Productive confrontation, or How to benefit from conflict

Essence, general characteristics and classification of types of functions of social conflicts

Definition 1
The functions of social conflict are a set of external forms of expression of the social purpose of a conflict clash that develops between social subjects - individuals and social groups.

In other words, the functions of social conflict reflect the role that conflict plays in relation to society itself, individual social groups, public organizations and the individual. This definition is based on a general theoretical understanding of a function as a role performed by one or another social institution or entity.

It should be noted that with the development of the theory of social conflict, the idea of ​​its functions also changed. Thus, at the stage of formation of the theory of social conflict, that is, at a time when scientists assessed conflict primarily as a positive phenomenon of social life, accordingly, the main functions of social conflicts were recognized as resolving social contradictions and ensuring balance in society.

Are you an expert in this subject area? We invite you to become the author of the Directory Working Conditions

In turn, at the present stage, taking into account the condemnation of most violent forms of social conflicts, in the process of characterizing them, both positive functions, performed predominantly by peacefully resolved conflicts, and negative functions began to be highlighted, which will be discussed in more detail below. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account that the differentiation of the functions of social conflicts into positive and negative is very conditional and personalized, since the same social conflict can perform positive functions for one of the parties, and lead to negative consequences for the other.

Note 1

In this regard, the specialized literature often emphasizes the functional inconsistency of social conflicts, and therefore it is advisable to consider the relationship between the positive and negative functions of the conflict in each specific case individually, depending on the content and characteristics of the corresponding contradiction.

Finished works on a similar topic

Course work Functions of social conflicts 410 ₽ Essay Functions of social conflicts 270 ₽ Test work Functions of social conflicts 240 ₽

Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost

Moving on to the classification of the types of functions of social conflicts, we note that in the specialized literature on this issue different points of view are offered. Thus, depending on the subject composition, the functions of interpersonal, intergroup, inter-institutional and general social conflicts are distinguished, depending on the direction of conflict interaction - the functions of internal and external conflicts. At the same time, the most common remains the previously designated classification of the functions of social conflicts into positive (also called positive or constructive) and negative (respectively called negative or destructive).

1.1. Formation of conflictological ideas

The highest value of ancient

They recognized not war and struggle, but
peace
and
harmony.
“Those who mourn the war win battles,” taught the ancient Chinese philosopher
Lao Tzu
(579 – 499 BC), “the main thing is to remain calm” (
Ancient Chinese Philosophy.
In 2 vols. - M.: Science, 1972. T. 1. – P. 124). In his opinion, the main principles of the world, Yang (light) and Yin (dark), do not so much fight with each other, but, complementing each other, form the harmony of the One.

These views of the Chinese thinker are consonant with the ideas of the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus

(535 – 475 BC), who saw the sources of conflict in some universal properties of the world as a whole, in its contradictory essence. But at the same time, he understood that in addition to contradictions and enmity in the world there is also a place for harmony and agreement:

War is the father of all things, and peace is their mother... All things are folded into harmony through counter-reversal... The Universe is alternately united and bound by friendship, or multiple and hostile to itself due to some kind of hatred.

It is in the light of the categories of contradictions and struggles that

first presented by ancient philosophers as universal characteristics of existence, the essence of the conflict, its universal nature, can be deeply understood.

Contradiction –

the central category of dialectics - the modern philosophical doctrine of universal categories and laws of development of nature, society and human thinking. According to this teaching, contradiction is associated with the diversity of elements of a single whole. Contradiction is a special kind of relationship between these elements of the whole, which arises when any inconsistency or inconsistency appears in the structure of the whole. And since there is no absolutely stable correspondence in any real object, the contradiction is of a universal nature, as is the conflict, which in this regard can be presented as a moment of aggravation in the development of a contradiction, as a manifestation of one of its states or properties. Precisely because the contradiction is universal, the world is in constant movement and development (Shevchuk D.A. Conflicts: avoid or force?: all about conflict situations at work, in business and personal life. - M.: GrossMedia: ROSBUKH, 2009).

Thus, the category of contradiction

is associated with the study of the source of all movement, change and development, which modern dialectics sees in the essence of the objects themselves. Associated with the universality of contradiction is the universal nature of the conflict, which acts as one of the states or properties of contradiction.

Fight category

complements the concept of contradiction, specifying the nature of the relationship between its opposite sides. Struggle is one of the basic concepts of dialectics. Its content includes not only the moment of struggle between opposing forces, but also the moment of their coexistence, which ensures the integrity of the process.

However, among both ancient and modern philosophers there is no complete unity in understanding the role of contradictions, struggle and conflicts. Already some of the ancient philosophers expressed utopian hopes for the possibility of creating a society where all contradictions and conflicts would be eliminated. Ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus

(341 – 270 BC) believed that the disasters associated with endless wars would eventually force people to live in a state of lasting peace. And despite the fact that real life again and again destroyed pipe dreams, utopias of this kind discovered great attractive force and arose again and again.

