Among the basic concepts that social science studies today, social conflicts occupy a large place. Largely because they are an active driving force, thanks to which modern society has come to its present state. So what is social conflict?
This is a clash of different parts of society, due to the contradictions that have arisen. Moreover, it cannot be said that social conflict always leads to negative consequences, because it is not so. Constructively overcoming and resolving such contradictions allows the parties to get closer, learn something, and society to develop. But only if both sides are determined to take a rational approach and look for a way out.
The concept of conflict in society was of interest to researchers long before the emergence of sociology as such. The English philosopher Hobbes was rather negative about this. He pointed out that some kind of conflicts would constantly occur within the society, the natural state, in his opinion, was "the war of all against all."
But not everyone agreed with him. Collision issues were actively explored by Spencer at the end of the 19th century. He considered that we are talking about a natural process, as a result of which the best remain, as a rule. Considering social conflicts and ways to resolve them, the thinker brought the personality to the fore.
In contrast, Karl Marx believed that the choice of the group is more important for society as a whole. The scientist suggested that the class struggle is inevitable. For him, the functions of social conflict are closely connected with the redistribution of goods. However, critics of the theory of this researcher pointed out that Marx was an economist. And he approached the study of society from the point of view of professional deformation, paying too little attention to everything else. In addition, here the value of a single person turned out to be downplayed.
If we talk about the basic concepts related to modern conflictology (which even took shape as a separate science, which indicates the great importance of the issue under study), then we can single out the teachings of Coser, Dahrendorf and Boulding. The theory of social conflict in the former is built around the inevitability of social inequality, which generates tension. Which leads to clashes. In addition, Coser points out that the struggle can begin when there is a contradiction between ideas about what should be and reality. Finally, the scientist does not bypass the limited number of values, the rivalry between different members of society for power, influence, resources, status, and so on.
It can be said that this theory does not directly conflict with Dahrendorf's approach. But he emphasizes differently. In particular, the sociologist points out that society is built on the coercion of some by others. There is a constant struggle for power in society, and there will always be more people who want it than real opportunities. Which gives rise to endless changes and collisions.
Boulding also has his own concept of conflict. The scientist suggests that it is possible to isolate something in common that exists in any confrontation. In his opinion, the structure of social conflict is subject to analysis and study, which opens up wide opportunities for monitoring the situation and managing the process.
According to Boulding, conflict cannot be completely separated from public life. And by it, he understands the situation when both parties (or more participants) take positions that cannot be fully reconciled with the interests and desires of each other. The researcher identifies 2 basic aspects: static and dynamic. The first concerns the main characteristics of the parties and the general situation as a whole. The second is the reactions, the behavior of the participant.
Boulding suggests that the consequences of social conflict in a particular case can be predicted with a certain degree of probability. Moreover, in his opinion, errors are often associated with a lack of information about what caused it, what means the parties actually use, etc., and not with the inability to make a forecast in principle. The scientist also draws attention: it is important to know at what stage of social conflict the situation is now in order to understand what will or may be at the next stage. 
Further development of the theory
At present, social scientists are actively studying social conflict and ways to resolve it, because today it is one of the most urgent and pressing problems. Thus, the premises of social conflict always concern something deeper than it might seem at first glance. A superficial study of the situation sometimes gives the impression that people are simply hurt by religious feelings (which often also has its significance), but upon closer examination, it turns out that there are enough reasons.
Often dissatisfaction accumulates over the years. For example, social conflicts in modern Russia are the problem of a clash of different ethnic groups, the economic disadvantage of some regions of the country compared to others, a strong stratification within society, a lack of real prospects, etc. At times it seems that the reaction is simply disproportionate, which is impossible to predict, to what are the consequences of social conflicts in certain cases.
But in reality, the basis for a serious reaction is a long-accumulating tension. It can be compared to an avalanche, where snow constantly accumulated. And just one push, a sharp sound, a blow in the wrong place is enough for a huge mass to break off and roll down.
