Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The contentious nature of war: an analysis of military theorists
Swedish National Defence College.
2005 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [sv]

The purpose of this essay is to investigate and assess, with Clausewitz’s theory as thebackground, how different military theorists interpret and relate to the nature of war.This essay illustrates the state of research into Clausewitz’s philosophical influences.Clausewitz’s theory of the nature of war is subjected to a qualitative text analysis that is followedby a critique of other military theorists interpretations of his theory. Subsequently a descriptive,comparative qualitative text analysis is performed where the factors identified by Clausewitz asbeing part of the nature of war (“rational thought”, “passion” and “chance”) are used as a meansto interpret and assess how other military theorists relate to Clausewitz theory. This essay ismainly founded on analysis of the works of Jomini, Delbrück, Fuller, Liddell Hart, Handel,Roxborough, van Creveld and Keegan. The analysis concludes with a categorization andassessment of the other theorists’ critiques of Clausewitz’s theory. The result shows that theircritiques are founded on parts of Clausewitz’s theory, which have been taken out of context orinterpreted differently than they are in this essay.My analysis of how other military theorists relate to the factors that constitute the nature of waraccording to Clausewitz, shows that all of them interpret his three factors as essential parts of thenature of war. None of them contributes anything new to Clausewitz’s theory of the nature ofwar. Nor do they suggest any alternative explanation of the nature of war that does not fit withinthe framework of Clausewitz’s theory. All in all, the results of this essay consolidateClausewitz’s theory of the nature of war.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2005. , 56 p.
Keyword [sv]
Krigsfilosofi, Krigsvetenskap, Uppsatser, Chefsprogrammet, Chefsprogrammet 2003-2005
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:fhs:diva-1636OAI: oai:DiVA.org:fhs-1636DiVA: diva2:427985
Educational program
Chefsprogrammet. (ChP)
Uppsok
Social and Behavioural Science, Law
Supervisors
Note
Avdelning: ALB - Slutet Mag 3 C-upps Hylla: Upps. ChP 03-05Available from: 2011-06-29 Created: 2011-06-29 Last updated: 2011-06-29Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(499 kB)1119 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 499 kBChecksum SHA-512
fa841b90b61ceb34d0def2ff23b2483e0fd87fd772a860f3a37081d73513bfae34bdea76158bf7e49934bd940dd8bac6bb7b96a1c11e58630fd030e611bc265f
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Swedish National Defence College
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1119 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Total: 293 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf