Subjective causes of social conflicts lie in certain features of worldview, mentality, character (psychology), and level of intelligence of social subjects (Fig. 8.1). More specifically, these subjective characteristics of subjects manifest themselves in certain feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas, under the influence of which subjects act and social conflict begins.
Feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas as causes of social conflicts
Mental motivations of subjects to activity are feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas, in which emotions and goals are combined in unity. A goal is an idea of the intended result of an action, indicating why it is being performed. A goal always presupposes a plan (program) for its implementation. Emotion is mental (mental) and physical energy with the help of which the subject carries out actions.
Feelings represent the psychological states of the subject, in which the goal-setting and emotional components social action merged together. The subject carries out actions under the influence of emotions of envy, fear, aggressiveness, revenge, to some extent irrationally, thoughtlessly, and thoughtlessly. A sensual impulse to social action, caused by resentment, fear, envy, revenge, hatred, often becomes the cause of social tension and social conflict. Southern peoples, due to their emotionality, are more conflict-prone than northern peoples. Subjective causes of social conflicts can be a feeling of fear, love, indignation, hatred, pride, etc.
Beliefs represent ideological psychological condition subject, including: 1) knowledge about something that the subject considers true (correct); 2) knowledge that the subject can argue to himself and others; 3) knowledge that evokes positive emotions (and thereby turns into a form of faith), which guides the subject in his activities.
Social conflict often arises due to the clash of different beliefs of subjects, different views (knowledge) on the same problem: industrial, economic, political, territorial, religious, etc. For example, there is still a conflict between the Catholic and Orthodox Church on the problem of God, rituals, etc., the conflict between communists and liberals on the issue of justice, democracy, political structure.
Interest is the intellectual and mental desire (attraction) of a subject to objects that are values (benefits) for him. Depending on these benefits, interests are material (food, clothing, housing, etc.), economic (money, jewelry, shares, etc.), political (power, status, official position, etc.), religious (God, communist idea, etc.), moral (good, duty, honor, justice, etc.), aesthetic (beauty, comic, tragic, etc.).
Interests include: 1) the purpose of the activity, i.e. the idea of the good necessary for the subject (material, economic, political, etc.) in the mind of the subject; 2) a plan (program) of actions and operations aimed at achieving it (realization of the goal); 3) the emotional-volitional desire (attraction) of the subject to the subject of interest. In general, the interest is in the functional, dynamic, organizational, psychological system of regulation of the subject’s activity, but not in this activity itself.
It is obvious that material, aesthetic and other interests differ in the nature of goals, activity programs, and emotional-volitional aspirations. But at the same time, there is much in common between interests in their psychological, organizational, dynamic form, which allows them to be identified as specific regulatory mechanisms of the activities of subjects (individuals, organizations, communities).
Interests common to many individuals that characterize social organizations(parties, states, unions, etc.), social institutions (family, educational, economic, etc.) and social communities (professional, political, territorial), historical communities (ethnic groups, nations, civilizations), act in the form of ideas: national self-determination, world domination, communist equality, God, etc. These ideas are associated with the interests of individuals, and through them - with the emotions of people and become regulators (motives) of their activities. Therefore, Marx emphasized that an idea always loses its motivating power when it is separated from the interest of individuals.
Subjective causes of social conflicts may include:
1) contradictions between the interests of people and the norms of behavior in society, which Parsons drew attention to.
For example, the norm requires caring for others, and economic interest pushes for profit. This always causes social conflict both within the subject and between subjects;
2) the contradiction between the same interests of different subjects aimed at the same subject (power, oil, territory, sovereignty, etc.);
3) opposing interests of different subjects (for example, Chechen extremists strive for sovereignty, and Russia - for territorial integrity);
4) misunderstanding of interests, intentions, actions by subjects who begin to see them as a threat to themselves. These include economic difficulties, national self-determination, national pride, the desire for leadership, etc.
Need as a cause of social conflict
The deep basis of social conflict is the needs of social actors. They form the essence of emotions, beliefs, interests, ideas and other subjective motivations of social conflicts. Social conflicts are ultimately the result of dissatisfaction or infringement (partial satisfaction) of some basic needs of social subjects for security, well-being, self-affirmation, and identity.
Need, need, satisfaction form the cycle of functioning of a social subject. Need is a contradiction between the necessary and actual state of the subject’s “body,” reflected in the form of emotions, feelings, judgments of dissatisfaction (“I’m hungry,” “I have no rights,” etc.). Satisfaction is the unity of the necessary and actual state of the “body” of the subject, reflected in emotions, feelings, judgments of satisfaction (“I am full”, “I am full”, etc.). These are passive states of the subject under the influence of the interaction of the internal (body) and external environment.
Need is a need-driven desire for satisfaction, which represents a powerful conscious - psychological mechanism for regulating human activity. This is not an activity, but rather a mechanism for regulating activity in which the need is realized.
The need includes: 1) an idea - a goal about the social good that it needs to satisfy; 2) a set of interests-goals that act as means of realizing the need-goal; 3) a program of evaluative and cognitive actions of environmental objects to select the desired good among them; 4) a program of consumer actions and operations that transform an object of consumption into an object of satisfaction and the “body” of a social subject.
All people’s needs can be divided into material (food, clothing, housing, etc.), social (safety, respect, self-affirmation, etc.), spiritual (goodness, justice, beauty, God, etc.). They differ in their subjects and conscious-psychological mechanisms of implementation. A need, when realized, does not always lead to a state of satisfaction for the subject. Then the need either intensifies, or is replaced, or disappears. The latter leads to the transformation of the subject, since needs form his essence.
Intelligence and social ideal as causes of social conflicts
The most important subjective cause of social conflicts is the level of intelligence. Lack of intelligence often becomes a subjective cause of social conflicts, when the organizing and aggressive party cannot “calculate” the balance of their own and others’ forces, the cost of victory and defeat, and gets involved in a conflict in the hope of an easy victory, when there are corresponding needs, interests, beliefs, etc. P. This happened to the Russian leadership led by Yeltsin during the first Chechen war. One of the main subjective reasons for the collapse of the USSR and the collapse of the proletarian-socialist formation was the lack of sufficient intelligence and dogmatism of the then political leadership of the country.
The rational activity of a social subject represents the unity of the social ideal and intellect. Only in relation to our existing social ideal can we evaluate our actions as right or wrong. The social ideal is different for different social subjects, and therefore forms the most important subjective cause of social conflicts. For the sake of the ideal of social equality, the Bolsheviks unleashed a terrible social conflict in Russia, which ended civil war, collectivization, industrialization, the elimination of religion, the expulsion of the Russian intelligentsia and unanimity. The presence of a liberal or socialist ideal is the most important subjective condition of social conflict in modern society.
Objective causes of social conflicts
Subjective causes of social conflicts are an expression of objective causes and their interpretations by subjects. Objective reasons are those that are outside the consciousness and will of people, social communities, institutions, and organizations. The many objective causes of social conflicts can be grouped into several general series (Fig. 8.2).
Disorganization of society as a cause of social conflict
First of all, such an objective cause of social conflicts is, according to the famous Polish sociologist J. Szczepanski, the disorganization of society, i.e. output of production (production stoppage and unemployment), economic (inflation, non-payment wages etc.), social (inequality between different social groups), political (the collapse of the USSR, the war in Chechnya, etc.), ideological (the struggle of liberalism and communism in post-Soviet Russia) processes beyond the limits of existing norms and threats in society interests of individuals, social groups, organizations.
This, for example, happened after the collapse of the USSR, when instead of the state distribution of goods and money, a market one was introduced, instead of social equality of people, a pronounced division between the poor and the rich arose, when the leading role of the party disappeared, and the judicial and legal systems had not yet emerged, when the communist the ideology was recognized as utopian, and no other ideology was proposed except for the ideology of enrichment.
The disorganization of society is associated with the disintegration of state and public (family, school, trade union, etc.) institutions (organizations) that are unable to keep environmental, production, economic, political, ideological processes within normal limits for a given (in our case, post-Soviet) society . This also includes natural (earthquakes, floods, tsunamis), man-made (Chernobyl), economic (depreciation of deposits, privatization, financial disasters, etc.), political (shooting of the Russian parliament building in October 1993, reform of the vertical of power, started by President V. Putin, etc.), military ( Chechen War) disasters and events.
The state of disorganization and disintegration of society causes many social conflicts, which outwardly manifest themselves in the spread of alcoholism, sexual promiscuity, an increase in crime, an increase in mental illness, the spread of suicide, etc.
Inequality of opportunities for social actors
Inequalities in the capabilities of social actors in the everyday, economic, political, national, educational, and religious spheres are often cited as objective causes of social conflicts. This inequality relates to the resources, statuses, and values of subjects. There are subjects with the same interests who lack resources. For example, there is a shortage (shortage) of housing, work, security, power, etc. So, now a significant part of people do not have enough money to live, pay for housing, buy medicine, maintain safety, etc. The most important objective cause of social conflicts is the clash of different interests. For example, liberals are focused on market economy at the expense of the interests of the common people. But ordinary people do not want to sacrifice their lives, habits, beliefs for the sake of liberal ideas, plans, and reforms. It is obvious that with the development of humanity, the shortage of many goods will deepen, becoming an objective cause of social conflicts, as well as the opposition of interests of different social actors.