What does this have to do with theory? Today, the causes of social conflicts are almost always studied in relation to how things actually happen. The objective circumstances of conflicts in society that led to the confrontation are considered. And not only from a sociological point of view, but also from an economic, political, psychological (interpersonal, confrontation between the individual and society), etc.
In fact, theorists are tasked with finding practical ways to solve the problem. In general, such goals have always been relevant. But now ways to resolve social conflicts are of increasing importance. They are essential to the survival of society as a whole.
Classification of social conflicts
As already established, the issue under study is of great importance for people and even for humanity. This may seem like an exaggeration, but when considering this topic, it becomes clear that global types of conflicts really threaten the entire civilization as such. If you want to practice, give yourself different scenarios for the development of events in which survival will be in question.
In fact, examples of such social conflicts are described in science fiction literature. They are largely devoted to dystopia. Finally, from the point of view of the social science study of the material, post-apocalyptic literature is of considerable interest. There, often the causes of social conflicts are studied after the fact, that is, after everything has happened.
To put it bluntly, humanity has reached a level of development when it is really capable of destroying itself. The same forces act both as an engine of progress and as a deterrent. For example, the promotion of industry enriches people, opens up new opportunities for them. At the same time, emissions into the atmosphere destroy the environment. Garbage and chemical pollution threaten rivers, soil.
The danger of nuclear war should not be underestimated either. The confrontation between the largest countries in the world shows that this problem has not been solved at all, as it seemed in the 90s. And a lot depends on what paths humanity will take next. And what methods of resolving social conflicts it will use, destructive or constructive. A lot depends on this, and it's not just about big words.
So let's get back to classification. We can say that all types of social conflicts are divided into constructive and destructive. The first is the focus on resolution, on overcoming. Here, the positive functions of social conflicts are realized, when society teaches how to overcome contradictions, build a dialogue, and also understands why this is generally necessary in specific situations.
We can say that in the end people gain experience that they can pass on to future generations. For example, once humanity faced the legalization of slavery and came to the conclusion that it was unacceptable. Now, at least at the state level, there is no such problem, such a practice is outlawed.
There are also destructive types of social conflicts. They are not aimed at resolving, here the participants are more interested in creating a problem for the other side or in completely destroying it. At the same time, they can formally use completely different terminology to indicate their position for various reasons. The problem of studying the situation is often related to the fact that the real goals are often hidden, disguised as others.
However, the typology of social conflicts does not stop there. There is another division as well. For example, short-term and protracted are considered by duration. The latter, in most cases, have more serious causes and consequences, although such a relationship is far from always traced.
There is also a division according to the total number of participants. In a separate group are allocated internal, that is, those that occur within the personality. Here, the functions of social conflict are not realized in any way, since we are not talking about society at all, it is rather a matter of psychology and psychiatry. However, to the same extent that each individual is able to influence others, to the same extent such contradictions will cause problems in society as a whole. After all, society as such consists of individuals. Therefore, the importance of such problems should not be underestimated. Next come interpersonal conflicts, clashes between individual individuals. And the next level is already group.
From the point of view of orientation, it is worth considering horizontal, that is, problems between equal participants (representatives of the same group), vertical (subordinate and boss), and also mixed. In the latter case, the functions of social conflicts are very heterogeneous. This is the realization of ambitions, and the splashing out of aggression, and the achievement of conflicting goals, and often the struggle for power, and the development of society as such.
There is a division according to the methods of resolution: peaceful and armed. The main task of the government is to prevent the transition of the first to the second. At least in theory. However, in practice, states themselves often become the instigators of such a transformation, that is, provocateurs of armed clashes.
In terms of volume, they consider personal or domestic, group, for example, one department against the second within a corporation, a branch against the main office, one class at a school against another, etc., regional, which develop in a single area, local (also a locality, only more, say, the territory of one country). And finally, the largest ones are global. A striking example of the latter are world wars. As the volume increases, the degree of danger to humanity also increases.
Pay attention to the nature of development: there are spontaneous conflicts and planned, provoked ones. With a large scale of events, one often combines with others. Finally, in terms of content, production, domestic, economic, political, etc. problems are considered. But in general, one confrontation rarely affects only one particular aspect.
