The word "factious" has historically been used in literature to characterize individuals or groups that foster division and conflict, particularly within a political or societal context. For instance, authors like John Locke [1] warned against "ill-affected and factious men" who might spread unrest when a ruler exercises his authority, while Charles Dickens [2] portrayed factious behavior as deliberately self-serving and divisive. Thomas Carlyle, in multiple passages [3, 4, 5], frequently linked the term with political strife and the damaging consequences of factionalism, underscoring its association with rebellion and internal discord. Similarly, Ben Jonson [6, 7] defined "factious" by its very connection to seditious and partisan behavior, and ancient historians such as Livy [8] and Plutarch [9] noted that such tendencies were often a natural, if dangerous, facet of public life. This literary usage consistently reflects a wariness of factional loyalties that challenge established order or unity within the state.