Are you writing some sort of naive and optimistic fellow?I'm winning currently by writing this:
"Civilizations start three different ways: they know peace and learn to have a war, they know war and then learn to have peace, they know both, and use both into advantage. There are no civilizations that don't know both, because war and peace are higher level concept compared to survival."
yeah because there's no further explanation on how that war and peace happens when civilizations form, what war and peace it is, legal, rhetorical, biological, and whatnot, he just drops this and the listener thinks he's naive when he was just doing very bad generalizingAre you writing some sort of naive and optimistic fellow?