Comparing: Words and Actions
The Art of War 9:5.1-7 Your enemy speaks humbly while building up forces.
This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.
The ideas explained in this article are from the first stanza of Section Five of Chapter 9 of The Art of War. This chapter is entitled Armed March. Its general topic is making competitive moves that advance our positions. It is one of the longest and most detailed chapters in the book, and this is one of its longest sections.
The focus here is identifying misdirection. Some of this misdirection comes from what we say. Other misdirection comes from what we appear to do. Though this section is translated in terms of interpreting an opponent’s action, this is misleading. The Chinese term <enemy> is never used here (or, in this entire chapter). The point is that others can mislead us or we can attempt to mislead them using the same tactics.
In the lines below, we summarize each Chinese character with a single English word shown in < > brackets in their original order. This transliteration of the Chinese is followed by an English sentence translation.
Words and Action
The first lesson here is comparing words and their actions.
<Words> <low> <and> <yet> <increase> <prepare> <is>
Your enemy speaks humbly while building up forces.
As we often see, the first word of this section, <words> sets its topic. Though much of the section is about misleading movements rather than words, that fact is that it is less costly to use words to mislead others than it is to use actions.
When we observe others speaking one way and acting another, we know to suspect something. But this is also a warning. If we speak one way and act another, we should realize that others will suspect us as well. Any disconnections between words and actions is suspect. The only way to avoid suspicion is to make sure our actions match our words.
This is not to say that everyone notices a discrepancy between words and actions. People’s words are often forgotten by the time we can evaluate their actions. In many cases, new words will replace the old words in order to explain actions.
<Advance> <also>
He is planning to advance.
What allows us to predict the future are action. Some actions make other actions possible. Here, the building up of forces makes a future advance possible. When resources are spent on developing an existing position, we see it as a build up of position, not a build up of forces. “Forces” are resources that are used for advance or expansion.
In the modern economy, these forces can take many different shapes: new market contacts, new advertising commitments, new partnerships, and so on. From the types of “forces” being built, we can infer that type of movement into a new territory that is being contemplated.
<Words> <strong> <and> <yet> <advance> <expel> <is>
The enemy talks aggressively and pushes as if to advance.
The first difference in this line is the “tone” of how someone speaks. When someone speaks <low>, they are being humble. When they speak <strong>, they are being aggressive. Though this is “just” tone, it is a huge difference in how the words feel.
This difference in tone indicates a difference in action. Earlier, preparation was increased. Here, forces are actually advanced to expel others from territory. This is not only aggressive words, but aggressive action.
What should we expect from this?
<Retreat> <also>
He is planning to retreat.
The key here are the aggressive words. Why speak aggressively if planning a true advance? Such words signal people to build up their defense. This make it harder for us to advance, but, if they are building up defense, they are in a poor position to take advantage of a retreat.
When words and actions are the same doesn’t mean that they are more trustworthy. The question here is what we believe. We naturally distrust words. When words and actions match, we are still suspicious that the words are misleading. Our suspicion is, that, despite actions initially matching the words, those actions will change over time.
The topic changes here to interpreting actions alone.
<Light> <carts> <first> <exit>
Small vehicles exit his camp first.
<Carts> are what move resources. The movement of resources is as important as the movement of people. In modern competition, the movement of resources are harder to see than the movement of people because the resources are more abstract: money, information, and so on.
Whenever we are planning a move, we usually deploy these intangible resources into the area that we want to explore before moving anything else. These resources are often used for information collection. The modern form of<light><cart> is used to move information into an out of a potential new territory.
<Reside> <this> <side> <is>
They move the army’s flanks.
When we want to advance or expand our positions, we have to look to the edges, the most extreme parts or <side> of our existing territory. These areas are the smallest, but they have potential for growth. We always want to advance into new territories that are connected to our existing positions. We should build on our positions rather than try to start new, unrelated ones.
When we see others or others see us moving to build at the edges of our existing position, everyone should expect that that area will be the foundation of our expansion.
<Battle> <formation> <also>
They are forming a battle line.
All movement should be designed to improve our positions in comparison to those of others. Even when our positions are not growing, positioning ourselves to make expansion easier improves the way that others think about us as competitors. Others factor this future potential into our existing positions.
Competition is a comparison. A <battle> is a comparison with rivals. A <battle> <formation> is a position used to compare us to others. These moves to improve how strong we will look when compared to others are important. Appearance are important in how people are compared. Positions are primarily made of appearances.