The causes of social conflicts briefly. Ways to get out of a conflict situation
- Yamalov Ural Buranbaevich, master
- Bashkir State Agrarian University
- MODELS (METHODS) OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION
- BEHAVIOR STYLES IN CONFLICT
- CONFLICT
- CONTRADICTION
- CONFLICT SITUATION
The article discusses the features of the conflict. The outcome of a conflict situation will largely depend not only and not so much on the causes, factors and patterns of the conflict, the degree of its development, but on the attitude of the participants themselves to the conflict situation.
- Algorithms for effective conflict management
Social conflict is the highest stage of development of contradictions in relations between people, social groups, social institutions, which is characterized by the strengthening of opposing tendencies and the clash of different interests.
The world is structured in such a way that in almost all spheres of human activity conflicts arise, which are most often based on emotions and personal hostility, and they are associated with aggression, threat, and hostility. Conflict is defined by the fact that the conscious behavior of one of the parties: an individual, group or organization conflicts with the interests of the other party. Conflict management is one of the most important functions of a manager (on average, they spend about 20% of their working time). To manage them, you need to know the types of conflicts, the causes of their occurrence, the characteristics of their course, as well as the consequences to which they can lead.
Social conflicts in the life of society are inevitable, since social development is carried out in conditions of confrontation between various interests, attitudes, and aspirations. However, in a developed society there are mechanisms for preventing and peacefully resolving conflicts within the framework of normalized relations.
Individuals and social groups involved in a conflict are called subjects of the conflict. The issue requiring resolution, or the good over which there is a conflict, is called the subject of conflict. The cause of the conflict is the objective social circumstances that predetermine its occurrence. The reason for the conflict is a specific incident or social action that provokes a transition to open confrontation.
The difference between conflict and peaceful confrontation, competition and rivalry for the possession of certain goods lies in the severity of the conflict, which can take the form of open aggression and violent actions.
At the heart of any social conflict lies an acute contradiction.
Contradiction is the fundamental incompatibility of important interests and aspirations (political, economic, ethnic, cultural) of individuals and social groups. Dissatisfaction with the current situation and readiness to change it is expressed in the growth of social tension. A conflict arises when one of the parties begins to openly realize its aspirations to the detriment of the other, which causes an aggressive response.
A contradiction does not always develop into an open clash; it can be resolved peacefully or persist in society as an implicit confrontation of ideas, interests, and tendencies.
Based on various criteria, types of conflicts are distinguished:
- by duration: short-term and protracted conflicts;
- by scope of participants: global, interethnic, national, local conflicts;
- in spheres of public life: economic, political, labor, sociocultural, national-ethnic, family and everyday life, ideological, spiritual and moral, legal conflicts;
- in the sphere of contradictions: interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup conflicts, as well as conflicts of the group with the external environment;
- by the nature of development: intentional, spontaneous;
- by means used: violent (military, armed) and non-violent conflicts;
- by social consequences: successful, unsuccessful, constructive, destructive conflicts.
Social conflict goes through several stages in its development:
- pre-conflict situation - awareness by the parties of the existing contradiction and increasing social tension;
- direct conflict - open actions aimed at realizing aspirations and satisfying the needs that became the cause of the confrontation;
- conflict resolution - ending the confrontation, eliminating the causes of the conflict or reconciling the parties on the basis of compromise;
- after the conflict stage - the final elimination of contradictions, the transition to peaceful interaction.
Typically, a social conflict is preceded by a pre-conflict stage, during which contradictions between subjects accumulate and gradually intensify.
Before the start of a conflict, the parties realize the existence of tension due to the dissatisfaction of some important needs, look for ways to resolve the contradiction that has arisen, and choose ways to influence the enemy.
Most often, social conflict arises due to differences in the level of material well-being, access to power, cultural goods, education, information, as well as due to differences in religious, ideological, moral attitudes and standards of behavior.
The severity of a conflict situation and ways out of it are determined not only by the significance of the contradiction, but also by the socio-psychological traits of the participants in the conflict: characteristics of temperament, intelligence, level of general culture, and communication skills.
The reason for the outbreak of a conflict is an incident - an event or social action aimed at changing the behavior of the opposing side and entailing a transition to open confrontation (verbal debate, economic sanctions, changes in legislation, etc.).
The next stage in the development of the conflict is its escalation, i.e. growth, increase in scale, number of participants, publicity.
The direct conflict stage of social confrontation is characterized by a set of certain actions that participants take in order to realize their interests and suppress the enemy.
All participants in a large-scale conflict play a certain role in it, although not all of them are necessarily in a state of confrontation with each other.
Witnesses to a conflict observe events from the sidelines without actively participating in them.
Mediators are people who try to prevent, stop or resolve a conflict, look for ways to reconcile conflicting interests, and participate in organizing negotiations. Instigators are people who provoke the beginning and further development of a conflict.
Accomplices may not directly participate in an open clash of warring entities, but through their actions they contribute to its development, supporting one of the parties.
Resolving a social conflict is overcoming the main contradiction in the interests of the parties, eliminating it at the level of the causes of the conflict. The resolution of the conflict can be achieved by the conflicting parties themselves without the help of any outsiders, or by involving a third party (mediator) in the solution. Thus, a conflict resolution model is a set of certain methods for overcoming it. This is not a randomly chosen method, but directly depends on the indications of the diagnosis of a specific conflict.
Models used in conflict resolution are formed on the basis of cultural and legal attitudes towards conflict existing in society, encouraging or prohibiting one or another method of conflict resolution. The model for resolving any conflict is based on the use of various methods - violent (repression, demonstration of force, various forms of coercion) or peaceful (negotiations, agreement, compromises).
There are four fundamental ways (models) by which conflicting parties can resolve their differences and exit the state of conflict:
- Forceful (one-sided dominance).
- Compromise.
- Integral model.
- Separation of the parties. A certain combination of these four methods is also possible (symbiotic model).
One-sided dominance(power model) – a method that involves satisfying the interests of one of the conflicting parties at the expense of the interests of the other. Forceful methods of resolving a conflict, in fact, lead to the destruction or complete suppression of the interests of one of the parties to the conflict. In this case, a variety of means of coercion are used, from psychological to physical. Often this is a way of transferring blame and responsibility to the weaker party. Thus, the real cause of the conflict is replaced and the dominant will of a stronger subject is unilaterally imposed.
