What branch of philosophy are you interested?

Answer 1

The Philosophy of war examines war beyond the typical questions of weaponry and strategy, inquiring into the meaning and etiology of war, what war means for humanity and human nature as well as the ethics of war. Certain portions of the philosophy of war overlap with Philosophy of history, Political Philosophy and Philosophy of law.

Great works in the Philosophy of war

A modern edition of The Art of War translated into English by Samuel B. Griffith.Perhaps the greatest and most influential works in the philosophy of war are The Art of War by Sun Tzu, Arthashastra by Chanakya and On War by Carl von Clausewitz. Each book combines observations on strategy with questions about human nature and the purpose of war. Clausewitz especially examines the teleology of war: whether war is a means to an end outside itself or whether it can be an end in itself. He concludes that the latter cannot be so, and that war is "politics by different means"; i.e. that war must not exist only for its own sake but must serve some purpose for the state.

Leo Tolstoy's novel War and Peace contains frequent philosophical digressions on the philosophy of war (and broader metaphysical assertions derived from Tolstoy's observations of the Napoleonic Wars), and was very influential on later thought about war. Tolstoy's thought was a big influence on Gandhi's non-violent resistance philosophy.

Niccolò Machiavelli wrote a book titled The Art of War, however its focus is mostly on weaponry and strategy instead of philosophy. However, sections of his masterpiece The Prince discuss war from a philosophical point of view.

Schools of thought
According to Anatol Rapoport's introduction to his edition of the J. J. Graham translation of Clausewitz's On War, there are three main schools of thought in the philosophy of war: the cataclysmic, the eschatological, and the political. (On War, Rapoport's introduction, 13) These are, of course, not the only possible philosophies of war, but only three of the most common. As Rapoport says,

To put it metaphorically, in political philosophy war is compared to a game of strategy (like chess); in eschatological philosophy, to a mission or the dénouement of a drama; in cataclysmic philosophy, to a fire or an epidemic.
These do not, of course, exhaust the views of war prevailing at different times and at different places. For example, war has at times been viewed as a pastime or an adventure, as the only proper occupation for a nobleman, as an affair of honor (for example, the days of chivalry), as a ceremony (e.g. among the Aztecs), as an outlet of aggressive instincts or a manifestation of a "death wish", as nature's way of insuring the survival of the fittest, as an absurdity (e.g. among Eskimos), as a tenacious custom, destined to die out like slavery, and as a crime. (On War, Rapoport's introduction, 17)
The Cataclysmic school of thought, which was espoused by Leo Tolstoy in his epic novel War and Peace, sees war as a bane on humanity--whether avoidable or inevitable--which serves little purpose outside of causing destruction and suffering, and which may cause drastic change to society, but not in any teleological sense. Tolstoy's view may be placed under the subcategory of global cataclysmic philosophy of war. Another subcategory of the cataclysmic school of thought is the ethnocentric cataclysmic, in which this view is focused specifically on the plight of a specific ethnicity or nation, for example the view in Judaism of war as a punishment from God on the Israelites in certain books of the Tenakh (Old Testament). As the Tenakh sees war as an ineluctable act of God, so Tolstoy especially emphasizes war as something that befalls man and is in no way under the influence of man's "free will", but is instead the result of irresistible global forces. (On War, Rapoport's introduction 16)
The Eschatological school of thought sees all wars (or all major wars) as leading to some goal, and asserts that some final conflict will someday resolve the path followed by all wars and result in a massive upheaval of society and a subsequent new society free from war (in varying theories the resulting society may be either a utopia or a dystopia). There are two subsets of this view: the Messianic and the Global theory. The Marxist concept of a communist world ruled by the proletariat after a final worldwide revolution is an example of the global theory, and the Christian concept of an Armageddon war which will usher in the second coming of Christ and the final defeat of Satan is an example of a theory that could fall under Global or Messianic. (On War, Rapoport's introduction, 15) The messianic eschatological philosophy is derived from the Jewish-Christian concept of a Messiah, and sees wars as culminating in unification of humanity under a single faith or a single ruler. Crusades, Jihads, the Nazi concept of a Master Race and the 19th century American concept of Manifest Destiny may also fall under this heading. (On War, Rapoport's introduction, 15) (See main articles for more information: Christian eschatology, Jewish eschatology)
The Political school of thought, of which Clausewitz was a proponent, sees war as a tool of the state. On page 13 Rapoport says,
Clausewitz views war as a rational instrument of national policy. The three words "rational", "instrument" and "national" are the key concepts of his paradigm. In this view, the decision to wage war "ought" to be rational, in the sense that it ought to be based on estimated costs and gains of war. Next, war "ought" to be instrumental, in the sense that it ought to be waged in order to achieve some goal, never for its own sake; and also in the sense that strategy and tactics ought to be directed towards just one end, namely towards victory. Finally, war "ought" to be national, in the sense that its objective should be to advance the interests of a national state and that the entire effort of the nation ought to be mobilized in the service of the military objective.
He later characterizes the philosophy behind the Vietnam War and other Cold War conflicts as "Neo-Clausewitzian". Rapoport also includes Machiavelli as an early example of the political philosophy of war (On War, Rapoport's introduction, 13). Decades after his essay, the War on Terrorism and the Iraq War begun by the United States under President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003 have often been justified under the doctrine of preemption, a political motivation stating that the United States must use war to prevent further attacks such as the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Answer 2

Logic.
It is by far the most interesting branch of philosophy, and the ONLY branch of philosophy that actually PROVED something(see e.g [1], [2]).
Most recent philosophical developments has linked logic to computer science making it by far the most useful philosophy as well[3].
And did i mention that all other branches of philosophy cannot exist without logic?

Answer 3

What branch of philosophy interests you most? ~~~ How will it benefit you to find what a motley group of strangers finds the more interesting branch of philosophy? Most here don't even know what philosophy is! What benefit can you possibly derive? Or is it that you are just drooling bored and babbling? Your 'question' is only barely better than "whats your favorite color?"

Answer 4

Aesthetics, Philosophy of Literature, Phenomenology, Existentialism, Contintental, Chinese Philosophy

Answer 5

The branch on which I am sitting at the time you question me. In this case free will and what I will do with it. I will look into all forms of philosophy as they are presented to me.

Answer 6

In western philosophy I am interested in phenomenology, specifically that posited by the existentialist Maurice Merleau-Ponty. I am also highly interested in Taoism and the philosophy of Lao Tzu.

Answer 7

Philosophy of Religion.. since it can expose illogical beliefs, and give an insight as to why certain religions follow certail laws. Also most religious followers have no idea about the philosophy of why they believe what they believe.

Answer 8

Politics because it affects our way of life. It is interesting to study the political philosophies of Aristotle, Locke, and Machiavelli .

Answer 9

Mostly politics - that is, how philosophy applies to real life. Sometimes philosophy gets so abstract and impractical I just can't be bothered.

Answer 10

not really philosophy but I am interested in sociology

Answer 11

Historical materialism