"Wars based on principle are far more destructive... the attacker will not destroy that which he is after"

Alan Watts, a British author and speaker known for translating and promoting Eastern philosophy for Western audiences, often tackled complex philosophical concepts in simple, insightful ways. The quote in concern can be unpacked to reveal a deep reflection on the nature of disputes, particularly those driven by abstract principles or ideologies.

Initially glimpse, the quote suggests that wars encouraged by concepts-- like ideology, religious beliefs, or ethical convictions-- tend to be more devastating than those driven by concrete goals, such as land, resources, or political power. When a conflict is rooted in principle, it suggests a profound commitment to an idea or belief that goes beyond concrete results. This deep-seated conviction frequently leads to an uncompromising position, with each profile their perfects as non-negotiable, therefore making reconciliation and compromise very tough.

Watts suggests that in principle-based wars, the combatants are frequently willing to go to higher lengths, use more extreme procedures, and withstand considerable losses to uphold their perfects. On the other hand, wars over tangible assets might enable settlement or settlement once a particular strategic or material objective has been attained.

Moreover, when Watts states "the aggressor will not destroy that which he wants," he suggests that in conflicts over concrete things, the opponent has an interest in maintaining what they prefer to get. For example, when war is waged over land, there is frequently an intent to occupy and use that land. Nevertheless, when the target is an idea or concept, the damage frequently spills over to the social fabric, culture, and entire populations, as the focus moves to eradicating opposing perspectives.

Thus, the destructiveness of principle-based wars lies in their all-consuming nature, where the dispute is not just for ownership but for the dominance of one worldview over another. They transform the battlefield into one where the civilian casualties includes not just lives and facilities but likewise worths, identities, and cultural heritages. Watts's observation acts as a cautionary reminder of the capacity for destruction when principles-- unyielding and outright-- drive human dispute.