Separation of the parties to the conflict. In this case, the conflict is resolved by stopping interaction, severing relations between the conflicting parties, isolating them from each other (for example, divorce of spouses, separation of neighbors, transfer of workers to different areas of production). The separation of the conflicting parties can be accomplished by their retreat, when they both leave the “battlefield”. This is how, for example, a squabble between bus passengers ends when one of them gets off at his stop, or a quarrel between neighbors in a communal apartment, which stops after they move.
Trade-off model– a method of reconciling conflicting interests, which consists of mutual concessions in the positions of the conflicting parties. It is important to know that the compromise model of conflict resolution is based on concessions to conflicts precisely in their interests. Thus, the concept of compromise is used in different senses: in the ordinary understanding, it is various concessions to each other, and in a conflict, it is the mutual refusal of the parties to the conflict from any part of their claims, mutual sacrifice of interests, in order to achieve agreement.
The main advantage of peaceful resolution of a conflict through compromise is introducing the conflict into a constructive framework and establishing the process of communication between the parties, finding certain points of agreement (compromise). Nevertheless, a compromise, according to the famous Western conflict expert K. Lasswell, “is a patchwork quilt that the conflicters are pulling over themselves.” Compromise, as a model for resolving a conflict, is certainly preferable and more civilized than force or separation, but it is not universal and has its limits of applicability. One should not think that any conflict can be easily resolved on its basis.
Integral model (integral strategy)– provides for the possibility of satisfying the interests of all conflicters, subject to their revision (audit) of their previously formed positions, the goals that they intended to achieve in the conflict. It is called integral not because it combines the qualities and advantages of previous models, but because it is capable of integrating the interests of conflicting parties. When using it, no one sacrifices their interests. Each conflicter seeks to satisfy his interests, and therefore feels like a winner. To achieve such a desirable outcome, the conflictors must abandon their position and reconsider the goals they set in this conflict.
As a rule, the integral model is achieved as a result of negotiations between conflicting parties, ending with the adoption of an agreed decision. In order for the conflict to be truly resolved, it is important that the conflicting parties agree among themselves, so that they themselves find the most suitable way out of the conflict situation. In practice, conflicting parties usually enter into some kind of negotiation before resorting to violence and or disunity. The integral model of conflict resolution is an important discovery of the twentieth century in the field of public institutions. One of the many paradoxes of modern Russian society is that the most effective and rational way to resolve conflicts is used much less often than it should be. In Russia, the majority of our fellow citizens do not know that a similar model for resolving conflicts exists, and if they do know, they do not like to use it. This is explained by a complex of reasons, among which we note the peculiarities of the mentality of Russians, expressed in an increased commitment to forceful decisions, with the peculiarities of upbringing - we are always taught that the goal is above all and the Russians’ misconception about integrity. Many people equate adherence to principles with stubbornness in one’s own way, with refusal to reconsider one’s position in a conflict, regardless of what caused this position. At the same time, it is overlooked that the interests of people and their groups are always more important than the goals that they set for themselves in order to achieve these interests. You must be flexible in setting and changing your short-term goals, while constantly taking care of your long-term vital interests. Unfortunately, many do the opposite. Refusing to reconsider their positions, without taking into account the new conditions that made them unreasonable, they continue to defend them, which complicates the achievement of fundamental interests.
There are also symbioses of conflict resolution methods - models that combine in a certain sequence - force, compromise, separation and integral models of conflict resolution.
In conclusion, it should be noted that it is difficult to foresee all the variety of conflict situations that life creates for us. Therefore, in conflict resolution, much must be resolved on the spot, based on the specific situation, as well as the individual psychological characteristics of the participants in the conflict.
Bibliography
- Igebaeva F.A. Interpersonal conflict in an organization and its consequences. // Language and literature in conditions of bilingualism and multilingualism. Collection of materials of the II All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference. – Ufa: RIC BashSU, 2012. pp. 249 – 252.
- Igebaeva F.A. The leader and his role in preventing conflicts in organizations // Development of modern society in Russia in the conditions of the new economy. Materials of the V All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference. – Saratov: Publishing house “KUBiK”, 2012. – P. 39 – 42.
- Igebaeva F.A. Social conflicts and ways to resolve them. Socio-economic development of society: education system and knowledge economy. Collection of articles of the IV International Scientific and Practical Conference. Penza. 2007. – P.33 – 35.
- Andreeva G.M. "Social Psychology", M., 2011. – 678s.
- Borodkin F.N. “Attention, conflict!”, Novosibirsk, 2012. – 679 p.
- Ageev V.S. “Intergroup interaction. Social and psychological problems”, M., 2013. – 456 p.
- Social Psychology. /Ed. Semenova V.E., 2015. – 888 p.
- Igebaeva F.A. The art of managing people is the most difficult and highest of all the arts in the collection: Science, technology and life – 2014 proceedings of the international scientific conference. editors v.a. iljuhina, v.i. zhukovskij, n.p. ketova, a.m. gazaliev, g.s.mal". 2015. pp. 1073 – 1079.
- Igebaeva F.A. Conflicts in the organization and their consequences. In the collection: Zprávy vědeckė ideje – 2014. Materiàly X mezinàrodní vědecká-praktická conference. 2014. – pp. 27 – 29.
- Igebaeva F.A. Some ethical and organizational aspects of personnel management In the collection Problems and prospects of the Russian economy. VII All-Russian scientific and practical conference March 26-27, 2008. Penza. 2008. – P.43 – 45.
- Igebaeva F.A. Sociology: a textbook for university students. – M.: INFRA-M, 2012. – 236 p. – (Higher education – Bachelor’s degree).
- Igebaeva F.A. Workshop in Sociology: /F.A. Igebaeva. – Ufa: Bashkir State Agrarian University, 2012. – 128 p.
- Internet resource. Available at: http://www.studfiles.ru/preview/2617345/
Conflict is a dispute, a clash between two people or social groups over the possession of something that is equally highly valued by both parties.
The participants in the conflict are calledsubjects of the conflict :
– witnesses – these are people observing the conflict from the outside;
– instigators – these are those who push other participants into conflict;
– accomplices – these are people who contribute to the development of the conflict with advice, technical assistance or other means;
– intermediaries – these are people who, through their actions, try to prevent, stop or resolve a conflict.
Not all parties to a conflict are necessarily in direct opposition to each other.
The issue or benefit that sparks the conflict, - This subject of conflict . The reason and reason for the conflict differ from its subject.
Cause of the conflict - objective circumstances that predetermine the emergence of conflict. The cause of the conflict is related to the needs of the conflicting parties.