Interpretation of the nature of conflict in the Middle Ages

During the Middle Ages,

When the Christian religion, based on the ideas of philanthropy and the equality of all before God, was established, it was again not possible to achieve lasting peace between people.
Moreover, clashes continued not only between believers and non-believers, but also between co-religionists themselves. On this occasion, Erasmus of Rotterdam
(1469 - 1536) remarked:

“The greatest absurdity is that Christ is present in both camps, as if he were fighting with himself.”

Trying to somehow explain and justify the countless manifestations of evil in the world created by God, religious philosophy developed a special teaching called “justification of God”, or “theodicy”.

The essence of this teaching was to clarify how, under a good and omnipotent God, there are various conflicts in the world: global catastrophes, cruel wars, treacherous murders, misfortunes and suffering of people.

The posing of these, as G. Heine put it, “damned questions” was one of the sources of the emergence of denial of God and atheism. Therefore, various attempts to answer these questions, which began at the dawn of Christianity, have not stopped to this day. The answer of one of the first Christian theologians Tertullian

(160 – 220), who believed that the nature of God and his plans are beyond human reason and therefore we have no choice but to blindly believe in him. “I believe it because it’s absurd,” he said.

It is not difficult to notice that there is much in common in the explanation of the root causes of the existence of various collisions in the world by philosophers of the pre-Christian and Christian periods. Both those and others recognize that struggle, conflicts, are an organic, irreducible property of existence. The difference between ancient and Christian philosophers is only that some see in these universal phenomena a property originally inherent in being, nature, while others see in them the plan, the will of God.

Two different approaches to understanding the nature of social conflict in modern times

Scientists thought especially a lot about contradictions in nature, society, thinking, about the struggle between people, classes, states in modern times,

when social conflicts became most acute. F. Bacon and T. Hobbes wrote about the nature of conflicts. J. J. Rousseau and I. Kant, Hegel and Marx, Vl. Soloviev and I. Berdyaev.

During the discussion, two

different approaches to understanding the nature of social conflict, which can be defined as pessimistic and optimistic.

1
The pessimistic approach
was most clearly expressed by the English philosopher
Thomas Hobbes
(1588 – 1679). In his book Leviathan (1651), he had a negative assessment of human nature. Man, he believed, by his natural nature is a selfish, envious and lazy creature. Therefore, he assessed the initial state of human society as a “war of all against all.” When this condition became unbearable for people, they entered into an agreement among themselves to create a state that, relying on its enormous power, comparable only to the power of the biblical monster Leviathan, is capable of saving people from endless hostility. Thus, having a negative assessment of human nature, T. Hobbes did not see any other way to overcome the depravity of people other than the use of state violence.

2
The optimistic approach
is represented by the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 - 1778), who, unlike Hobbes, believed that man is by nature kind, peaceful, and created for happiness. The source of conflicts in modern society, in his opinion, were shortcomings in its organization, the misconceptions and prejudices of people and, above all, their commitment to private property. The most important tool for restoring the natural relations of peace and harmony for people should be the democratic state they create by mutual agreement, based primarily on non-violent, educational means that best correspond to the essence of man.

And in the subsequent period, researchers of this problem either adhered to one of these two concepts, or developed one or another type of their synthesis.

Thus, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant

(1724 - 1804) believed that
the state of peace between people living in the same neighborhood is not a natural state...
The latter is, on the contrary, a state of war, i.e. if not continuous hostilities, then a constant threat. Therefore, the state of the world must be established. Thus. Kant, like T. Hobbes, pessimistically recognizes the “state of war” as natural for people, but at the same time, like J. J. Rouseau, he expresses optimistic hope for the possibility of achieving a “state of peace.”

The concept of social conflict by Marx and his followers

A very detailed concept of social conflict was proposed by the economist and sociologist Karl Marx

(1818 1883). According to Marx, conflicts are characteristic of all levels of social life: politics, economics, culture. The entire history of hitherto existing societies has been the history of class struggle. Its main reason was the dominance of private property, on which all so-called “antagonistic socio-economic formations” are based. In a communist society based on public property, antagonistic contradictions and conflicts will disappear. Thus, the prehistory of humanity will end and its true history will begin.

Followers of Marx in Russia, V. I. Lenin

others believed that acute social contradictions would disappear under socialism, in the first, lower phase of communism. In Soviet philosophy, this position was recognized as indisputable; it was proclaimed that with the construction of developed socialism, the development of non-antagonistic contradictions into antagonistic ones becomes objectively impossible.

However, the achievement of this ideal was associated in Marxism with the use of mass violence in the form of an irreconcilable struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, socialist revolution, armed uprising, civil war and the dictatorship of the proletariat. Therefore, it is precisely these forms of social conflicts that Marxism has developed in the most detail. Following the teachings of Marx, Lenin and his comrades created a detailed doctrine of the driving forces of the socialist revolution, the art of preparing and carrying out an armed uprising, methods of implementing the dictatorship of the proletariat in order to eliminate the ruling elite led by the royal family, as well as the nobility, clergy, bourgeoisie, kulaks, various “enemies of the people”, “dissidents”, etc. Revolutionary violence was for Marx and his followers the main method of resolving social conflicts, and reforms and compromises were only its by-product.

In its subsequent development, the theory of conflict constantly relies on the original ideas about the nature of conflict expressed by outstanding thinkers of antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Modern Age. Thus, modern conflictology, using these ideas of classical philosophy, somehow adheres to two

basic concepts of human nature.

Some scientists, guided by the ideas of Rousseau. Marx argue that man is a rational being, and outbursts of aggression and cruelty arise as a forced reaction to life circumstances. In their opinion, human consciousness and psyche are formed during lifetime under the influence of specific social conditions. They believe that reforms and improvement of social institutions will inevitably lead to the elimination of conflicts and wars.

Others affirm the fundamentally irrational nature of man, for whom violence and aggression are natural and natural. Following the principles of T. Hobbes, developed in the works of F. Nietzsche

(1844 - 1900) and
3. Freud
(1856 1939), supporters of this concept consider aggressive manifestations in human behavior as a pathology and deviation in his nature, but as a natural state dictated by his nature. In their opinion, this is why, striving for eternal and final peace, humanity inevitably returns to war.

However, despite the fruitfulness of ideas about the nature of conflict expressed by classical philosophy, in the study of the essence of conflict until the end of the 19th century. there were significant shortcomings:

1. conflicts were considered only in the most general terms, in connection with the philosophical categories of contradictions and struggle, good and evil, as a universal property of not only social, but also natural existence;

2. the specifics of social conflicts in general were not studied, only a description of certain types of social conflicts was given: in economics, politics, culture, psyche;

3. predominantly only macro-level conflicts, between classes, nations, states, were studied, and conflicts in small groups, intrapersonal conflicts remained outside the field of view of scientists;

4. the general features of conflict as a phenomenon of social life were not studied, and therefore there was no independent theory of conflict, and, consequently, conflictology as a science.

Conflictology emerged as an independent discipline only in the middle of the 20th century, emerging from two fundamental sciences: sociology and psychology.

Development of conflictology within the framework of social science

In sociology, the general concept of social conflict began to take shape at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. in the works of German scientists Max Weber

(1864 – 1920) and
Georg Simmel
(1858 – 1918). They proved that conflicts are an inevitable part of social life. The sociological approach, in contrast to the philosophical, extremely generalized approach, is characterized by the study of conflict on the basis of such specific methods as questioning, statistical analysis of mass data, interviewing, etc. As a result, within the framework of the sociological approach, ideas about conflicts have become more detailed, specific, “living” " Although different sociologists had different views on the nature and role of conflicts in the life of society, they all nevertheless recognized their important role in public life and the need for their specifically sociological analysis.

According to M. Weber, society is a collection of groups that differ in their status. Therefore, their interests diverge, which gives rise to social conflicts. Any hopes for the possibility of eliminating them from the life of society are illusory. We must recognize the inevitability of the existence on this earth of the eternal struggle of some people against others.

However, people’s interests not only diverge, but to some extent they also coincide, which creates the basis for a balance of power and the achievement of social consensus. And although conflicts cannot be completely eliminated from social life, this does not mean that it is characterized by constant instability.

G. Simmel in his book “The Conflict of Modern Culture” (1918) and a number of his other works proceeded from the fact that the many egoistic groups existing in society are nevertheless not isolated from each other, but, on the contrary, are closely connected with each other by thousands of invisible threads. It is these intersections of group interests that mitigate conflicts and serve as the basis for the stability of democratic societies. Nevertheless, conflicts are irremovable; they represent a necessary universal property of social life, its equally stable form as power, market, social contract, etc. As soon as life rose above a purely animal state, an internal conflict was revealed in it, the growth and resolution of which is the way renewal of the entire culture.

The modern era is precisely distinguished by the extreme degree of development of this universal property of life. Of all the historical epochs in which this conflict took on an acute character... none reveals it as a main motive and to the same extent as ours. Numerous followers of Simmel substantiated the idea that the most important practical goal of sociology is to facilitate the transformation of conflicts into cooperation. It was after Simmel’s work that the term “sociology of conflict” came into scientific circulation .

These initial provisions served as the basis for the creation by the middle of the 20th century. conflict theories

as an independent field of sociology.
This problem was solved mainly through the efforts of two outstanding scientists - the German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf
(b. 1929) and the American sociologist
Lewis Coser
(b. 1913).

Dahrendorf, in his famous works “Classes and Class Conflicts in Industrial Society” (1957), “Modern Social Conflict” (1988) and others, considers conflict as the main category of sociology and therefore calls his sociological concept the theory of conflict.

For him, the presence of conflicts is a natural state of society. It is not the presence, but the absence of conflicts that is surprising and abnormal. Reason for suspicion arises when a society or organization is discovered in which no manifestations of conflict are visible. Conflicts are by no means always a threat to a given social system; on the contrary, they can serve as one of the sources of its change and preservation based on the positive changes generated by conflicts.

Unlike K. Marx, R. Dahrendorf believes that the main source of conflict is not economic, but political contradictions

between social groups, associated with the concentration of power in some and its absence in others. Conflicts on economic grounds between workers and entrepreneurs today lack their former explosive force and can be resolved without the use of revolutionary methods characteristic of the 19th century.

Modern society has developed rational methods for regulating conflicts with the participation of power structures in this process. The main provisions of the theory of social conflict he developed can be summarized as follows:

1) since the distinctive feature of any society is the relationship of domination and subordination, its attribute is conflict;

2) the basis of social life and its potential for conflict are power relations,

the dominance of some groups over others: owners over workers, officers over soldiers, teachers over students, government officials over the rest of society;

3) society is a system of conflicting groups.

Conflicts are inevitable and universal.
There are many types of conflicts, including intrapersonal, intragroup, interpersonal and intergroup, at the level of society as a whole, interstate, etc. Therefore, it is more correct to talk not about conflict resolution, but about their regulation,
since conflicts never completely disappear;

4) the commonality of interests of people forming one group, and the differences in the interests of different groups, as they are realized, lead to the formation of various types of organizational structures,

trade unions, parties, lobbying associations, etc.;

5) it is these structures that contribute to the aggravation of conflicts,

especially in conditions of excessive concentration of power in the hands of a few and the lack of other groups not only of power itself, but also of the opportunity to obtain it.

A classic work of modern conflictology was the work of L. Coser “Functions of Social Conflict” (1956). Developing the ideas of Weber and Simmel about the universality of conflict, the American sociologist gave in his work a deep justification for the positive role of conflict interaction

in the life of society. He formulated a number of provisions that became the theoretical foundation of the modern science of conflict:

1) a constant source of social conflicts is the irremovable shortage of resources, power, values, prestige, which always exists in any society. Therefore, as long as society exists, there will be a certain tension in it, which from time to time develops into conflicts. People's desire for power and prestige plays a special role in the constant struggle for these scarce resources;

2) although conflicts exist in any society, their role in a non-democratic, “closed” and democratic, “open” society is different. In a “closed” society, especially in a totalitarian society, which is split into two hostile, opposing camps, conflicts are of a revolutionary violent and destructive nature. In an “open” society, although many conflicts arise, they are resolved constructively;

3) the constructive and destructive results of the conflict are profoundly different. The main task of conflictology is to develop recommendations for limiting the negative and using the positive functions of conflicts.

It should be noted that the conflict theory developed by R. Dahrendorf and L. Coser also had a critical orientation. It was contrasted by its authors as the Marxist theory of class struggle that dominated in the middle of the 20th century. in socialist countries, as well as the concepts of social harmony and “human relations” that were influential in the West.

Concept of social harmony and "human relations"

These concepts were most fully presented by American sociologists Talcott Parson

(1902 – 1979) and
Elton Mayo
(1880 – 1949)

T. Parsons, in his work “The Structure of Social Action” (1937), interpreted conflict as a social anomaly, a kind of social disease that must be treated. The norm, from his point of view, is precisely the absence of conflict, harmony of the social system, and the removal of social tension.

The founder of the theory of “human relations” E. Mayo also argued that the main problem of our time is establishing peace in industry and overcoming a dangerous social disease – conflict. In his opinion, social health is “social equilibrium”, “a state of cooperation”. We must strive for it in every possible way, using not only economic, but also psychological methods, in particular, the formation of a favorable psychological climate in production teams, a sense of job satisfaction, a democratic leadership style, etc.

His ideas found some support among practitioner managers. However, over time, from about the 50s, hopes associated with the theory of social cooperation, human relations, and social harmony began to weaken, since on their basis it was not possible to completely overcome conflicts both in production and in society as a whole. Therefore, we had to return again to the conflict model of society, which was presented in the most detailed form in the works of Dahrendorf and Coser.

General theory of conflict interaction

Another American sociologist, Kenneth Boulding, made a significant contribution to the completion of the formation of conflictology as an independent scientific discipline.

In the book “Conflict and Protection. General Theory” (1963), he tried, based on existing achievements in the study of conflicts, to present a general theory of conflict interaction.

The starting premise of his concept was the recognition that the conflict behavior of people, their constant hostility with their own kind, is a natural form of behavior for them. However, expressing such a pessimistic assessment of human nature, he expressed the hope that, relying on human reason and moral standards, a person can still be improved by softening the forms of conflict interaction.

To do this, it is necessary first of all to understand the common elements and common patterns of development inherent in all conflicts. It is this general knowledge that will help resolve the conflict in any of its specific manifestations. The basis of these general ideas about conflicts occurring both in society and in nature is the description of their two main models: static and dynamic.

Static model

considers conflict as a specific system, the first element of which is the parties (people, animals, objects, theories), and the second is the relationship between these parties. Conflict is defined by Boulding as a competitive situation in which parties seek to take a position that is incompatible with the desires of the other party.

Dynamic model

is based on the well-known modern psychological concept of behaviorism, or behavioral psychology, according to which a person behaves according to the “stimulus-response” principle, constantly reacting to environmental impulses. The dynamics of conflict is one of the manifestations of general human behavioral reactions in conditions of confrontation.

If the capabilities of animals in a conflict situation are limited to a certain minimum number of stereotypes “struggle for food, territory, place in the hierarchy,” then human nature is so plastic that it assumes many options for conflict actions.

The specificity of social conflicts is associated with handling large amounts of information, signs, symbols, knowledge about the world, about oneself and about other people. Even those conflicts that at first glance are associated only with material reasons, in reality have many other aspects, being also associated with the assertion of status, role, prestige, etc.

This determines the complex nature of the motives that cause conflict, the presence in them of not only obvious, but also hidden aspects. The key to the nature of any situation lies in self-awareness

parties, whether individuals or social organizations.

Nevertheless, there is a single, universal source of conflict. It is the incompatibility of the needs of the parties

with limited possibilities to satisfy them.

It should be emphasized that the principle of “scarcity”

(from the English scarcity), i.e. limitations, scarcity, lack of any resources and benefits, material or spiritual, began to actively develop in many subsequent works of Western and domestic conflictologists.

Following Boulding, conflictology also began to widely use game theory, modeling conflict situations in order to introduce rationality, precise calculations into the behavior of conflicting parties, develop a specific plan of conflict actions, “conflict strategies,” etc. Moreover, the meaning of all these strategies is to resolve conflicts, transform a situation of conflict into a situation of harmony.

The publications of these, as well as a number of other sociologists, attracted the attention of the general public. Scientific seminars and conferences on this issue began to be held, and special scientific centers for the study of conflict situations emerged. The first periodicals on this topic appeared. Similar centers and publications arose first in the USA, and then in a number of other Western countries. Specialists began to appear capable of providing services as intermediaries in resolving various types of conflicts, and then special firms specializing in the pre-trial regulation of civil cases emerged. This practice has become very widespread.

Development of conflict management within the framework of psychological science

The expanding practice of pre-trial settlement of conflicts has revealed a large role in their regulation not only of the sociological, but also of the psychological approach.

After all, a necessary side of a social conflict is not only the externally expressed behavior of people, but also their internal attitudes, values, views and feelings, needs and interests, i.e. their psychology, individual and corporate.

Therefore, over time, the number of works on this topic began to rapidly increase. Along with sociology, the psychology of conflict also appeared.

If sociology is focused on the analysis of intergroup conflicts, then psychology focuses primarily on the study of intrapersonal and interpersonal contradictions, although at the same time it also participates in the study of the psychological aspects of intergroup clashes, for example, interethnic conflicts.

The psychologist sees in conflict interaction a clash of opposing motives, views, interests that cannot be satisfied at the same time. This is the conflict experienced by a young man when choosing between two interesting professions. The internal conflict when choosing between two troubles and dangers awaiting a person can be very painful. Thus, a person may want to get rid of an unsatisfying, unpleasant job, but at the same time he may be afraid of becoming unemployed.

The feelings of discomfort and anxiety experienced in such conflict situations can become so strong that they turn into a source of neurosis or stress.

Investigating the causes of various mental disorders, Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud

(1856 - 1939) came to the conclusion that their main source is the conflict inherent in the human psyche
between the conscious and unconscious,
between vague, instinctive drives and the requirements of moral and legal norms. It is this disharmony of the human soul that serves as the main source of all social conflicts: intrapersonal, interpersonal, intergroup.

One of Freud's followers Carl Jung

(1875 – 1961) proposed a new classification of people’s characters, which was based on the criterion of differences in the way they resolved internal conflicts.
According to this classification, all people are divided into two main psychotypes: introverts and extroverts. Introverts
are people who are turned inward, characterized by isolation, contemplation, self-focus, and a desire to distance themselves from other people and the outside world.
Extroverts,
on the contrary, are outward-looking and open to external influences in their thinking and behavior.

Modern psychology has developed other typologies that take into account people's behavior in conflict situations.

