What is the main idea of the principle of strategic victory and the use of troops put forward in Sun Tzu's Art of War?

The strategy of "winning with the enemy" put forward by Sun Tzu in "Virtual Reality" is of great value for how to correctly choose the operational objectives and direction and command the military's operational actions. The debate field is like a battlefield. The battlefield situation is changing rapidly, and the debate field is also unpredictable; The fighter plane was fleeting, and the debate front was instantly reversed. Debate is the dialectical unity of breaking and standing. Breaking is attacking, standing is defending; Do not break, do not stand, stand and break. Attacks should be lethal, either frontal attack, a little attack, or unprepared attack, in order to gain a foothold. The defense should be indestructible, with clear views, sufficient arguments and rigorous argumentation; Defense is not just persistence, but attack, take the initiative to attack, and turn passivity into initiative. However, whether attacking or defending, we must decide the winning policy according to the "enemy's situation" in order to "because of people, not because of people."

After Japan surrendered, Meiru? As a representative of Judge China, he attended the trial of Japanese war criminals in the Far East International Tribunal. Before the trial, the judges disputed about the seating arrangement. The President is the Chief Justice, namely Australian Judge Weber. The first seat on the right hand is held by an American judge, and the second seat on the left hand becomes the focus of controversy. Mei Yu? I realized that although China was one of the "top four" at that time, it existed in name only. For the sake of national dignity and honor, he said in public: "I don't care about talking about my personal position, but since we represent our respective countries, I must seek the opinions of my own government ...". I think it is reasonable to arrange judges' seats in the order of signatures of the surrendering countries when Japan surrendered. Today is the trial of Japanese war criminals. China was most influenced by Japanese, while War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression lasted the longest and made the greatest sacrifice. Therefore, China, with a history of eight years of bloody war, should rank second. "Although the judges have different opinions, the court has no ranking principle, Meiru? The reason is irrefutable, so there is no objection. However, unexpectedly, in the rehearsal the day before the trial, Weber suddenly announced the order of admission: the United States, Britain, China ... beautiful? Immediately protested, took off his robe and refused to go on stage. He said: "Many reporters and cinematographers have been present at today's rehearsal. Once it is published in the newspaper tomorrow, it will be a fait accompli. As my colleagues don't have too many objections to my proposal, I request to vote on my proposal immediately, otherwise I will have to return to China and resign from the government without attending the rehearsal. "Weber had to call the judges to vote. Finally, according to the signing order of the surrendering countries: the United States, China, Britain ... the admission time has been arranged and the judges are seated.

This is a good example of "winning with the enemy" in the debate. Isn't it beautiful? Deliberately saying "I have to ask my own government" first is a kind of "retreat", the essence of which is the strategy of "retreat for progress", which makes all judges and officials puzzled. And then what about Meru? From retreating to attacking, I solemnly stated that Judge China should take the second place. This move was unexpected, because the court had no rules for seating arrangement to follow, and Meiru gained the upper hand in the situation. But I didn't expect Webber to let China take the third place in the rehearsal. Mei Yu? Immediately protested and took off his robe and refused to take office, claiming to "return to China and resign", which was another ingenious "retreat". However, there is "advance" in "retreat", and there is attack in defense, both offensive and defensive. He suggested that the judge vote-he already knew the result of the vote, and according to the situation at that time, no one else proposed other principles. Mei Yu? Judging the situation and winning by the enemy is worth learning from.

Second, profit and temptation.

Argumentative writing is a kind of language confrontation to defend oneself and refute others. Although the views held by the two sides of the debate are opposite, they are also aimed at "clarifying right and wrong, judging confusion, clarifying similarities and differences, examining names and facts, handling interests and determining doubts". At the beginning of the plan, Sun Tzu put forward the strategic thoughts of "controlling power by profit" and "inducing power by profit". There is no doubt that the ultimate goal of war is to "benefit". The ultimate goal of the debate is, in the final analysis, to benefit from one word. The benefits of argument include tangible benefits, intangible benefits, immediate benefits and long-term benefits. In the debate, if you can seduce the other side with small profits, you can often make the other side lose big because of small.

