One of the more fundamental concepts in Sun Tzu is “The Moral Law,” one of the Five Constants of warfare, as translated by Lionel Giles in 1910. Regardless of the label we use for it, Sun Tzu’s definition serves well: “The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.” Thus, “The Moral Law” is the unifying cause that unites a nation, an army, or a corporation; it is, in a more military sense, the mission. In business, this is what constitutes the content of the mission statement to all stakeholders.
Sun Tzu’s concept of generalship is public service, albeit for a ruler who, in his day, was a king, and thus a law unto himself. Nonetheless, the same core principle holds: a nation with a stronger reason to fight and more vibrant leadership has an advantage in war. This advantage is far from absolute; it is merely one of five constants Sun Tzu writes of. However, its importance cannot be dismissed.
In American history, various self-appointed missions have come and gone. One of the more notable ones in war was that expressed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his “Day of Infamy” speech; he laid out to the nation a great cause justified any hardship and any sacrifice in obtaining what was considered to be righteous vengeance against Japan, in addition to full war against Japan’s ally, Germany, in ending further threats to American soil. What matters here is that the American people were heavily motivated by the idea behind American involvement in the war, now that the war had been brought to America (from their layman’s perspective).
The Moral Law is unity of purpose. Unity of purpose, in turn, provides the motivation for those participating in the organization to act, to follow orders, to obey regulations, and to further the interests of the leader. It is the foundation of organized action. Its importance must not be dismissed.
Love your take on “the Morale Law”. I am working on a paper about AoW, and would love to hear your opinion about the following statements. Would you agree with me if i say:
1) General speaking we are referring to “The Moral Law,” as some kind of “rules of engagement” ,“mission statement” , “objectives”, “ Mission”, “goals”, “duties”, “ motivations” and such that applies to all members of a group, organization, society or a nation and must be followed by everyone, regardless of that person’s position and personal references.
2) despite of the King’s protest, Sun Tzu beheaded the 2 girls just to establish the morale law . or it has another reason?
I appreciate your feedback.
I think killing the concubines is not moral law, its ruling w fear
@Anon: I agree, it is a form of fear-based authority; however, I think that a Moral Law can come in many colors — even ones that we may not traditionally view favorably.
@regova: Wow, I had never really thought about that. When I read the concubine story, something just seemed unexplained to me. Then, I read your comment, and it seems so much clearer. Thank you for the excellent insight!
Killing the concubines did not establish the moral law, it was the 5th constant, method an discipline. IMO
let us not forget Vietnam a war lost at home first because of “the Morale Law”
The moral law has it’s roots in Tao as expressed in Confucianism. Confucius did not originate the concept of Tao, but he gives it the best explanation by lifting out a passage in an ancient text “The Great Learning.”
The Great Learning
By Confucius
Written ca. 500 B.C.E
What the great learning teaches, is to illustrate illustrious virtue; to renovate the people; and to rest in the highest excellence.
The point where to rest being known, the object of pursuit is then determined; and, that being determined, a calm unperturbedness may be attained to. To that calmness there will succeed a tranquil repose. In that repose there may be careful deliberation, and that deliberation will be followed by the attainment of the desired end.
Things have their root and their branches. Affairs have their end and their beginning. To know what is first and what is last will lead near to what is taught in the Great Learning.
The ancients who wished to illustrate illustrious virtue throughout the kingdom, first ordered well their own states. Wishing to order well their states, they first regulated their families. Wishing to regulate their families, they first cultivated their persons. Wishing to cultivate their persons, they first rectified their hearts. Wishing to rectify their hearts, they first sought to be sincere in their thoughts. Wishing to be sincere in their thoughts, they first extended to the utmost their knowledge. Such extension of knowledge lay in the investigation of things.
Things being investigated, knowledge became complete. Their knowledge being complete, their thoughts were sincere. Their thoughts being sincere, their hearts were then rectified. Their hearts being rectified, their persons were cultivated. Their persons being cultivated, their families were regulated. Their families being regulated, their states were rightly governed. Their states being rightly governed, the whole kingdom was made tranquil and happy.
From the Son of Heaven down to the mass of the people, all must consider the cultivation of the person the root of everything besides.
It cannot be, when the root is neglected, that what should spring from it will be well ordered. It never has been the case that what was of great importance has been slightly cared for, and, at the same time, that what was of slight importance has been greatly cared for.
[…] and they will make their way. The only advice I can give them is this: stay on the right side of Sun Tzu’s Moral Law. It made me a happy person. Happiness is more important than wealth or […]