It's often perplexing to note how violent human existence has been. Until the end of world wars, it was common for armies to be raised and sent to die. Only when institutions like trading, finance and learning, which do not occur optimally in turmoil, spread worldwide, there was an incentive to keep peace. This leaves us with a question as to why peace wasn't pursued over the early years of human civilisation. The answer to that would be science or, to be more specific, maths. Before maths, most languages were subjective and interpretive rather than definite and logical. With that power of subjectivity, it was easy to evade having to answer. How big is the earth, you ask? While under maths, you will have to put units, and then under physics, estimate and verify it; in any other language, you can just have a word for it. Subjectivity gives an illusion of an answer, preventing one from digging further and, in this case, striving to learn more. That leaves us with a vacuum, which ...