The desire to eliminate these causes and thereby social conflicts, especially class ones (between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat), gave rise to socialist projects for eliminating one or another type of inequality in general, especially class inequality. And this was done in the USSR and other countries of proletarian socialism. The foundations of many social conflicts were not essentially eliminated, but were driven deeper, as happened with conflicts between the intelligentsia and the proletariat and interethnic ones. As a result, negative consequences were revealed: the achievement of social equality in the political, social, economic spheres led the USSR to totalitarianism, stagnation in the economy and living standards of the population, loss of incentives to work and self-development, aggravation of interethnic relations. As a result, the USSR lost its motives for self-propulsion and found itself in a state of stagnation during the Brezhnev period, which ultimately led the country to collapse.
This once again demonstrates that every inequality is an incentive for self-development of people and society. Inequality cannot be completely eliminated, it only needs to be mitigated to a certain extent. Social inequality also exists in countries of liberal (USA, etc.) and democratic (Germany, etc.) capitalism; for example, in the USA to a greater extent, and in Germany to a lesser extent.
Scientists have long discovered a connection between social inequality (equality) and the efficiency of social production: the higher the social inequality, the greater the efficiency of social production, the pace of social development and social instability. In market countries there is a universal mechanism for finding balance (unity) of these two sides. This is a mechanism of political democracy, the presence of right, center and left parties in the political superstructure of society. When right-wing parties are in power, society is focused primarily on production efficiency. The fair distribution of produced goods is gradually being disrupted, workers' indignation and political instability arise. As a result, left-wing parties come to power, focused on a more equitable redistribution of produced goods. There is a decrease in the efficiency of social production. Post-Soviet Russia still has a very long way to go in this direction.
Objective factors motivators of subjective reasons
Objective reasons - subjective reasons - social conflict - this is the cause-and-effect chain connecting the conflict with its causes.
Can subjective factors without objective prerequisites, i.e. themselves, cause social conflict? Yes. In this case, intrapersonal or interpersonal conflicts, which, by our definition, are not social, will become the causes of social conflict, as may have been the case in the relationship between Yeltsin and Dudayev before the start of the first Chechen war.
If we consider that it is the infringement (dissatisfaction or partial satisfaction) of the needs of a social subject that is the final cause of social conflict, then the approach to its resolution also changes. To do this, it is necessary, first of all, to eliminate the objective reasons for the infringement of the needs of social subjects, to mitigate social inequality, to establish democratic order in society, and not to infringe on one social subject’s needs by another.
The resolution of a social contradiction over a social good should always be guided by the needs of the subjects. It is possible to fairly divide the subject of the conflict only when the needs of potential or actual opponents are fair. Therefore, a genuine resolution of social conflict is possible only with a deep analysis by the opposing subjects of their needs, interests, and claims. It is no coincidence that J. Barton, the leader of a team of researchers working on the problem of resolving social conflict, believes:
Only organizational efforts that fully satisfy basic human needs can bring true closure to conflict, i.e. such a resolution that fully affects the subject of the dispute and establishes new, self-sufficient relations between opponents.
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 bad influence. 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 to begin the study of conflicts and to subsequently write 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 clash 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 serves 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 its 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. An object is a specific reason, motivation, driving forces conflict. All objects are divided into three main types:
1. Objects that cannot be divided into parts , and it is impossible to own them jointly 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, mask, 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 in a satisfactory manner. to the fullest, and in the interaction of subjects there will be 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. How 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 combining benefits and rewards, society organizes the interests of social groups, directing them through some 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 systems worldviews 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 mental condition 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. It's complicated 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 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. An evolving conflict tends to create additional reasons 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 stop 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 of the parties are introduced. 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 real reasons and the 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);
Study possible options problem solution;
Search agreements for 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, as a result of the conclusion of peace, to remove emotional stress parties;
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 agreement (harmony) with himself and 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 existing system public 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 imply aggressive-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 see that in approximately the same conflict situations different people They don't behave the same way. 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 V 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 involves 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.
Social conflict
Material from Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia
Social conflict- conflict caused by disagreement social groups or personalities with differences in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of people's social connections.
In area scientific knowledge there is a separate science dedicated to conflicts - conflictology. A conflict is a collision of opposing goals, positions, and views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, 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 potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is determined by opposing values and norms, interests and needs. An essential aspect of social conflict is that these subjects act within the framework of some broader system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be revealed in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, and the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each stage of the conflict it will be concentrated at a certain point of intersection of interests.
Causes of social conflicts
The reason for social conflicts lies in the definition itself - it is the confrontation of individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It arises when one party to the conflict seeks to realize its interests to the detriment of the other.
Types of social conflicts
Political conflicts- these are conflicts caused by the struggle for the distribution of power, dominance, influence and authority. They arise from various interests, rivalries and struggles in the process of acquiring, distributing and exercising political-state power. Political conflicts are directly related to gaining leading positions in institutions and structures of political power.
Main types of political conflicts:
conflict between branches of government;
conflict within parliament;
conflict between political parties and movements;
conflict between various parts of the management apparatus, etc.
Socio-economic conflicts- these are conflicts caused by the means of life support, the use and redistribution of natural and other material resources, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access and distribution of spiritual goods.