The study of social conflicts shows that it is quite possible to manage them, they can be prevented, they should be controlled. And a lot here depends on the intentions of the parties, on what they are ready for. And this is already influenced by the awareness of the seriousness of the situation.
The consequences of the conflict are highly controversial. On the one hand, conflicts destroy social structures, lead to significant unreasonable expenditure of resources, on the other hand, they are the mechanism that contributes to the solution of many problems, unites groups and, ultimately, serves as one of the ways to achieve social justice. The ambiguity in people's assessment of the consequences of conflict has led to the fact that sociologists involved in the theory of conflicts have not come to a common point of view about whether conflicts are beneficial or harmful to society.
The severity of the conflict to the greatest extent depends on the socio-psychological characteristics of the warring parties, as well as on the situation requiring immediate action. Absorbing energy from the outside, the conflict situation forces the participants to act immediately, putting all their energy into the collision.
The duality of people's assessment of the consequences of the conflict has led to the fact that sociologists involved in the theory of conflicts, or, as they say, conflictology, have not come to a common point of view about whether conflicts are beneficial or harmful to society. Thus, many believe that society and its individual components develop as a result of evolutionary changes, and as a result, they assume that social conflict can only be negative, destructive.
But there is a group of scientists, consisting of supporters of the dialectical method. They recognize the constructive, useful content of any conflict, since as a result of conflicts new qualitative certainties appear.
Let us assume that in every conflict there are both disintegrative, destructive, and integrative, creative moments. Conflict can destroy social communities. In addition, internal conflict destroys group unity. Speaking about the positive aspects of the conflict, it should be noted that a limited, private consequence of the conflict may be an increase in group interaction. Conflict may be the only way out of a tense situation. Thus, there are two types of consequences of conflicts:
- disintegrated consequences that increase bitterness, lead to destruction and bloodshed, to intra-group tension, destroy normal channels of cooperation, divert the attention of group members from pressing problems;
- integrative consequences that determine the way out of difficult situations, lead to the resolution of problems, increase group cohesion, lead to the conclusion of alliances with other groups, lead the group to understand the interests of its members.
Let's take a closer look at these implications:
Positive Consequences of the Conflict
A positive, functionally useful result of the conflict is the solution of the problem that gave rise to disagreements and caused clashes, taking into account the mutual interests and goals of all parties, as well as the achievement of understanding and trust, strengthening partnerships and cooperation, overcoming conformism, humility, striving for advantage.
Socially (collectively) - the constructive impact of the conflict is expressed in the following consequences:
The conflict is way to identify and fix disagreements, as well as problems in society, organization, group. The conflict indicates that the contradictions have already reached the highest limit, and therefore it is necessary to take immediate measures to eliminate them.
Thus, any the conflict performs an informational function, i.e. provides additional impulses to the awareness of one's own and other people's interests in the confrontation.
The conflict is form of conflict resolution. Its development contributes to the elimination of those shortcomings and miscalculations in the social organization that led to its emergence. The conflict contributes to the removal of social tension and the elimination of a stressful situation, helps to "let off steam", defuse the situation.
The conflict may perform an integrative, unifying function. In the face of an external threat, the group uses all its resources to unite and confront the external enemy. In addition, it is the task of solving existing problems that unites people. In search of a way out of the conflict, there is mutual understanding and a sense of involvement in the solution of a common task.
The solution of the conflict contributes to the stabilization of the social system, as it eliminates the sources of discontent. The parties to the conflict, having learned from the "bitter experience", will be more cooperative in the future than before the conflict.
In addition, conflict resolution prevent more serious conflicts from arising that might have arisen if this were not the case.
Conflict intensifies and stimulates group creativity, contributes to the mobilization of energy to solve the problems assigned to the subjects. In the process of finding ways to resolve the conflict, mental forces are activated to analyze difficult situations, new approaches, ideas, innovative technologies, etc. are being developed.
