Most unfortunately, many feel strong reservations to the idea daborder such a book. Of course the subject is sharp and seems to leave little room to the pleasures of reading and limaginaire.
Concerning the sphere of thought and reflection, it will also often dismissed as too restrictive by its field of application.
So Clausewitz so subtle analyst of the practical field, locked together behind the mask of military theorist raw and cold.
Yet jaffirme here that most will have much to gain by risking the writings of our Prussian general; because rarely thought and practice, theory and materiality, nauront overlapped in such close proximity and with such relevance of the judgment.
So be ignored as this frightening and come in search of weapons for this form of war that no dentre us néchappe: confront the practical realities of the present. If indeed some contemporary military strategy experts will find Clausewitz "old fashioned" field that was supposed to be specifically his, he is, in my opinion, everything else about the person he truly shone and which sattachant the characteristics of the human nature remains in its durability.
What Clausewitz himself could thus formulate: "Let us not deceive ourselves, there is no question here of formulas and scientific problems. In fact the material relations are very simple. What is more difficult, this is to understand the moral forces which come into play. "
For what does he speak so when he says, "The will of man never draws its strength from logical subtleties. "
Or, "The war is the domain of the uncertainty; three quarters of the elements on which the action is based remain in the mists dune uncertainty more or less. Nimporte more than in any field, you must quune subtle and penetrating intelligence know and appreciate dinstinct discern the truth. Because of this uncertainty all information of any solid basis, and these constant interventions of chance, the acting person is constantly in front of the different realities from those which it sattendait. "Ny not you see the expression of something that directly concerns you strong when you are faced with the need Dagir
We also often find a psychologist Clausewitz, as here:
"The strength of character leads us to speak of a variety of it, lobstination.
It is often very difficult to say in concrete cases begins where the other ends and moon; by cons, abstract difference between the two does not seem difficult to establish, ()
Lobstination is a defect of temperament. This inflexibility of will, this intolerance of contradiction, not of a particular note that selfishness which is primarily due to obey and make obey other orders solely from his own spiritual activity.
Lobstination therefore precludes the lintelligence which is rather the ability dentendement. "
Finally, in what seems to be the most remarkable moon definitions of dialectical progress of theory and practice:
"The theory must be an observation, not a doctrine.
This is the object of an analytical investigation which led to its attention. The more she achieved this goal, the more it moves from the objective form of a knowledge to the subjective form of a pouvoir.et applied to the experience in loccurrence history, involves familiarity with that object. "
Regarding the available translations of the Revised Editions Gerard Lebovici in 1989 by De Vatry seems more consistent; however, it may sometimes be useful to consult the version of Denise Naville Éditions de Minuit (1955) which more literary form that the less precise (some unfortunate misinterpretation we find it), can sometimes help clear up some obscure points. But whatever the version, it would be very surprising that you can not derive any profit.