National-ethnic conflicts- these are conflicts that arise during the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.
According to the classification of D. Katz’s typology, there are:
conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;
conflict between directly competing subgroups;
conflict within the hierarchy over rewards.
Basic aspects of social conflicts.
Social heterogeneity of society, differences in income levels, power, prestige, etc. often lead to conflicts. Conflicts are an integral part of social life. This determines the close attention of sociologists to the study of conflicts.
A conflict is a collision of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of opponents or subjects of interaction. Radugin A.A., Radugin K.A. Sociology. - M.: Center, 1996., p. 117. The English sociologist E. Gidens gave the following definition of conflict: “By conflict I mean a real struggle between active people or groups, regardless of the origins of this struggle, its methods and means mobilized by each side.” Conflict is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is susceptible to conflict to one degree or another. The wide dissemination of this phenomenon and the keen attention of society and scientists to it contributed to the emergence of a special branch of sociological knowledge - conflictology. Conflicts are classified according to their structure and areas of research.
Social conflict is a special type of interaction of social forces in which the action of one side, faced with opposition from the other, makes it impossible to realize its goals and interests.
The main subjects of the conflict are large social groups. Major conflict expert R. Dorendorf classifies three types of social groups as subjects of conflict. 1). Primary groups are direct participants in the conflict. Which are in a state of interaction regarding the achievement of objectively or subjectively incompatible goals. 2). Secondary groups - strive to not be directly involved in the conflict. But they contribute to fueling the conflict. At the acute stage, they can become the primary side. 3). Third forces are interested in resolving the conflict.
The subject of the conflict is the main contradiction because of which and for the sake of which the subjects enter into confrontation.
Conflictology has developed two models for describing conflict: procedural and structural. The procedural model focuses on the dynamics of the conflict, the emergence of a conflict situation, the transition of the conflict from one stage to another, forms of conflict behavior, and the final outcome of the conflict. In the structural model, the emphasis shifts to the analysis of the conditions underlying the conflict and determining its dynamics. The main goal of this model is to establish the parameters that influence conflict behavior and specify the forms of this behavior.
Much attention is paid to the concept of “power” of participants in conflicts. Strength is the opponent’s ability to realize his goal against the will of the interaction partner. It includes a number of heterogeneous components:
Physical force, including technical means used as an instrument of violence;
An informationally civilized form of the use of force, requiring the collection of facts, statistical data, analysis of documents, study of examination materials in order to ensure complete knowledge of the essence of the conflict, about one’s opponent in order to develop a strategy and tactics of behavior, the use of materials discrediting the opponent, etc.;
Social status, expressed in publicly recognized indicators (income, level of power, prestige, etc.);
Other resources - money, territory, time limit, number of supporters, etc.
The stage of conflict behavior is characterized by the maximum use of the power of the participants in conflicts, the use of all resources at their disposal.
An important influence on the development of conflict relations is exerted by the surrounding social environment, which determines the conditions in which conflict processes take place. The environment can act either as a source of external support for the parties to the conflict, or as a deterrent, or as a neutral factor.
1.1.Classification of conflicts.
All conflicts can be classified depending on the areas of disagreement as follows.
1. Personal conflict. This zone includes conflicts occurring within the personality, at the level of individual consciousness. Such conflicts may be associated, for example, with excessive dependence or role tension. This is a purely psychological conflict, but it can be a catalyst for the emergence of group tension if the individual seeks the cause of his internal conflict among group members.
2. Interpersonal conflict. This zone involves disagreements between two or more members of one group or more groups.
3. Intergroup conflict. A certain number of individuals forming a group (i.e., a social community capable of joint coordinated actions) come into conflict with another group that does not include individuals from the first group. This is the most common type of conflict, because individuals, when starting to influence others, usually try to attract supporters and form a group that will facilitate actions in the conflict.
4. Conflict of belonging. Occurs due to the dual affiliation of individuals, for example, when they form a group within another, larger group or when an individual is simultaneously part of two competitive groups pursuing the same goal.
5. Conflict with the external environment. The individuals who make up the group experience pressure from the outside (primarily from cultural, administrative and economic norms and regulations). They often come into conflict with the institutions that support these norms and regulations.
According to their internal content, social conflicts are divided into rational And emotional. Rational conflicts include those that cover the sphere of reasonable, business-like cooperation, redistribution of resources and improvement of management or social structure. Rational conflicts also occur in the field of culture, when people try to free themselves from outdated, unnecessary forms, customs and beliefs. As a rule, those participating in rational conflicts do not move to the personal level and do not form an image of the enemy in their minds. Respect for the opponent, recognition of his right to some share of the truth - these are characteristic features of a rational conflict. Such conflicts are not acute or protracted, since both sides strive, in principle, for the same goal - improvement of relationships, norms, patterns of behavior, fair distribution of values. The parties come to an agreement, and as soon as the frustrating obstacle is removed, the conflict is resolved.
