be reasonable, meaning that it should be based on the expected benefits and costs of conflict. War ought to be instrumental in the sense that it should only ever be fought to win, never for its own sake, and that