Reason for conflict - a minor incident that contributes to conflict, but the conflict itself may not develop. The occasion can be either accidental or specially created.
For a correct and comprehensive understanding of the conflict, it is necessary to distinguish between it and contradiction. Contradiction – this is a fundamental incompatibility, disagreement of some important – political, economic, ethnic – interests.
Contradiction necessarily underlies any conflict and manifests itself in social tension - a feeling of dissatisfaction with the state of affairs and a readiness to change it. But a contradiction may remain a contradiction without reaching an open collision, that is, a conflict. Thus, contradiction expresses the hidden and static aspect of the phenomenon, and conflict is open and dynamic.
Social conflict – this is the highest stage of development of contradictions in the system of relations between people, social groups, social institutions, and society as a whole, which is characterized by the strengthening of opposing tendencies and interests of social communities and individuals.
In the history of sociology, there are various concepts that reveal the essence of social conflicts.
At the present stage of development of sociological science, there are two main paradigms in terms of the role of conflict in society. Scientists determine the following functions of social conflicts.
Conflicts arise from various reasons: external and internal, universal and individual, material and ideal, objective and subjective etc. The cause of the conflict is related to needs conflicting parties. The following causes of social conflicts can be identified:
– social heterogeneity of society, the presence of opposing orientations;
– differences in levels of income, power, culture, social prestige, access to education, information;
– religious differences;
– human behavior, his socio-psychological traits (temperament, intelligence, general culture, etc.).
Social conflict goes through three main stages:
1. Pre-conflict - conflict situation. The parties are aware of the existing emotional tension, strive to overcome it, understand the causes of the conflict, and evaluate their capabilities; choosing a method of influencing the enemy.
2. The conflict itself – distrust and lack of respect for the enemy; consent is impossible. The presence of an incident (or reason), i.e., social actions aimed at changing the behavior of rivals. Their overt and hidden actions.
3. Conflict resolution – completion of the incident, elimination of the causes of the conflict.
Types of social conflicts
By duration - long-term; short-term; one-time; protracted; repetitive.
By volume – global; national; local; regional; group; personal.
According to the source of occurrence - objective; subjective; false.
By means used - violent; non-violent.
According to the form - internal; external.
By influence on the course of development of society - progressive; regressive.
By the nature of development - deliberate; spontaneous.
In areas of public life - economic (production); political; ethnic; family and household.
By type of relationship - intra- and intersystem (individual-psychological) levels; intra- and intergroup (socio-psychological) levels; intranational and international (social) levels.
Experts identify the following ways to resolve social conflicts:
– compromise (lat. compromissum) – solving the problem through mutual concessions of the parties;
– negotiation – a peaceful conversation between both parties to resolve the problem;
– mediation – the use of a third party in solving the problem in absentia;
– arbitration (French arbitrage – arbitration court) – appealing to a government authority vested with special powers for help in solving the problem;
– use of force, authority, law - unilateral use of power or force by the party that considers itself stronger.
Possible ways out of conflicts are as follows:
– Restoration– return of society to the pre-conflict state: to previous forms of social life, social institutions that continue to exist taking into account the new situation.
– Non-interference (waiting) – the hope that “everything will work itself out on its own.” This is the path of delaying and delaying reforms, marking time. In an open society, if the confrontation does not threaten general collapse, this path, under certain conditions, can be fruitful.
– Update– an active way out of the conflict by discarding, abandoning the old, and developing the new.
Each social conflict is specific; it occurs in certain social conditions. Consequently, the ways out of it must correspond to the current specific situation.
The general strategy for exiting social conflict should be to combine these three paths. Renewal is necessary, this is the key to resolving any conflict, but it is impossible to update everything due to the inertia of human consciousness. A natural process of rollback (reaction) to some old values and forms should be provided for.
Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which successful resolution of social conflicts is possible:
– timely and accurate diagnosis of the causes of the conflict, i.e. identification of existing contradictions, interests, goals.
– mutual interest in overcoming contradictions based on recognition of the interests of the opposite side. This can be achieved based on a goal that is meaningful to both parties.
– joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.
During negotiations, priority should be given to discussing substantive issues.
The conflicting parties should strive to relieve psychological and social tension.
Participants in a conflict must demonstrate mutual respect for each other.
All conflicting parties must show a tendency to compromise.
Thus, conflict is the most important aspect of interaction between people in society, a kind of cell of social existence. This is a form of relationship between subjects of emotional action, the motivation of which is determined by opposing values and norms, interests and needs.
Sample assignment
B2. Below is a list of terms. All of them, with the exception of one, are associated with the concept of “social conflict”. Compromise; negotiation; arbitration; rehabilitation; witnesses.
Find and indicate a term that is not related to the concept of “social conflict”.
Answer: Rehabilitation.
Typology of conflicts
Factors of interethnic regional conflicts
Conditions and factors of social conflict
Conditions and factors of conflicts
Sources of conflicts
Causes of social conflict
Causes and sources of social conflict
Determinants and typology of social conflicts
Issues for discussion
1. What is conflict and what is its structure?
2. Which elements of the conflict structure are objective and which are subjective?
3. What are the main approaches to understanding the dynamics of conflict?
4. What is the essence of the latent period in the dynamics of the conflict?
5. Prove that conflict is a multidimensional dynamic phenomenon.
6. Graphically depict the structure of the conflict, the dynamics of the conflict.
In general philosophical terms, the concept "cause" means a phenomenon whose action causes or produces some other phenomenon, which is called a consequence. In society, as in nature, there is an infinite number of cause-and-effect relationships and dependencies. And conflicts here are no exception; they can also be generated by a variety of reasons: external and internal, universal and individual, material and ideal, objective and subjective, etc.
Causes of the conflict- these are problems, phenomena, events that precede a conflict and, in certain situations that arise in the process of the activities of subjects of social interaction, cause it.
It should also be noted that it is necessary to distinguish the cause of the conflict from its cause. The reason for the conflict serves as a phenomenon that contributes to its occurrence, but does not determine the emergence of a conflict with necessity. Unlike a reason, a reason arises by chance and can be created completely artificially, as they say, “from scratch.” The reason reflects the natural connection of things. Thus, the reason for a family conflict may be an under-salted (over-salted) dish, while the real reason may be the lack of love between spouses.
