Cunning Vs. Valor

[Shikanosuke]

I'm not very good at posting threads in the first place so I hope I explain this clearly enough.

People vary in their opinions of victory. Some people think that people like Kongming or Sima Yi achieved victory by dis-honorable means like trickery or ploys whereas other leaders have won victories on the battlefield by their simple ability to command troops during battle and so forth. One method may be more bloodier than the other but is there a difference in the quality of victory?

So which is the more glorious victory, the victory won by cunning and wit, or the victory won by leadership and valor.

I'm not sure valor was the best word to use in this question, so forgive me if my question does not make sense.

Personally, I tend to more admire the leader who wins by his natural ability to lead his troops than bother with ploys, diplomatic scheming, or fancy stunts. However, after reading books like ROTK I have grown to understand and appreciate the genius in such methods as Kongming, Sima Yi,Hideyoshi, and other strategists have used. Especially whenn some wars are won without the loss of life.

[Sky Scorcher]

They both come hand in hand, because trickery and ploys make up for the lack of troops, morale, experience, and provisions. Valor leads men through ploys and ambushes, and keeps their morale steady throughout the battle.

[boogiepopmeup]

though cunning can be impressive like jiang wei turning an entire army with a letter, and sun quan's 'surrender' to wei. what makes great reading are things like zhang liao's defence of he fei and zhao yun's rescue of liu chan.

[Sky Scorcher]

I agree. Those moments show their dedication to their cause, whether it be for honor, or for victory, etc...

[Zanshiro]

In humblest of opinions, I would think that the two must coincide to find a true leader, one worthy of following. One could be extremely devious, and lack courage, therefore showing themselves incapable of making the right decision for the people under pressure (Think Cao's first advisor when he left him alive). Or, one could be extremely courageous and ready for battle, yet not have the mind to work the strategies of an army, though warriors would rally to be by his side in battle (Think Lu Bu, Zhang Fei). Such forth comes the tide of warriors where all areas must be strong - Mind, Body, and Spirit. (Think Lord Guan Yu). Though Chinese, Lord Guan actually resembles the aspects of the ancient Samurai by his actions and deeds, in humblest of opinions, and where these aspects unite, you find leaders, both on the battlefield and off it.

[Shikanosuke]

but which of the two do you all value/admire more?

[Zanshiro]

Shikanosuke said:

but which of the two do you all value/admire more?

My apologies, I didn't read well enough to discern that was the goal of the question. I value both equally, for without both sides of knowledge, it can lead to the imbalance. And on the other end of the spectrum (which is neither, yet still balance)...A victory in war is a victory in war...The details are lost to those left alive to tell the story (typically the winning side)

[Chibichan]

Though I, too, believe that both is important for a real, true victory, but between the two, I must go with cunning. While valor is admirable (and let's face it, Zhao Yun rescuing the baby stands high in my rank of valor), having the wits to attain victory just ranks higher to me. You can have all the valor and bravery you can muster, but will it attain victory all the time? No, but then again, the same can be said for cunning as well.

That's why I think you need both.

(Call me bias; most of my favorite characters are strategists... how sad is that?)