Most Conflicts We Have Actually Based On Its Substances

Weird is, he who creates it he who blames on it. Many would deem it's stupid, but defining words requires more efforts to feel and to go beyond into chords.

We're too often trapped in a conflict with fewer solutions and it has lessened its chance to be solved. Like a moderator failing to pull the final wrap-ups, the debate is based on an equivalent context that doesn't exist. Some insist from the word of "d" and "e", some try to identify "fi" and "nit", and some how to unlock the suffix of "ion". How could the conflict's solution fail when the debate is so beautifully orchestrated from each perspective?

It may because they have gone too far from an endeavor to define the "definition" itself.

Somehow there's innocence within a stupidity, and there's political aspect inside a weirdness. We can't afford to pay attention on these both and to compare them each other since they are derived from a different context. We can actually, but it's just better not.