Among the huge variety of causes of conflicts, general and specific causes can be distinguished. General groups of reasons:
1) socio-political and economic reasons related to the socio-political and economic situation in the country;
2) socio-demographic reasons, reflecting differences in people’s attitudes and motives due to their gender, age, ethnic groups, etc.;
3) socio-psychological reasons, reflecting socio-psychological phenomena in social groups: relationships, leadership, group motives, collective opinions, moods, etc.;
4) individual psychological reasons, reflecting the individual psychological characteristics of the individual: abilities, temperament, character, motives, etc.
Among most common reasons social conflicts can be distinguished:
Different or completely opposite perceptions of people's goals, values, interests and behavior;
The unequal position of people in imperatively coordinated associations (some control, others obey);
Discord between people's expectations and actions;
Misunderstandings, logical errors and generally semantic difficulties in the communication process;
Lack and poor quality of information;
The imperfection of the human psyche, the discrepancy between reality and ideas about it.
Private reasons directly related to the specifics of a particular type of conflict. For example, dissatisfaction with the conditions of labor relations, violation of work ethics, non-compliance with labor laws, limited resources, differences in goals and means of achieving them, etc.
Let us dwell on the causes of conflicts determined by the labor process. Indeed, for many work collectives they are the leading source of conflict situations.
There are several ways or methods to determine the causes of conflict behavior. As an example, consider one of them - conflict mapping method. Its essence consists in a graphical display of the components of the conflict, in a consistent analysis of the behavior of the participants in the conflict interaction, in the formulation of the main problem, the needs and fears of the participants, and ways to eliminate the causes that led to the conflict.
The work consists of several stages.
At the first stage, the problem is described in general terms. If, for example, we are talking about inconsistency in work, about the fact that someone does not “pull the strap” along with everyone else, then the problem can be displayed as “load distribution.” If the conflict arises from a lack of trust between an individual and a group, then the problem can be expressed as “communication.” At this stage, it is important to determine the very nature of the conflict, and for now it does not matter that this does not fully reflect the essence of the problem. The problem should not be defined in the form of a binary choice of opposites “yes or no”; it is advisable to leave the possibility of finding new and original solutions.
At the second stage, the main participants in the conflict are identified. You can enter individuals or entire teams, departments, groups, or organizations into the list. To the extent that the people involved in a conflict have common needs in relation to a given conflict, they can be grouped together. A combination of group and personal categories is also allowed.
For example, if a conflict map is drawn up between two employees in an organization, then these employees can be included in the map, and the remaining specialists can be combined into one group, or the head of this department can also be identified separately.
The third stage involves listing the basic needs and concerns associated with them of all the main participants in the conflict interaction. It is necessary to find out the motives of behavior behind the participants’ positions on this issue. People's actions and their attitudes are determined by their desires, needs, and motives that need to be established.
The term “fear” means concern, anxiety of an individual when it is impossible to realize some of his needs. In this case, you should not discuss with the parties to the conflict how justified their fears and concerns are until they are included in the map. For example, one of the participants in the conflict had a concern about something that seemed unlikely when drawing up a map. At the same time, fear exists and it must be included in the map, its presence must be acknowledged. The advantage of the cartography method is that it is possible to speak out during the process of drawing up a map and reflect irrational fears on it. Fears may include the following: failure and humiliation, fear of making a mistake, financial ruin, the possibility of rejection, loss of control over the situation, loneliness, the possibility of being criticized or judged, job loss, low wages, fear of being bossed around that everything will have to start all over again. Using the concept of “fears”, it is possible to identify motives that are not mentioned out loud by the participants in the conflict. For example, some people find it easier to say that they do not tolerate disrespect than to admit that they need respect.
As a result of drawing up a map, the points of convergence of interests of the conflicting parties are clarified, the fears and concerns of each party are more clearly manifested, and possible ways out of the current situation are determined.
The social heterogeneity of society, differences in levels of income, property, power, and prestige naturally lead to an aggravation of social contradictions and conflicts. Conflicts are a special type of interaction, the subjects of which are communities, organizations and individuals with actually or supposedly incompatible goals.
Social conflict- this is a special interaction of individuals, groups and associations in the collision of incompatible views, positions and interests. The concept of social conflict includes a wide range of phenomena at different levels: from clashes between individuals to interstate armed conflicts.
Depending on the areas of contradiction, conflicts are divided into:
On personal ones;
Interpersonal;
Intragroup;
Intergroup;
Conflicts with the external environment, etc.
The sources of social conflicts can be in social, political or economic relations. Conflict situations of an industrial, national or ethnic nature in modern society acquire special social significance and can serve as the basis for the emergence of such a phenomenon as extremism . Extremism represents a commitment to extreme views and measures in social and political activity.
The emergence of extremist views is facilitated by factors of social tension:
A sharp drop in the efficiency of functioning of various spheres of public life;
Formation of social groups opposing each other;
Declining living standards of the population:
The possibility of unpredictable, spontaneous mass behavior and the formation of an aggressive crowd;
Economic and social crisis;
Weakening of state power;
A feeling of infringed national identity.
Participants in the conflict can be both individuals and social groups, organizations and states. The main subjects of the conflict are called opponents, or warring parties. The opposing sides may not be equal, i.e. have different ranks. Rank- this is the strength of the opponent in the conflict, determined by his social status, available resources and power. For example, an individual can conflict with a group and even a state and win if its rank is higher.
Causes of conflicts are diverse, but they are always based on a contradiction associated with the clash of social interests, views, and positions of the two sides.
The subject of conflict in sociology is considered to be an objectively existing or imaginary problem that is the cause of disagreements between opponents. Each side is interested in resolving this problem in its favor. The object of the conflict is some scarce resource. The emergence of any conflict is preceded by such a combination of objective conditions and circumstances that create the real subject of the conflict. Sociologists call this combination conflict situation. The conflict situation is developing gradually, against the backdrop of social tension.
Social tension in society is characterized by:
The spread of dissatisfaction with the existing order among the population;
Loss of trust in authorities;
Mass spontaneous actions, etc. The level of social tension in society can change: decrease or increase.
All social conflicts go through three stages:
Pre-conflict;
Directly conflicting;
Post-conflict.
Pre-conflict stage- this is the period during which contradictions accumulate (for example, the need to reduce staff).
Conflict stage- this is a set of certain actions of the warring parties (for example, the administration determines candidates for dismissal, and trade unions express protest).
Post-conflict stage- the stage when measures are taken to eliminate contradictions between opposing parties (removing socio-psychological tension in the relationship between the enterprise administration and the remaining employees).
