Skip to main content

What I learned from The Art of War: Winning Battles

 Every battle was won before it was fought
- Sun Tzu on The Art of War

People use this quote on different aspects. Some use it on business, some with their work, most of the time it is use in war. But this has more than what it means. This applies to all that you do: even walking.

Let's digest it:

Doing something has basic parts

  1. Goal (Ends, Want, Effect)
  2. Work(Means, Task, Cause)

When you do something, you have a goal in mind: a reason why you are doing it. If you don't have a reason then you are stupid. Even just wasting your time is a reason for doing something. Let's take your reading this article as an example. Why are you reading this? It could be that you are interested with Sun Tzu and his book. Perhaps, you got interested with the article itself. Maybe you are looking for knowledge or wisdom and you ended up here by chance. Every reason is valid. Some or most may or may not like it. But, it is valid and you have a reason: which means you are not stupid.

Before you can get to the goal, you do the work first. There is no sense in having a goal without working for it. It's like wanting to win the lottery without buying a ticket. Or, wanting to be in shape without working out. I think you get what I mean.

Now, what am I implying?

I define battle as the small or big things that we do in life. From taking an bath to leading a nation. We do battle everyday. And, when Sun Tzu say "Every battle was won before it was fought" I understood it as having accomplished things right after you have decided to do them. So, if you are fickle minded in doing something or has doubts about yourself on doing it, think about this article. There's always an answer, because every battle was won before it was fought.
Labels:

Popular

Understanding Large Language Models (LLMs) Using First-Principles Thinking

Instead of memorizing AI jargon, let’s break down Large Language Models (LLMs) from first principles —starting with the most fundamental questions and building up from there. Step 1: What is Intelligence? Before we talk about AI, let’s define intelligence at the most basic level: Intelligence is the ability to understand, learn, and generate meaningful responses based on patterns. Humans do this by processing language, recognizing patterns, and forming logical connections. Now, let’s apply this to machines. Step 2: Can Machines Imitate Intelligence? If intelligence is about recognizing patterns and generating responses, then in theory, a machine can simulate intelligence by: Storing and processing vast amounts of text. Finding statistical patterns in language. Predicting what comes next based on probability. This leads us to the core function of LLMs : They don’t think like humans, but they generate human-like text by learning from data. Step 3: How Do LLMs Wor...
Read more

Contextual Stratification - Chapter 8: Scales

  The Microscope Analogy Imagine looking at a painting. Stand close, inches from the canvas and you see individual brushstrokes, texture, the physical application of paint. Step back a few feet, and you see the image: a face, a landscape, a composition. Step back further, across the room, and you see how the painting relates to its frame, the wall, the space it occupies. Step back outside the building, and the painting disappears entirely into the larger context of the museum, the city, the culture. Same painting. Different scales of observation. And at each scale, different features become visible while others disappear. The brushstrokes that dominated up close are invisible from across the room. The composition that emerged at medium distance fragments into meaningless marks up close. Neither view is "wrong". They're both accurate descriptions of what's observable at that scale. This is what scale means in contextual stratification: the resolution of observation, th...
Read more

Contextual Stratification - Chapter 6: A Different Possibility

The Uncomfortable Question We've spent five chapters documenting a pattern: frameworks work brilliantly within their domains, then break down at boundaries. Physics, economics, psychology, medicine, mathematics; everywhere we look, the same story. We've examined why the standard explanations fail to account for this pattern. Now we must ask the question that makes most scientists uncomfortable: What if the boundaries are real? Not artifacts of incomplete knowledge. Not gaps waiting to be filled. Not temporary inconveniences on the road to unified understanding. What if reality itself is genuinely structured into domains, each operating under different rules, each requiring different frameworks to understand? This is not the answer we want. We want unity. We want simplicity. We want one elegant equation that explains everything from quarks to consciousness. The history of science seems to promise this; each generation unifying more, explaining more with less, moving toward that ...
Read more