Résumé
In recent years, the fight, understood as violent and localized confrontation between two military forces, became an unexpected meeting point of history, sociology and political science. It has indeed been a proliferation of books on the subject, who share a common interest in the war 'at ground' seen through the immediate experience of those who face it. In doing so, they attach themselves to analyze very specific dimensions, sometimes with particular attention to tactical or technical aspects hitherto willingly left to the military alone. This appropriation of the fight by the social sciences does not just happen. First, because the entropy and disorder which characterize lend themselves to the establishment of regularities or production of generalizations which constitute the rationale of the latter. But because we are entitled to ask what the social sciences can learn the fight. The advantage of the war to the understanding of societies has certainly already been extensively highlighted. It was highlighted by different disciplines as anthropology, history or political science. The importance that one is prepared to give to war to realize the structure of societies do not, however, requires priority attention to what is happening on the battlefield. The attraction of some historians for war violence, from the 1980s, has also been mocked by emphasizing that these authors belonged to the first generation of which had not had direct experience. The question of the contributions of these studies on the struggle for the social sciences therefore worth asking. One way to answer this question is to look back on the social sciences have so far focused on the fight. Despite their common interest in what happens on the battlefield, these in fact adopt very different views on the subject. This article highlights three approaches have so far contested the analysis of combat. The first is that of military sociology, which seeks in the fight to increase knowledge of military organizations. The second is that military historians, who sees in the expression of the struggle of the companies report to war. The third, more recent analysis fight like a particular form of war violence. These three approaches, we shall see, provide a deeper understanding of phenomena warriors. Nevertheless, one can ask whether they are sufficient to realize what war is. Adapted from the source document.