As a rule, any conflict begins with an incident. An incident (or cause) of a conflict is an event or circumstance as a result of which latent (i.e. hidden) contradictions between the parties move into the stage of open confrontation. If neither side tries to make concessions and avoid the conflict, then the latter moves into an acute stage. The growth of a conflict is called escalation . Ending a conflict does not always mean resolving it. Conflict resolution is the decision of its participants to end the confrontation . The conflict may end with the parties reconciling, one of them winning, gradually fading, or escalating into another conflict. Sociologists believe that the most optimal solution to conflict is reaching consensus.
Consensus is the agreement of a significant majority of representatives of a certain community regarding important aspects of its functioning, expressed in assessments and actions. Consensus does not mean unanimity, since it is almost impossible to achieve a complete coincidence of the positions of the parties, and it is not necessary. The main thing is that none of the parties express direct objections; also, when resolving the conflict, a neutral position of the parties and abstention from voting are allowed.
Social conflicts can lead to both non-integrative(partnership relationships are destroyed), and integrative(group cohesion increases) consequences. Social policy pursued by the state plays a large role in the prevention and timely resolution of social conflicts. Its essence is the regulation of the socio-economic conditions of society and concern for the well-being of all its citizens.
Sociology of conflict
Introduction........................................................ ........................................................ ........................... 3
The concept of conflict................................................... ........................................................ .......... 4
What is social conflict?........................................................ ...................................... 4
Subjects and participants in the conflict................................................................. ..................................... 4
Object of conflict................................................... ........................................................ ............. 6
Main types of social conflicts............................................................. ........................... 7
Conflict of needs................................................... ........................................................ .... 8
Conflict of interest................................................ ........................................................ ......... 9
Value conflict................................................... ........................................................ ... eleven
The main stages of conflict development.................................................................. ........................... 13
Pre-conflict stage................................................... ................................................. 13
Stage of development of the conflict................................................................... ............................................. 16
Conflict resolution stage......................................................... ........................................ 17
Post-conflict stage................................................... ............................................... 19
Functions of social conflict................................................................... ................................... 21
Types of social conflicts................................................................... ........................................... 23
Intrapersonal conflicts................................................................... ........................................ 23
Interpersonal conflicts................................................................... ............................................... 29
Conflicts between individuals and groups.................................................... ........................... 34
Intergroup conflicts................................................................ ............................................... 39
CONCLUSION................................................. ........................................................ ...................... 41
Footnotes........................................................ ........................................................ ........................... 42
List of used literature:........................................................ ........................... 43
Introduction
We encounter conflicts everywhere in our lives. Starting from banal quarrels in transport to armed clashes - all these are conflicts; over time, there are more and more different types of conflicts, as the development of society causes the emergence of more and more new interests and values.
Conflicts have both positive and negative impacts. On the one hand, conflicts do not allow society to ossify, they force it to rebuild and change, on the other hand, they become the causes of disagreements, quarrels, grievances and other clashes, even wars.
Throughout history, humanity has been unable to ensure that there are no more negative conflicts and more positive ones.
In this essay, I do not set myself the task of fully covering all possible types of conflicts - there are too many of them. And I do not have the opportunity to study each of them in detail. Political, interethnic, legal and economic conflicts are too broad concepts that deserve separate in-depth study and writing separate works.
In this essay I will try to reveal the very concept of conflict, describe the main types and some ways to resolve them. I will try to lay some foundation that can serve both for starting the study of conflicts and for later writing larger scientific works.
Concept of conflict
What is social conflict?
“The concept of “social conflict” unites those situations in which the interests of individuals do not coincide, and, while protecting these interests, they collide with each other” 1
The word “conflict” (from Latin - confliktus) means a clash (of parties, opinions, forces). The causes of collisions can be a variety of problems in our lives. For example, a conflict over material resources, values and the most important attitudes in life, over power, over personal differences, etc. Thus, conflicts cover all spheres of people’s life, the entire set of social relations, social interaction. Conflict is essentially one of the types of social influence, the subjects and participants of which are individuals, large and small social groups and organizations. However, conflict interaction presupposes confrontation between the parties, i.e., actions directed against each other.
So, social conflict is an open confrontation, a collision of two or more subjects and participants in social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values.
Subjects and participants of the conflict
The concepts of “subject” and “participant” of a conflict are not always identical. The subject is an “active party” capable of creating a conflict situation and influencing the course of the conflict in accordance with its interests. A participant in a conflict may consciously, or not fully aware of the goals and objectives of the confrontation, take part in the conflict, or may be accidentally or against his (the participant’s) will involved in the conflict. Consequently, the subject of the conflict, entering into confrontation, consciously pursues and defends his goals and interests. As the conflict develops, the statuses of “participants” and “subjects” may change places.
It is also necessary to distinguish between direct and indirect participants in the conflict. The latter represent certain forces pursuing their own personal interests in a supposed or real “alien” conflict. Indirect participants can:
1. provoke conflict and contribute to its development
2. contribute to reducing the intensity of the conflict or its complete cessation
3. support one or the other side of the conflict or both sides at the same time.
In the sociology of conflict, the concept of “party to the conflict” is often used. This concept can include both direct and indirect participants in the conflict. Sometimes indirect
The participants, for their special interest in the conflict, are called "third party" or "third party".
Situations often arise when it is quite difficult to identify the direct subjects of the conflict. A striking example is ethnopolitical conflicts (Chechen or Ossetian-Ingush), when it is not easy to answer the question of who represents the parties to the conflict: the leaders of the opposing sides, or those who are directly involved in power operations, or those who perceive each other as rivals and supports the positions of their leaders in the conflict? Or are they all together as representatives and participants of a certain social group?
Quite often, a conflict, having begun as interpersonal, with the appearance of active adherents on each of its sides, turns into intergroup conflict. Just as often one can observe the opposite picture: having become involved in a conflict as part of a certain group, a person begins to lead his own line in it, as a result of which it becomes a personal group one for her. In turn, a personal group conflict often transforms into an intergroup conflict if an individual manages to separate some of its members from the opposing group, make them his own adherents, or acquire the latter from somewhere else. All these “spillovers” change the course of the conflict and therefore require careful consideration when analyzing it.
Object of conflict
One of the indispensable elements of conflict is the object due to which a conflict situation is created. The object is the specific reason, motivation, driving forces of the conflict. All objects are divided into three main types:
1. Objects that cannot be divided into parts , and it is impossible to own them together with anyone.
2. Objects that can be divided in different proportions between the parties to the conflict.
3. Objects that both parties to the conflict can jointly own.
Identifying the target in each specific conflict is far from easy. Subjects and participants in the conflict, pursuing their real or imaginary goals, can hide, disguise, and replace the sought-after motives that prompted them to confrontation. For example, in political struggle, the object of the conflict is the real power in society, but each of the subjects of political confrontation tries to prove that the main motive of his specific conflict activity is the desire to achieve the maximum possible benefits for his voters.
Determining the main object is an indispensable condition for the successful resolution of any conflict. Otherwise, the conflict will either not be resolved in principle (a deadlock situation), or will not be resolved fully, and in the interaction of the subjects there will remain smoldering coals for new clashes.
The basis of a social conflict may be not one, but several controversial issues (problems). Each issue should be considered as a disagreement, a contradiction that requires its solution. Controversial issues must be identified and grouped in accordance with the reasons for their origin and the nature of perception.
Main types of social conflicts.
Depending on the motivation of the conflict, three blocks of social conflicts are distinguished:
Conflict of needs
The current situation in the world brings the problem of resources or vital needs to one of the first places.
Conflicts over needs can be divided into two types: first, conflict due to real or perceived resource limitations; secondly, due to the relationship between short-term and long-term needs.
Consideration of the conflict of needs in various spheres of human life and society shows that needs cannot be reduced only to the sum of external requirements arising from social and economic conditions. They represent certain core lines of organization of the entire system of interaction in society. They manifest themselves in mass habits and cultural skills that are acquired by people in the course of their socialization, individual development, and education.
At the same time, the problem of determining the priority of certain needs remains the most important problem of a socio-political nature. Not a single state, not a single political party, in its practical policy, can turn a blind eye to the need-based, essentially essential conflicts that are associated not only with certain options for the use of resources, but also with the choice of certain options for the development of culture itself.
Resources as an object of conflict are considered, perhaps most often, mainly in terms of their possession or the desire of subjects to acquire them in the interests of replenishing their resource potential. Resources include everything that can be effectively used, that is, usefully used to meet the needs of the subject, realize his interests and goals. From here it is clear that we are talking about certain means of ensuring needs, the interests and goals arising from them.
Resources - material (finance, equipment, technology, land, its subsoil, etc.) and spiritual (culture, science, education, etc.) - constitute a typical object of conflict. Especially when their distribution in society is uneven, disproportionate, unfair, making it easier for some social subjects to access them and making it difficult for others, or even providing some at the expense of others. The latter, experiencing infringement and difficulties in ensuring their own resource potential, have every reason to oppose this state of affairs, thus finding themselves in confrontation with those who are satisfied with it.
Conflict of interest.
What needs and interests have in common is that in both cases we are dealing with people's aspirations that directly affect their social and economic behavior. However, if needs orient people's behavior towards the possession of those goods that turn out to be vitally necessary or stimulate vital ways of human activity, then interests are those incentives for action that stem from the mutual attitude of people towards each other.
The immediate subject of social interest is not the good itself, but those positions of the individual or social layer that provide the opportunity to obtain this good. Both in everyday speech and in theoretical analysis, interests are much more often connected with social position, which fixes for a certain time the totality of opportunities provided to an actor by society. It is social position that outlines the boundaries of what is accessible and possible for an individual and a social group.
Status, being an object of struggle between certain social subjects, acts for them mainly not as a means, but as a condition for ensuring their normal life, which is also worth fighting for if the current state of affairs prompts it. After all, it depends on him what - equal or unequal - the position of the subject will be in society, among other social subjects, how free or forced his relationships with them will be, to what extent his self-esteem will be preserved or infringed, etc.
On the part of society, the formation of interests is most influenced by the institutions and systems of distribution of life goods that have developed in it. One way or another, through distribution systems, the most essential task of organizing any social community is solved: correlating the result of activity and recognizing this result through remuneration. At the same time, one should not keep in mind only material or financial reward. A very wide range of not only property, but also spiritual benefits can be used as reward, the provision of which means increasing the prestige of the rewarded person or social group for what is considered or recognized as useful for society.
Through certain types of combinations of benefit and reward, society organizes the interests of social groups, directing them along certain more or less stable channels. Interests are therefore directed not at abstract society in general, but at the system of social institutions and, above all, at the institutions of distribution, which turn out to be the main instruments for regulating social status.
Value conflict.
Modern culture presupposes a fairly broad framework of tolerance, that is, the possibility of communication and joint action of people or groups committed to different worldview systems and different value orientations. However, tolerance and mutual recognition are not yet the dominant modes of relationships between value systems. Quite often, value systems act as self-sufficient sources of motivation, operating on the basis of dividing human communities into “us and others.” It is in this case that we observe a value conflict. The differences between “us and others”, between “us and them” acquire decisive significance and become the dominant factor in individual and group motivation. Value confrontations and priorities - and this is their peculiarity - are based on faith. Knowledge is also built in accordance with faith, i.e. a system of rational arguments that explain and justify the original creeds - the postulates on the basis of which this system of values is built.
Values, understood, of course, not in a broad sense - as everything that is positively significant from the point of view of satisfying human needs, but more narrowly - as something fundamentally important for a certain social subject and his life activity, very often act as an object of social conflicts, for which he is ready to fight decisively. They generally cannot act as a means to ensure one or another of his needs, interests, aspirations, as is the case with resources, but serve for him only as an end in itself, an expression of his understanding of himself, his own essence, with the loss of which he himself disappears as something independent, self-determining, worthy of recognition and respect from other entities. Conflicts based on values, also in contrast to conflicts based on resources, as a rule, arise due to their imposition by one social entity on another, forced inclusion in them, or due to a disdainful attitude towards them on the part of other entities.
Taking into account the motivation of the conflict and subjective perceptions of the conflict situation, the following types of conflicts are distinguished:
1. false conflict - the subject perceives the situation as a conflict, although there are no real reasons for the conflict;
2. potential conflict - there are real grounds for a conflict to arise, but one of the parties or both parties, for one reason or another (for example, due to lack of information) have not yet recognized the situation as a conflict;
3. true conflict - a real conflict between the parties. In turn, true conflict can be divided into the following subtypes:
· constructive conflict that arose on the basis of real contradictions between subjects
· accidental conflict - a conflict that arose due to a misunderstanding or an accidental coincidence;
· displaced conflict - a conflict that arose on a false basis, when the true cause of the conflict is hidden
· an incorrectly attributed conflict is a conflict in which the true culprit, the subject of the conflict, is behind the scenes of the confrontation, and the conflict involves participants who are not related to the conflict.
If the classification is based on the mental state of the parties and the behavior of people in conflict situations corresponding to this state, then conflicts are divided into rational and emotional. Depending on the goals of the conflict and its consequences, conflicts are divided into positive and negative, constructive and destructive. 2
Pre-conflict stage
A conflict is preceded by a pre-conflict situation. This is an increase in tension between potential subjects of conflict caused by certain contradictions. Only those contradictions that are perceived by potential subjects of conflict as incompatible opposites of interests, goals, values, etc., lead to an aggravation of social tension and conflicts.
Social tension is also not always a harbinger of conflict. This is a complex social phenomenon, the causes of which can be very different. Here are some of the most typical reasons causing the growth of social tension:
a) real “infringement” of people’s interests, needs and values;
b) inadequate perception of changes occurring in society or individual social communities;
c) incorrect or distorted information about certain (real or imaginary) facts, events, etc. 3
Social tension is essentially a psychological state of people and, before the start of a conflict, is of a latent (hidden) nature. The most characteristic manifestation of social tension during this period is group emotions.
One of the key concepts in social conflict is also “dissatisfaction”. The accumulation of dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs and the course of developments leads to increased social tension.
The pre-conflict stage can be divided into three phases of development, which are characterized by the following features in the relationship between the parties:
· the emergence of contradictions regarding a certain controversial object; growing mistrust and social tension; presentation of unilateral or mutual claims, reduction of contacts and accumulation of grievances;
· the desire to prove the legitimacy of one’s claims and accusing the enemy of unwillingness to resolve controversial issues using “fair” methods; being locked into one's own stereotypes; the emergence of prejudice and hostility in the emotional sphere;
· destruction of interaction structures; transition from mutual accusations to threats; increase in aggressiveness; formation of the image of the “enemy” and the attitude to fight.
Thus, the conflict situation is gradually transformed into an open conflict. But the conflict situation itself can exist for a long period of time and not develop into a conflict. For a conflict to become real, an incident is necessary.
An incident is a formal reason for the start of a direct clash between the parties.
An incident can happen by accident, or it can be provoked by the subject(s) of the conflict. The incident may also result from the natural course of events. It happens that an incident is prepared and provoked by some “third force”, pursuing its own interests in a supposed “foreign” conflict.
The incident marks the transition of the conflict to a new quality. In the current situation, there are three main options for the behavior of the conflicting parties.
The parties (sides) strive to resolve the contradictions that have arisen and find a compromise;
One of the parties pretends that “nothing special happened” (avoiding the conflict);
The incident becomes a signal for the start of open confrontation. The choice of one option or another largely depends on the conflicting attitude (goals, expectations) of the parties.
Stage of development of the conflict
The beginning of open confrontation between the parties is the result of conflict behavior, which is understood as actions aimed at the opposing side with the aim of capturing, holding a disputed object or forcing the opponent to abandon his goals or change them. There are several forms of conflict behavior:
a) active conflict behavior (challenge);
b) passive-conflict behavior (response to a challenge);
c) conflict-compromise behavior;
d) compromising behavior. 4
Depending on the conflict setting and the form of conflict behavior of the parties, the conflict acquires its own logic of development. A developing conflict tends to create additional reasons for its deepening and expansion.
Three main phases can be distinguished in the development of the conflict at its second stage.
1. Transition of the conflict from a latent state into open confrontation between the parties. The fight is still being carried out with limited resources and is local in nature. The first test of strength occurs. At this phase, there are still real opportunities to stop the open struggle and resolve the conflict by other methods.
2. Further escalation of confrontation. To achieve their goals and block the enemy’s actions, more and more new resources are being introduced by the parties. Almost all opportunities to find a compromise are missed. The conflict is becoming increasingly unmanageable and unpredictable.
3. The conflict reaches its climax and takes the form of a total war using all possible forces and means. At this phase, the conflicting parties seem to forget the true causes and goals of the conflict. The main goal of the confrontation is to inflict maximum damage on the enemy.
Conflict resolution stage
The duration and intensity of the conflict depend on many factors: on the goals and attitudes of the parties, on the resources at their disposal, on the means and methods of fighting, on the reaction to the environmental conflict, on the symbols of victory and defeat, on available and possible methods (mechanisms) finding consensus, etc.
At a certain stage in the development of the conflict, the conflicting parties’ ideas about their capabilities and the capabilities of the enemy may change significantly. There comes a moment of “reassessment of values”, caused by new relationships that have arisen as a result of the conflict, a new balance of power, the awareness of the impossibility of achieving goals or the exorbitant price of success. All this stimulates a change in tactics and strategies of conflict behavior. In this situation, one or both conflicting parties begin to look for ways out of the conflict and the intensity of the struggle, as a rule, subsides. From this moment the process of ending the conflict actually begins, which does not exclude new aggravations.
At the conflict resolution stage, the following scenarios are possible:
1) the obvious superiority of one of the parties allows it to impose its conditions for ending the conflict on the weaker opponent;
2) the fight continues until one of the parties is completely defeated;
3) due to a lack of resources, the struggle becomes protracted and sluggish;
4) having exhausted resources and not identifying a clear (potential) winner, the parties make mutual concessions in the conflict;
5) the conflict can also be stopped under pressure from a third force. 5
The social conflict will continue until obvious, clear conditions for its termination appear. In a fully institutionalized conflict, such conditions can be determined before the start of the confrontation (for example, as in a game where there are rules for its completion), or they can be developed and mutually agreed upon during the development of the conflict. If the conflict is partially institutionalized or not institutionalized at all, then additional problems of its completion arise. There are also absolute conflicts, in which the struggle is waged until the complete destruction of one or both rivals.
There are many ways to end a conflict. Basically, they are aimed at changing the conflict situation itself, either by influencing the parties to the conflict, or by changing the characteristics of the object of the conflict, or by other means.
The final stage of the conflict resolution stage involves negotiations and legal formalization of available agreements. In interpersonal and intergroup conflicts, the results of negotiations can take the form of oral agreements and mutual obligations of the parties. Usually one of the conditions for starting the negotiation process is a temporary truce. But options are possible when, at the stage of preliminary agreements, the parties not only do not stop “fighting”, but escalate the conflict, trying to strengthen their positions in the negotiations. Negotiations involve a mutual search for compromise by the conflicting parties and include the following possible procedures:
Recognizing the existence of a conflict;
Approval of procedural rules and regulations;
Identification of the main controversial issues (drawing out a protocol of disagreements);
Research possible solutions to problems;
Search for agreements on each controversial issue and conflict resolution in general;
Documentation of all agreements reached;
Fulfillment of all accepted mutual obligations. 6
Negotiations may differ from each other both in the level of the contracting parties and in the differences existing between them. But the basic procedures (elements) of negotiations remain unchanged.
Post-conflict stage
The end of direct confrontation between the parties does not always mean that the conflict is completely resolved. The degree of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of the parties with the concluded peace agreements will largely depend on the following provisions:
To what extent was it possible to achieve the pursued goal during the conflict and subsequent negotiations;
What methods and methods were used to fight;
How great are the losses of the parties (human, material, territorial, etc.);
How great is the degree of infringement on the self-esteem of one or another party;
Was it possible to relieve the emotional tension of the parties as a result of the conclusion of peace;
What methods were used as the basis for the negotiation process;
To what extent was it possible to balance the interests of the parties;
Was the compromise imposed under forceful pressure (by one of the parties or some “third force”), or was it the result of a mutual search for ways to resolve the conflict?
What is the reaction of the surrounding social environment to the results of the conflict.
If one or both parties believe that the signed peace agreements infringe on their interests, then tensions between the parties will continue, and the end of the conflict may be perceived as a temporary respite. Peace concluded as a result of mutual depletion of resources is also not always able to resolve the main controversial issues that caused the conflict. The most durable peace is one concluded on the basis of consensus, when the parties consider the conflict to be completely resolved and build their relations on the basis of trust and cooperation.
Types of social conflicts.
Intrapersonal conflicts
The resolution of intrapersonal conflicts primarily depends on the person himself, on the ability and opportunity to live in harmony (in harmony) with himself and the environment. Such conflicts can be conditionally described as conflicts “between what we have and what we would like to have.” Other variants of such conflicts: “between what you want and what you don’t want”, “between who you are and who you would like to be”, etc. From an evaluative point of view, intrapersonal conflicts can be represented as a struggle between two positive or two negative tendencies or as a struggle between positive and negative tendencies in the psyche of one subject. Options are possible when trends contain both positive and negative aspects at the same time (for example, a proposed promotion involves an undesirable move to a new place of residence).
Personality is a stable system of socially significant traits determined by the existing system of social relations, culture and biological characteristics of the individual. Intrapersonal conflict, like any other social conflict, involves conflict interaction between two or more parties. Several mutually exclusive needs, goals, values, and interests can simultaneously exist in one person. All of them are socially conditioned, even if they are purely biological in nature, since their satisfaction is associated with a whole system of certain social relations. Therefore, intrapersonal conflict is also a social conflict.
Any human action represents both interaction with the Other within himself, and opposition to the Other as a participant in the dialogue. But conflict is caused only by mutually exclusive tendencies of equal importance, when a person seems to be bifurcated in making a decision, when the choice of one or another tendency presupposes forceful pressure from One on the Other, i.e., confrontation and violence.
There is a psychological conflict when the barrier to certain actions lies within ourselves. These are problems of choosing between two different aspirations:
a) conflict of needs (you want to eat and need to be treated);
b) conflict between social norm and need (love and norm);
c) conflict of social norms (duel and church). 7
One type of intrapersonal conflict is unconscious internal conflict. It is based on any conflict situations that were not fully resolved in the past, which we have already forgotten. But on an unconscious level, we continue to carry the burden of unresolved problems in the past and involuntarily reproduce old conflict situations, as if trying to solve them again. The reason for the resumption of an unconscious internal conflict may be circumstances similar to the previous unresolved situation.
Competition and rivalry permeate all areas of our lives, and often excellence for one means failure for another. Potential hostile tension creates fear. The source of fear can also be the prospect of failure and the threat of losing a sense of self-esteem. Market relations presuppose aggressively competitive interaction, and Christian morality preaches the brotherly love of people for each other. Advertising stimulates our needs, and real life becomes an obstacle to their satisfaction. Under such conditions, the human environment becomes one of the main sources of intrapersonal conflicts.
It is easy to notice that in approximately the same conflict situations, different people behave far from the same. Social psychology identifies the four most common types of behavior of people in conflict situations: “The first type is aggressive behavior that contributes to the development of conflict; the second is behavior indicating a tendency to compromise; the third is associated with a tendency to submit, that is, to accept the decision of the opposite side; the fourth type shows a tendency to avoid conflict.” 8 In real life, each of these types does not occur in its pure form, but most people, with certain reservations, can be classified as one or another type of conflict behavior.
Interpersonal conflicts
Interpersonal conflicts can be considered as a clash of personalities in the process of their relationships. Such clashes can occur in a variety of spheres and areas (economic, political, industrial, sociocultural, everyday, etc.). The reasons for such clashes are infinitely diverse - from a convenient seat in public transport to the presidential seat in government agencies.
Interpersonal conflicts arise both between people meeting for the first time and between people who are constantly communicating. In both cases, the personal perception of the partner or opponent plays an important role in the relationship. An obstacle to finding agreement between individuals can be a negative attitude formed by one opponent towards another. An attitude represents the readiness, predisposition of a subject to act in a certain way. This is a certain direction of the manifestation of the psyche and behavior of the subject, readiness to perceive future events. It is formed under the influence of rumors, opinions, judgments about a given individual (group, phenomenon, etc.).
When interacting with other people, a person primarily protects his personal interests, and this is normal. The conflicts that arise are a reaction to obstacles to achieving goals. And how significant the subject of the conflict seems to be for a particular individual will largely depend on his conflict attitude.
Individuals encounter interpersonal conflicts, protecting not only their personal interests. They can also represent the interests of individual groups, institutions, organizations, labor collectives, and society as a whole. In such interpersonal conflicts, the intensity of the struggle and the possibility of finding compromises are largely determined by the conflict attitudes of those social groups whose representatives the opponents are.
All interpersonal conflicts that arise due to clashes of goals and interests can be divided into three main types.
The first one presupposes a fundamental clash in which the realization of the goals and interests of one opponent can only be achieved by infringing on the interests of the other.
The second one affects only the form of relations between people, but does not infringe on their spiritual, moral and material needs and interests.
The third represents imaginary contradictions that can be provoked either by false (distorted) information or by incorrect interpretation of events and facts.
Interpersonal conflicts can also be divided into the following types:
a) rivalry - the desire for dominance;
b) dispute - disagreements about finding the best solution to joint problems;
c) discussion - discussion of a controversial issue.