There is a lawsuit in America. The plaintiff Bo fennell? Witt was injured in the shoulder by the elevator, claiming that the shoulder function was seriously damaged and could not be raised to the normal height. In court, defense lawyer Ahmai asked the plaintiff, "How far can you raise your hand?"? Can you show it to the judge? " Witt carefully raised his arm to his ear and stopped. "So, please tell me how high you can lift without hurting your arm?" "You can lift it so high." With that, Witt raised his hand above his head. Whitley was so greedy that he let his guard down under Willie's drive. In order to get more compensation, he showed his true colors. It was precisely by grasping Witt's desire for benefits that the defense lawyer lured him to relax his vigilance and strip off his disguise. Witt's cleverness was overtaken by cleverness, and his attempt to extort more money was dashed. In the debate, it is necessary to "seek advantages and avoid disadvantages" and "mix interests". If you only think about how to get it, the result is often a small bargain and a big loss.

Third, avoid reality and be empty.

Sun Tzu said in "Reality": "The shape of husband and soldier is like water, the shape of water, avoiding heights and falling; The shape of a soldier, avoiding reality and attacking emptiness. " Sun Tzu also said in "On the War": "Those who are good at using soldiers should avoid their spirits and attack their land, which will also cure their anger." As a strategist's strategy, avoiding reality means avoiding the enemy's strength and attacking his weakness in some cases. Using this strategy in argumentation is to avoid its sharp edge, seize the opponent's weakness, open the gap, attack one point, not as good as the rest, and expand the results.

1984 Reagan had a TV debate with his opponent Mundell during the presidential campaign. Mundell attacked Reagan's age, pointing out that he was too old to be president. Reagan retorted, "Mundell said I was too old. I will not take advantage of my opponent's youth and immaturity in the campaign. " This witty and sharp argument made the audience laugh, and in the laughter, the voters accepted Reagan. In fact, Mundell's words undoubtedly have some rationality: old, of course, not enough energy! However, Reagan skillfully turned the "old but not refined" attack into a "young and immature" counterattack in his argument, and declared that he was not prepared to take advantage of this, in sharp contrast to his opponent's behavior. In this way, Reagan escaped from reality, not only in the argument, but also in the character image, and also fought back against his opponent and won this round.

This example tells us that if we find some of the other party's contents threatening in the debate, we can quickly find the other party's weaknesses from another angle by cleverly avoiding them, fight back decisively and turn passivity into initiative.

Fourth, take a detour and go straight.

Sun Tzu put forward the strategic thought of "taking circuitous as a straight line" in "Military Argument". It means: to achieve the purpose of direct access through twists and turns. From the formal point of view, it seems to be a long road and a detour, but from the practical effect and strategy application, this long road and detour that must be taken is exactly the straightest and shortest road and the way to achieve the goal as soon as possible. Apply the strategy of "detour and straight line" to the argument, and convince the other party or make the other party agree through indirect proof or rebuttal. In particular, the parties to be persuaded are superiors, authorities, teachers, etc. Indirect strategies are often more effective than positive theories and cross-examination. There are countless examples of this.

Carnegie rents the lobby of a hotel in new york for 20 days every quarter to hold a series of seminars. Once, the hotel informed Carnegie that the rent would be tripled, and all the tickets had been sold out by then.

Of course, Carnegie doesn't agree with the price increase. The next day, he went to the general manager of the hotel and said, "I was surprised when I received the notice, but considering your position, you should work hard for the profit of the hotel, or you will be fired." So I can't blame you, but can we study the advantages and disadvantages of price increases for hotels with the same list? "

Carnegie took out the paper and drew a line from the middle, marking "advantages" and "disadvantages".

Then write in the welfare column: "The hall can be vacated for rent, which can be used for dances or parties. The rent obtained is much higher than that of seminars, so it is really a big loss for the hotel to give a 20-day lecture."

Then write in the column of shortcomings: "The benefits that the hotel will get from my seminar will not increase, but will decrease. Not only will it be reduced, but I won't get a dime-because I can't afford the rent you asked for, the seminar will have to be held elsewhere. Moreover, most of the participants in the seminar are intellectuals, who are the best publicity of the hotel. No matter how much money you spend on advertising, there may not be so many such people patronizing. Isn't it a great loss for the hotel to stop the lecture? "

Carnegie handed the form to the general manager and said, "Please think carefully about the pros and cons of writing it here, and then let me know your decision."

The next day, Carnegie was informed that the rent had only increased by 50%, not tripled.

Carnegie "takes pedantry as a straight line" and achieved his goal easily.