However, during conflict interactions and clashes, the aggression of its participants is often transferred from the cause of the conflict to the individual. In this case, the original cause of the conflict is simply forgotten and the participants act on the basis of personal hostility. This kind of conflict is called emotional. From the moment an emotional conflict appears, negative stereotypes appear in the minds of the people involved in it.
The development of emotional conflict is unpredictable, and in the vast majority of cases they are uncontrollable. Most often, such a conflict ends after new people or even new generations appear in the situation. But some conflicts (for example, national, religious) can transmit the emotional mood to other generations. In this case, the conflict continues for quite a long time.
1.2.Characteristics of conflicts.
Despite the numerous manifestations of conflict interactions in social life, they all have a number of common characteristics, the study of which allows us to classify the main parameters of conflicts, as well as identify factors influencing their intensity. All conflicts have four main parameters: the causes of the conflict, the severity of the conflict, its duration and consequences. By considering these characteristics, it is possible to determine the similarities and differences in conflicts and the characteristics of their course.
Causes of conflicts.
Defining the concept of the nature of the conflict and the subsequent analysis of its causes is important in the study of conflict interactions, since the cause is the point around which the conflict situation unfolds. Early diagnosis of a conflict is primarily aimed at finding its real cause, which allows for social control over the behavior of social groups at the pre-conflict stage.
Consequences of social conflict.
Conflicts, on the one hand, destroy social structures, lead to significant unnecessary expenditure of resources, and on the other hand, they are a mechanism that helps solve many problems, unites groups and ultimately serves as one of the ways to achieve social justice. The duality in people's assessment of the consequences of conflict has led to the fact that sociologists involved in conflict theory have not come to a common point of view on whether conflicts are useful or harmful for society.
Thus, many believe that society and its individual elements develop as a result of evolutionary changes, i.e. in the course of continuous improvement and the emergence of more viable social structures based on the accumulation of experience, knowledge, cultural patterns and the development of production, and as a result they assume that social conflict can only be negative, destructive and destructive.
Another group of scientists recognizes the constructive, useful content of any conflict, since as a result of conflicts new qualitative certainties appear. According to supporters of this point of view, any finite object of the social world, from the moment of its inception, carries within itself its own negation, or its own death. Upon reaching a certain limit or measure, as a result of quantitative growth, a contradiction that carries negation comes into conflict with the essential characteristics of a given object, and therefore a new qualitative certainty is formed.
Constructive and destructive paths of conflict depend on the characteristics of its subject: size, rigidity, centralization, relationship with other problems, level of awareness. The conflict increases if:
competing groups increase;
it is a conflict over principles, rights or personalities;
the resolution of the conflict forms a significant precedent;
conflict is perceived as win-lose;
the views and interests of the parties are not connected;
the conflict is poorly defined, nonspecific, vague. 11 Social conflict: modern research. Ed. N.L. Polyakova // Abstract collection. - M, 1991, p. 70.
A private consequence of conflict may be increased group interaction. As interests and viewpoints within a group change from time to time, new leaders, new policies, and new in-group norms are needed. As a result of the conflict, new leadership, new policies and new norms can be quickly introduced. Conflict may be the only way out of a tense situation.
Conflict resolution.
An external sign of conflict resolution can be the end of the incident. It is completion, not temporary cessation. This means that conflictual interaction between the conflicting parties ceases. Elimination or cessation of the incident is a necessary but not sufficient condition for resolving the conflict. Often, having stopped active conflict interaction, people continue to experience a frustrating state and look for its causes. In this case, the conflict breaks out again.
Resolution of social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in a conflict situation, allowing to extinguish the conflict, is considered to be the elimination of the cause of the conflict. In a rational conflict, eliminating the cause inevitably leads to its resolution, but for an emotional conflict, the most important point in changing the conflict situation should be considered a change in the opponents’ attitudes towards each other.
It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the demands of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.
Social conflict can also be resolved as a result of the depletion of the resources of the parties or the intervention of a third force that creates an overwhelming advantage for one of the parties, and, finally, as a result of the complete elimination of the rival. In all these cases, a change in the conflict situation certainly occurs.
Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is a timely and accurate analysis of its causes. And this involves identifying objectively existing contradictions, interests, and goals. An analysis carried out from this angle allows us to outline the “business zone” of a conflict situation. Another, no less important condition is mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each party. To do this, the parties to the conflict must strive to free themselves from hostility and mistrust of each other. This state can be achieved based on a goal that is meaningful to each group on a broader basis. The third, indispensable condition is a 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 with the participation of a third party, etc.
