Sun Tzu incorporated in the "Art of War". According to Steven C. Combs in "Sun-zi and the "Art of War": The Rhetoric of Parsimony", warfare is "used as a metaphor for rhetoric, and that both are philosophically based arts." Combs writes "Warfare is analogous to persuasion, as a battle for hearts and minds." The application of "The Art of War" strategies throughout history is attributed to its philosophical rhetoric. Daoism is the central principle in the "Art of War". Combs compares ancient Daoist Chinese to traditional Aristotelian rhetoric, notably for the differences in persuasion. Daoist rhetoric in the art of war warfare
What Is Art? to justify their own tastes. Jahn notes the "often confusing use of categorisation" and the lack of definition of the key concept of emotion. Bayley writes that "the effectiveness of "What is Art?" lies not so much in its positive assertions as in its rejection of much that was taken for granted in the aesthetic theories of the time". Noyes criticises Tolstoy's dismissal of beauty, but states that, "despite its shortcomings", "What is Art?" "may be pronounced the most stimulating critical work of our time". Simmons mentions the "occasional brilliant passages" along with the "repetition, awkward language, and loose terminology".