Thus, American psychologist Eric Berne

(1902 – 1970) developed
the concept of transactional analysis.
According to his theory, all people are divided into three main states that dominate their psyche: “child”, “parent” and “adult”. People belonging to the first group are prone to emotional, spontaneous behavior; the latter love to teach and are distinguished by stereotypical thinking; still others are pragmatic and rational. Conflict situations arise when people with the same type of psyche begin to interact, for example, two “children” or two “adults.”

In the 90s, American psychologist K. Thomas

proposed an original
test method
for determining people’s propensity for one of the methods of behavior in a conflict situation.
He designated these methods of behavior as follows: 1)
avoidance or avoidance of conflict;
2)
competition or force;
3)
adaptation or method of unilateral concessions;
4)
compromise or mutual concessions;
5)
cooperation or achieving a mutually beneficial solution.

Thus, the main prerequisites for the emergence of conflictology as an independent discipline were created by the development of philosophy, sociology and psychology.

Conflictology and jurisprudence

However, other sciences that studied some specific forms of conflict interaction also played a certain role in the formation of a new scientific discipline. These include: history, art history, pedagogy, political science, military sciences, jurisprudence, economic theory, management theory and some others. Mathematical models of conflict situations are created. Modern theology (theology) also considers this problem from a religious position, especially in connection with the study of the issue of theodicy, the justification of God in relation to the evil he allows on earth.

A special role among these sciences belongs to jurisprudence,

which in recent years has been actively seeking to “see the conflict through the eyes of a lawyer”

The important role of legal sciences in the study of conflict is due to the fact that it is these sciences that determine what should happen if the rights of several individuals or organizations, which for jurisprudence are subjects of legal relations, individuals or legal entities, collide. Conflicts between legal entities are most often resolved through legal means. The situation with individuals may be more varied. But a participant in any conflict, in a certain development of events, can become the subject of influence from law enforcement agencies, i.e. can turn from a participant in an ordinary conflict into a participant in civil or criminal proceedings as a plaintiff, defendant, victim, accused or witness. Often, having begun outside the legal field, a conflict turns into a legal one and, thus, falls within the scope of one or another branch of law. Thus, a family quarrel can develop into a criminal offense if it results in assault.

As legal practice shows, the legal element is of particular importance in disputes about inheritance, which are often resolved not amicably in the family circle, but in a court hearing on the basis of the existing law on inheritance.

Less commonly, the legal aspect is found in the so-called cognitive,

cognitive conflicts, in clashes that arise in conditions when new information contradicts established views and ideas. But in countries with a totalitarian regime and the dominance of a monopoly ideology, legal authorities often intervene in such discussions, persecuting dissidents.

To regulate conflicts in various spheres of life, appropriate norms are applied,

related to certain branches of law. Most often, conflict relationships are regulated on the basis of civil, labor, financial, and family law. The most dangerous conflicts are those within the scope of criminal law. A special role belongs to international and interethnic conflicts regulated by international law, as well as constitutional legislation.

Positive functions of social conflicts

As noted above, the most common approach to studying the functions of social conflicts is their analysis by differentiating them into positive and negative functions. Thus, the positive functions of social conflicts include:

• The ability of social conflict to identify and eliminate contradictions that are objectively emerging in society, which helps ensure the continuous evolutionary development of society as a whole. The significance of this function is that timely identification and resolution of social contradictions can prevent in the future more serious forms of social clashes, the consequences of which can be much more destructive;
• By reducing social tension as a result of resolving social conflict, it performs the functions of stabilization and integration of relations developing between social actors;
• Social conflicts can act as a catalyst for the development of social relations and processes, giving them dynamism by providing their participants with incentives for creative behavior and the search for compromise ways of social development;
• The state of social conflict contributes to a deeper awareness by social actors of the ideas and interests inherent in them and other social actors, an understanding of the existence of problems and contradictions of social development;
• Social conflict also performs subjective functions, helping to relieve social tension of its participants, as well as the internal development of the individual and his ability for effective interpersonal interaction.

Functions of conflict

Negative functions of social conflicts

The second group of functions of social conflicts identified by modern science are the negative (destructive) functions of the social phenomenon under consideration. These, based on the analysis of the content and specificity of social conflicts, can generally include:

• The possibility of a social conflict having a negative impact on the internal psychological state of its participants, especially at the stage of open confrontation and escalation of the social conflict;
• Social conflicts in their extreme manifestations are also accompanied by the use of mechanisms of psychological and physical violence of the parties to the conflict towards each other, as well as third parties;
• Social conflicts can negatively affect the process of social production, productive creative activity of members of society, especially in the case of mass social conflicts, leading to a shift in priorities and a decrease in the quality of professional labor and educational activities;
• The negative role of social conflicts can also be expressed in relation to their influence on the development of an individual, social group or institution, or on the pace of social development as a whole, since protracted and massive social confrontations undermine people’s ideas about justice and morality, lead to a shift in value orientations, etc.