Conflictology has developed a number of recommendations, following which speeds up the process of conflict resolution: 1) during negotiations, priority should be given to discussing substantive issues; 2) the parties should strive to relieve psychological and social tension; 3) the parties must demonstrate mutual respect for each other; 4) negotiators should strive to turn a significant and hidden part of the conflict situation into an open one, openly and demonstrably revealing each other’s positions and consciously creating an atmosphere of public equal exchange of opinions; 5) all negotiators must show a tendency to
2. Social conflicts in modern society.
In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of social life gives rise to its own specific types of social conflicts. Therefore, we can talk about political, national-ethnic, economic, cultural and other types of conflicts.
Political conflict - this is a conflict over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. This conflict can be hidden or open. One of the most striking forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative powers in the country that has continued throughout the entire period since the collapse of the USSR. The objective causes of the conflict have not been eliminated, and it has moved to a new stage of its development. From now on, it is being implemented in new forms of confrontation between the President and the Federal Assembly, as well as the executive and legislative powers in the regions.
A prominent place in modern life is occupied by national-ethnic conflicts- conflicts based on the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups. Most often these are conflicts related to status or territorial claims. The problem of cultural self-determination of certain national communities also plays a significant role.
Play a major role in modern life in Russia socio-economic conflicts, that is, conflicts over means of life support, wage levels, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the price level for various goods, and real access to these goods and other resources.
Social conflicts in various spheres of public life can take place in the form of intra-institutional and organizational norms and procedures: discussions, requests, adoption of declarations, laws, etc. The most striking form of expression of conflict is various kinds of mass actions. These mass actions are implemented in the form of presenting demands to the authorities from dissatisfied social groups, in mobilizing public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest. Mass protest is an active form of conflict behavior. It can be expressed in various forms: organized and spontaneous, direct or indirect, taking on the nature of violence or a system of non-violent actions. The organizers of mass protests are political organizations and so-called “pressure groups” that unite people based on economic goals, professional, religious and cultural interests. Forms of expression of mass protests can be such as: rallies, demonstrations, pickets, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes and is an effective means of solving very specific problems. Therefore, when choosing a form of social protest, its organizers must clearly understand what specific goals are set for this action and what is the public support for certain demands.
Sociology as a science. Tutorial
X. SOCIAL CONFLICTS
1. Concept, causes and types of social conflicts. 2. Mass actions. Social movements.
Basic concepts Anomie, conflict society, antagonisms, system crisis, counteractions, violation of the system stabilization mechanism, consensus, neutralization of the opponent, bifurcation, compromise, latency, business zone, post-conflict syndrome, maximalism of the parties, frustration, public mood. Purpose of information: to give students an idea of the nature, dynamics, subjects and methods of resolving social conflicts in society.
Recommendations First question. When studying the nature, essence and participants of social conflicts, find their definitions in the literature, and try to use specific examples of conflict systems existing in the world (society, group, social institution) to find out the motives and prerequisites for the ripening of social tension in society. Carefully study the basics of the theory of modern Western conflictology and try to carry out a comparative analysis of the most common conflict paradigms in sociology. When studying the patterns of functioning of social systems, focus on the concept of a crisis society and consider the processes of integration and disintegration, differentiation of interests, stratification, functional and dysfunctional systems, spontaneous and purposeful conflicts. Particular attention should be paid to the concepts of conflict society by K. Marx, R. Dahrendorf, L. Coser and others. It is advisable to consider the second question using the method of comparative analysis of numerous types of mass social movements and actions, to reveal the dialectical nature of their interaction, interdependence, to explain the nature, direction, driving the forces of contemporary formal and informal mass movements. It is useful to analyze the hierarchy of mass movements and the current state of mass consciousness on the basis of studying the political life of Russian society.
Concept, causes and types of social conflicts Conflicts have always been an integral part of the life of society. Conflict is a clash between people or large social groups, which acts as a universal phenomenon, i.e. Every society is subject to conflict. They can lead to the destruction of not only economic or political systems, but also society itself as a whole. Therefore, a special branch has been formed within sociology - conflictology, which faces a number of scientific and practical problems. Is it possible for a society to exist without conflict? The question is about 1) the causes of conflicts; 2) about the role of conflicts in the life of society; 3) about the possibilities of regulating social conflicts. The term "conflict" comes from Latin word conflictus - collision. The concept of "social conflict" is a complex phenomenon. This is a certain form of social interaction between people in the form of a collision of opposing goals, values, views, needs, interests. Conflict is the simultaneous deployment of action and counter-action. This is an extremely complex action of two or more parties united in opposition. The term "social conflict" was introduced by the German sociologist Georg Simmel, who called it a "dispute". M. Weber called the conflict a “struggle.” English sociologist Anthony Giddens defines conflict as “a real struggle between acting individuals or groups.” Americans T. Parsons and R. Merton viewed conflict as a dysfunction of individual structures in the social system. L. Koser considers the conflict the most important element social interaction that contributes to the strengthening or destruction of social bonds. In general, in sociology, conflict is defined as a form of interaction between different social communities. The nature of conflicts is determined by the presence in society of objective and subjective contradictions that permeate the economy, politics and culture. The simultaneous aggravation of all contradictions creates a crisis of society, a violation of the mechanism of stabilization of the system. A manifestation of the crisis of society is the growth of social tension, the clash of classes, nations, and the masses with the state. But objective contradictions should not be identified with conflict. Contradictions give rise to open and closed conflicts only when people recognize them as incompatible interests and needs. Social conflict is a way of interaction between individuals, communities, and social institutions, determined by their material and spiritual interests, a certain social status, and power. The dynamics of social systems is a process that is realized in various types of social interaction: competition, adaptation, assimilation, conflict. Note that the conflict here acts as a kind of connecting transitional form, say, to competition (competition), consensus. Consensus is one of the methods for making economic, socio-political and other decisions, which consists in developing an agreed position that does not cause fundamental objections from the parties. One way or another, conflict has been and remains a constant companion of social life, as consistent with the nature of society and man as consensus. The legalization of conflict management in our country was prompted by the situation when the country was literally overwhelmed by conflicts, when we were not ready for the fact that “democracy is a conflict.” A special role belongs to the sociological aspect of the study (conflict and society), and the political science aspect (conflict and politics). But the socio-psychological aspect is becoming increasingly important in terms of studying the dynamics of the conflict. Let us highlight two main concepts of social conflict. “The concept of positive functional conflict” (G. Simmel, L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf, K. Boulding, J. Galtung, etc.) is strictly sociological. It views conflict as a problem of communication and interaction. Its social role is stabilization. But the stability of a society depends on the number of conflict relations existing in it and the types of connections between them. The more different conflicts intersect, the more complex the group differentiation of society, the more difficult it is to divide all people into two opposing camps that do not have any common values and norms. This means that the more conflicts independent of each other, the better for the unity of society. In this concept, “competition” is distinguished as key concept, and the interests of the parties are considered the driving force of the conflict. Its process consists of a set of reactions to the outside world. All collisions are reactive processes. Consequently, the essence of the conflict lies in the stereotypical reactions of social actors. But conflict resolution is thought of as “manipulating” behavior without radically changing the social order. This is mainly the difference between Marxist conflictology (the theory of class struggle and social revolution) from the principle of “scarcity” (i.e. limited goods, scarcity), characteristic of Western interpretations of the causes of conflict. The positive functional concept views conflict as “a struggle for values and claims to a certain social status, power. and material and spiritual benefits insufficient for everyone, a struggle in which the goals of the parties to the conflict are to neutralize, damage or destroy the “rival”. In the concept of conflict as. “social disease” T. Parsons was the first to speak loudly about conflict as a pathology, and identified the following foundations of stability: satisfaction of needs, social control, coincidence of social motivations with social attitudes. E. Mayo put forward the idea of “industrial peace,” characterizing conflict as a “dangerous social disease” that is the antithesis of cooperation and balance. Proponents of this concept (among them primarily the Swedish ecologist Hans Brodahl and the German sociologist Friedrich Glasl) proceed from the fact that two opposing trends manifest themselves in the historical process. The first is emancipation, the desire to free ourselves (man - woman, younger and older generations, employees - entrepreneurs, developed and developing countries, East - West). The disease begins when emancipation leads to selfishness, and this negative side individualism. The second is increasing mutual dependence, which contains a tendency towards collectivism. The disease begins when interdependence turns into collectivism, i.e. when a certain system wins, allowing a person to be neglected as an individual. The disease has a wide spectrum, affecting the individual, social organisms, groups, organizations, communities, nations, and entire peoples. What are the aspects of a sociological diagnosis of conflict? First of all, these are the origins of the conflict (not the causes, but where it begins); then the biography of the conflict (its history, roots, background against which it progresses, crises, turning points); parties (subjects) of the conflict, depending on which the level of social complexity of any conflict is determined; position and relationships of the parties, formal and informal dependencies, roles, personal relationships; initial attitude towards the conflict (hopes and expectations of the parties). X. Brodahl and F. Glasl identify three main phases of the conflict. 1. From hope to fear (discussions, self-isolation, arguments taken to extremes, loss of communication, initiation of action). 2. From fear to loss of face (formation of false images of the enemy, strengthening of leadership and authoritarianism, pushing for self-exposure, intimidation and panic). 3. Loss of will is the path to violence (limited destruction and violence, destruction of the nerve (administrative) center, and finally, total destruction, including self-destruction). The escalation of a conflict is a kind of deadly process, but it can be overcome quickly and disappear altogether if the main contradiction between the parties is eliminated. In any conflict there is a struggle between the tendencies of egoism and “collectivism”. Finding a balance between them means finding a way to resolve the conflict and growing in your humanity (this is always an effort!). ; Extremeness (its researchers are M. Weber, E. Durkheim, L. Sorokin, N. Kondratiev, I. Prigozhin, N. Moiseev, etc.) arises when there is a threat to one’s very existence social system within this quality and is explained by the action of extreme factors. An extreme situation is associated with the emergence of a “bifurcation state” (Latin bifurcus - bifurcation), that is, a state of dynamic chaos and the emergence of opportunities for innovative development of the system. Under these conditions, parameters change and borderline (marginal) states arise. As a result, the effect of “entity detection” occurs. Its function is to stabilize the system in response to extreme forces. When emerging from dynamic chaos, it is necessary to have a leader (at the group level) or a dominant motivation (at the individual level), which carries out the target function of survival of the social system. Sociologists see two options for getting out of an extreme situation. The first is a catastrophe associated with the disintegration of the system core and the destruction of subsystems. The second is adaptation (compromise, consensus), the object of which is group contradictions and interests. To analyze the dynamics of the social system, the concept of “cycle of extreme situation” was introduced. The cycle is associated with a minimum of time for decision-making, with a maximum of information about events, with maximum efficiency (mobilization of forces, abilities, resources), with a minimum of errors.
- 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 essential functions 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, because 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 needs that became the cause of 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 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 more weak side. 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 communal apartment, which stops after their relocation.
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 conflict resolution 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 diversity 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 modern society Russia in 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/
Social conflict
Social conflict- conflict, the cause of which is disagreement between social groups or individuals with differences in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of people's social connections.
In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science dedicated to conflicts - conflictology. A conflict is a collision of opposing goals, positions, and views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, 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 potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is determined by opposing values and norms, interests and needs. An essential aspect of social conflict is that these subjects act within the framework of some broader system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be revealed in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, and the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each stage of the conflict it will be concentrated at a certain point of intersection of interests.
Causes of social conflicts
The reason for social conflicts lies in the definition itself - it is the confrontation of individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It arises when one party to the conflict seeks to realize its interests to the detriment of the other.
Types of social conflicts
Political conflicts- these are conflicts caused by the struggle for the distribution of power, dominance, influence and authority. They arise from various interests, rivalries and struggles in the process of acquiring, distributing and exercising political-state power. Political conflicts have direct relation to winning leading positions in institutions and structures of political power.
Main types of political conflicts:
conflict between branches of government;
conflict within parliament;
conflict between political parties and movements;
conflict between various parts of the management apparatus, etc.
Socio-economic conflicts- these are conflicts caused by the means of life support, the use and redistribution of natural and other material resources, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access and distribution of spiritual goods.
National-ethnic conflicts- these are conflicts that arise during the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.
According to the classification of D. Katz’s typology, there are:
conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;
conflict between directly competing subgroups;
conflict within the hierarchy over rewards.
see also
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
See what “Social conflict” is in other dictionaries:
Social conflict- a type of interaction of social actors in which the actions of one side, faced with opposition from the other, make it impossible to realize their goals and interests. Social conflict is a collision of parties (two or more subjects),... ... Elementary principles of the general theory of law
Social conflict- (see social conflict) ... Human ecology
Social conflict- - struggle between segments of society for valuable resources... Dictionary-reference book for social work
SOCIAL CONFLICT is one of the types of social relations; a state of confrontation, struggle between individuals or groups of people, permeating all areas of social relations and spheres of human activity. In theory… … Philosophical Encyclopedia
Conflict, the cause of which is disagreement between social groups or individuals due to differences in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of people's social connections. In the field of scientific knowledge there is a separate... ... Wikipedia
A set of problems that characterize the complex process of interaction, dependence and manifestation of conflicts in public life. Social conflict, like any complex social phenomenon, is connected with those social structures by thousands of threads... Political science. Dictionary.
CONFLICT OF LEGAL- - a social conflict in which a contradiction is associated with the legal relations of the parties (their legally significant actions or states) and, therefore, the subjects or the motivation for their behavior, or the object of the conflict have legal characteristics...
CONFLICT SOCIO-POLITICAL TRANSITIONAL PERIOD- – conflict in a society that is transforming from a totalitarian to a democratic form of functioning. In different social political systems one and the same social conflict can perform different functions: in pluralistic... ... encyclopedic Dictionary in psychology and pedagogy
CONFLICT IS DESTRUCTIVE- – a conflict, the negative consequences of which after the end of the struggle of the parties as a whole significantly exceed its positive results. The destructive consequences of conflicts are associated primarily with death, injury and stress of people. Besides,… … Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy
SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONFLICT- – social conflict, which is based on contradictions of an economic nature. In modern Russian society, the confrontational nature of emerging socio-economic relations is determined by contradictory processes... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy
Books
- Social intelligence. The Science of Successful Interaction with Others, Karl Albrecht. IQ is valuable. But has it ever happened to you, an intelligent person, when communicating with colleagues, clients, parents, children, to look like a “complete idiot”, to be absolutely helpless, and never find the right words? Yes……
