We can look at several times in history, including our own where victory was not only in doubt but unlikely.

Fighting is the default state, never stop fighting. If you never stop, you won't ever have to wonder when you should start.

The only reason you shouldn't be fighting is when there are no more enemies left and you are living in paradise, otherwise, you're fighting.

We all die, there's no way around it. Lots of dead bodies are needed to win wars but millions are dying anyway. You can either die for something or die for nothing.

Figure out how to win but where you figure that out is in the field, not contemplating your navel. lol

That's a direct quote of Sun Tzu's, is it not?

The Art of War isn't just about physical conflict on a national level; its lessons can be applied to any conflict, of any size or nature.

For example, one of the principles Sun Tzu espouses, is to never fully envelope an enemy army. If you completely surround them, they are going to be more likely to realize "Fuck, we've got nowhere to run... FIGHT AS HARD AS YOU CAN, MEN! Maybe we can cut our way through the enemy and flee!" This means a longer fight, which means more deaths and injuries on both sides- everyone loses. But instead of surrounding them entirely, let's say you leave their left flank exposed, with a nice open field in that direction. As each unit/individual begins to realize what is happening, that they are beset from 3 sides, that open plain will begin to look very inviting... and they'll be more likely to decide "Fuck fighting, c'mon boys, let's get out of here while we still can!" Similarly, treating prisoners (and accepting surrenders without brutality) is extremely important- if your enemy knows that you flay prisoners alive, they will resist you with utmost ferocity, TO THE DEATH. This means more fighting, more of your men lost, more time spent- everyone loses. If they instead know that, as a prisoner, they might get beaten up a bit and be hungry, put to work, but otherwise won't be abused... surrendering becomes much more appealing than "Trying not to get stabbed/shot".

So how to apply these concepts to, say, an argument with someone? Well, a full envelopment would be... like an ultimatum. You give a person an ultimatum, and they'll either dig in and resist, or they'll concede. It's better to let the person feel like they have more control over the situation, so if you present the ultimatum in a way that doesn't seem like an ultimatum, they're more likely to accept- and you win.

You got any good examples of concepts like this that can be used on smaller levels than straight up warfare?