Get paid for your student work

Coursework, abstracts or other works

Nature and reasons for its occurrence

Conflict arises when one side believes that the other is infringing on its interests.

When people have too different perceptions of what is happening , their opinions on a particular issue do not coincide, a clash occurs.

Each side tries to prove that it is right and rejects the opponent’s arguments. People stop hearing each other and become fixated only on their own point of view.

Respect for each other and tolerance disappear, hatred and contempt grow. is born to prove to the other side that you are right and to accept it.

Experts consider conflicts to be a natural phenomenon that arises during human socialization.

He tries to make friends, certain acquaintances appear. During communication, sometimes interlocutors realize that their opinions differ , and this gives rise to negative situations.

Conflicts are usually accompanied by disputes and aggression , but there are times when interlocutors come to a compromise and respect not only their own opinion, but also the opinion of their opponent.

Psychologists have identified several causes of conflict:

1. Objective . Mismatch of interests, outlook on life. In this case, the parties cannot accept each other’s views and criticize.
2. Organizational and managerial . Associated with a person’s professional activity, when an employee makes mistakes, feels pressure from a manager, or the boss does not carry out instructions, or is criticized by subordinates. Both sides are dissatisfied with each other, expectations do not correspond to reality.
3. Socio-psychological . Usually this is an incorrect assessment of the results of activities, or the person treats an adult as a child and talks to him as if he were a little one, and does not give serious instructions.
4. Personal . Mismatch of temperaments, characters, insufficient social adaptability, incorrect assessment of one’s own capabilities. Your own self-improvement will help prevent negative situations.

Such an incident can also be provoked by raising the voice, rude language, arrogance, lack of desire to talk, or solve the problem during communication.

Causes of conflicts:

Classification of conflicts

Positive character traits of a person - what applies to them

Conflict of interests has a fairly broad classification:

1. By impact on the organization’s activities (facilitating or hindering the adoption of correct decisions):

• constructive (develop the organization thanks to adequate communication);
• destructive (hostility, rivalry).

1. By content:

• realistic (dissatisfaction, injustice);
• unrealistic (intentional aggression, provocation).

1. By the nature of the participants:

• intrapersonal (internal dispute);
• interpersonal (between two opponents);
• intergroup (between several groups);
• between an individual and a group (for example, superiors and subordinates).

Dispute helps clarify relationships

1. By areas of manifestation:

• social (in the system of relationships between individuals);
• political (struggle based on power);
• economic (for example, a dispute over property).

1. According to the severity of the confrontation:

• hidden (without external aggressive actions);
• open (provocation, for example, war).

Characters of the conflict

Direct and indirect parties take part in the conflict. Direct participants are the subjects of this phenomenon: the instigators and the other side, the opponent, the interlocutor. Indirect persons in a conflict situation are instigators, provocateurs who may not be aware of the topic being discussed. There are also accomplices who in every possible way dispense advice to one of the sides of the discussion, supporting it. There are so-called mediators, a third party who judges and contributes to the gradual completion of the conflict of interests.

Dynamics of conflict.

The beginning of the conflict is an incident, i.e. actions of opposition parties aimed at achieving their goals. The incident is characterized by awareness of the conflict situation and a transition to direct activity.

Developing according to certain patterns, the conflict has its own dynamics, in which there are four main stages.

1. The emergence of an objective conflict situation. This situation - the so-called stage of potential conflict - is not immediately perceived adequately by people.

2. Awareness of an objective conflict situation or awareness of the conflict (all participants in the conflict perceive the situation as intractable). At this time, awareness of contradictions occurs. Moreover, the latter can be not only objective, really existing, but also subjective, i.e. imaginary, not really present.

3. Conflict actions or transition to conflict behavior. At this stage, conflict behavior is aimed at blocking the achievements of the opposite party, its aspirations, goals, and intentions. At the same time, a destructive conflict is characterized by the desire of the participants to humiliate each other, while a constructive conflict is characterized by conflict actions that do not go beyond the scope of business contact, as well as the search for possible ways out of the conflict.

This is the most acute, dynamic stage, which is completely filled with conflict content: the conflict is aggravated by an emotional background, i.e. feelings, which in turn push people to conflicting actions - the opposite effect. This creates a chain reaction. The mutual manifestation of confrontation that has begun often changes the conflict situation that arose from the very beginning. It introduces new incentives for subsequent actions.

The chain reaction that occurs under the influence of emotional and cognitive factors leads to an escalation of the conflict and turns it into a protracted clash. This is the negative aspect of the chain reaction; the positive one is that in this chain reaction tendencies of the opposite nature appear, i.e. its resolution: conflict actions fully explain the true state of affairs, the real relationships between the parties to the conflict (opponents) and thus perform a cognitive function.

When entering into a conflict, each party has a hypothesis about the interests of the opponent and the reasons for his entry into the conflict. Then, during the conflict itself, these interests and reasons are finally clarified, the enemy’s forces and the possible consequences of the conflict become obvious. In this phase, the cognitive function sobers up the enemy and questions the legitimacy of the conflict; and then the prerequisites for its resolution appear.

4. Conflict resolution. It is possible by changing the objective conflict situation or by transforming the images of this conflict situation that opponents have. Conflict resolution can be partial (elimination of conflicting actions, but the incentive to conflict still remains) and complete (conflict is eliminated at the level of external behavior and at the level of internal motives).

Necessary and sufficient conditions and factors

Conflict conditions are circumstances that provoke the emergence of negative situations. They can be objective and subjective. Objective conditions include:

• changes in the economic, political and social life of society,
• financial stratification of citizens, when people’s incomes differ significantly,
• violation of traditional, moral principles,
• illnesses: both physical and psychological.

The subjective conditions for the birth of conflict are:

• the person is too anxious and excited,
• stressful state,
• selfish behavior
• low moral and personal qualities of a person,
• inability to build relationships with other people.

Causes of the conflict

Negative character traits - how to find and correct negative qualities

Among the main reasons for conflicts of interest are the following:

1. Difference of views and opinions, inability to agree with the interlocutor.
2. Different levels of social status, class. An example is the confrontation between a boss and a subordinate.
3. Mismatch between expectations and results.
4. Misunderstandings, misunderstandings, logical and semantic difficulties.

The factor that intensifies the conflict can be briefly described as the incompatibility of the interlocutors’ claims due to limited opportunities to resolve them. Some individuals prefer to avoid such situations, refuse to argue or sort things out. However, it is impossible to do this always, since without a conflict of interests, society would cease to exist due to the complete satisfaction of all needs, which would slow down development.

Positive and negative sides of the conflict

Conflict has positive and negative sides. The positive aspects of the conflict help to lift the veil of the opponents' thoughts, even if they try to convince each other that they are right in an aggressive and assertive manner. By maintaining a strong position, they allow themselves to express themselves directly, which often sounds negative. However, having received the information flow and treating it adequately, one can draw a number of conclusions where there are general compromises.

It may not be possible to completely resolve the problem, at least not immediately. The negative side of this phenomenon includes emotional instability, which can make it difficult to make a general decision or find a compromise.

Structure and content of the conflict.

The structure of the conflict can be expressed by the formula : Conflict = Conflict situation + Incident.

A conflict situation is characterized by the presence of a contradiction in the interests and needs of the parties and may not be recognized for a long time. It reflects the entire set of causes and conditions that precede and cause the conflict.

A conflict situation is usually influenced by : the object of the conflict, its subjects (parties), the positions (motivation) of the parties, the image of the situation presented in the minds of each party.

The object of conflict is a real or ideal object that causes the conflict. The object of the conflict is very difficult, sometimes impossible, to determine. In addition, there is a danger that in the process of conflict interaction one conflict object can be replaced by another, which often occurs unconsciously and complicates conflict resolution. Taking into account the subject of our research, it should be emphasized: participation in a conflict by representatives of different ethnic groups often leads to the fact that their behavior and actions are mediated by differences in their views and motivations for actions and actions, differences in the specifics of relationships and even the culture of the people as a whole.

The subjects (parties) of a conflict are its direct participants. Some scientists propose to separate the parties and participants in the conflict, citing the fact that during development, there may be random people (participants in the conflict) whose interests do not coincide with the interests of the parties (subjects) of the conflict, but who find themselves in the zone of action of the latter.

The goals, motives and objectives of the conflicting parties determine the positions of the subjects - internal and external. The first are openly made demands on the opponent. The latter contain the true motives for entering into conflict. The internal position may not coincide with the external one. In addition, it may be unconscious by the subject himself. To resolve a conflict constructively, it is necessary to correctly comprehend your internal position.

The conflict situation is greatly influenced by the image of the opponent’s situation, his vision of the current conditions. Often the images of the situations on both sides are directly opposite, and to resolve the conflict it is important to be able to look at the problem through the eyes of the opponent. With the participation of representatives of different ethnic groups, this is almost impossible, especially if they do not know each other’s national psychology.

The structure of the conflict also includes the ranks of opponents. An opponent of the first rank is an individual who acts in a conflict on his own behalf and defends his own interests and goals. A second-rank opponent is an individual (or group) who speaks on behalf of the group and pursues its goals. The third-rank opponent is an individual (or structure) speaking on behalf of a structure that consists of interacting simple groups. Ranks can continue further. An opponent of zero rank is also identified. This is a person who is in a dispute with himself and is only developing his position, his decision. In a monoethnic group, as the study has shown, the values ​​of the group (national) always come first and significantly influence the content and development of the conflict.