Conflict can serve as a means of clarifying the balance of power of social groups or communities and thus can warn against the following, more destructive conflicts.
The conflict may become the source of new norms of communication between people or to help fill the old norms with new content.
The constructive impact of the conflict on the personal level reflects the impact of the conflict on individual traits:
fulfillment by the conflict of a cognitive function in relation to the people who take part in it. In difficult critical (existential) situations, the real character, true values and motives of people's behavior are shown. The possibility of diagnosing the enemy's strength is also connected with the cognitive function;
promotion of self-knowledge and adequate self-esteem of the individual. The conflict can help to correctly assess one's strengths and abilities, to reveal new, previously unknown aspects of the personality's character. It can also temper the character, contribute to the emergence of his new virtues (a sense of pride, self-esteem, etc.);
removal of unwanted character traits (feeling of inferiority, humility, compliance);
increasing the level of socialization of a person, his development as a person. In conflict, an individual can gain as much life experience in a relatively short period of time as he may never get in everyday life;
facilitating the adaptation of the employee in the team, since it is during the conflict that people open up to a greater extent. A person is either accepted by the members of the group, or, conversely, they ignore it. In the latter case, of course, no adaptation takes place;
reducing mental tension in the group, relieving stress among its members (in case of a positive resolution of the conflict);
satisfaction of not only primary, but also secondary needs of the individual, its self-realization and self-affirmation.
Negative Consequences of the Conflict
The negative, dysfunctional consequences of the conflict include people's dissatisfaction with a common cause, a departure from solving urgent problems, an increase in hostility in interpersonal and intergroup relations, a weakening of team cohesion, etc.
The social destructive impact of the conflict manifests itself at various levels of the social system and is expressed in specific consequences.
When resolving the conflict, violent methods can be used, as a result of which large human casualties and material losses are possible. In addition to the direct participants, those around them can also suffer in the conflict.
The conflict can lead the parties to the confrontation (society, social group, individual) into a state of destabilization and disorganization. The conflict can lead to a slowdown in the pace of social, economic, political and spiritual development of society. Moreover, it can cause stagnation and a crisis of social development, the emergence of dictatorial and totalitarian regimes.
The conflict can contribute to the disintegration of society, the destruction of social communications and the socio-cultural alienation of social formations within the social system.
The conflict may be accompanied by an increase in pessimism in society and a disregard for customs.
The conflict can cause new, more destructive conflicts.
The conflict often leads to a decrease in the level of organization of the system, a decrease in discipline and, as a result, a decrease in the effectiveness of the activity.
The destructive impact of the conflict on the personal level is expressed in the following consequences:
- negative impact on the socio-psychological climate in the group: there are signs of a negative mental state (a feeling of depression, pessimism and anxiety), leading a person to a state of stress;
- disappointment in one's capabilities and abilities, deintensification of the face; the emergence of a feeling of self-doubt, the loss of previous motivation, the destruction of existing value orientations and patterns of behavior. In the worst case, the consequences of the conflict can also be disappointment, loss of faith in former ideals, which gives rise to deviant behavior and, as an extreme case, suicide;
- a person's negative assessment of his partners in joint activities, disappointment in his colleagues and recent friends;
- a person's reaction to conflict through defense mechanisms that manifest themselves in various forms of bad behavior:
- indentation - silence, separation of the individual from the group;
- information that scares with criticism, scolding, demonstrating one's superiority over other members of the group;
- firm formalism - formal politeness, the establishment of strict norms and principles of behavior in a group, observation of others;
- turning everything into a joke;
- conversations on extraneous topics instead of a business discussion of problems;
- constant search for the guilty, self-flagellation or accusations of all the troubles of the members of the team.
These are the main consequences of the conflict, which are interconnected and are concrete and relative.
Conflict is a very capacious concept. It is studied from different positions and in various aspects by many sciences: philosophy, sociology, psychology, jurisprudence, history and political science. The conflict underlies any contradiction, and it, in turn, is an incentive for any changes, sometimes constructive and progressive, and sometimes destructive, destructive. Most often, the concept of conflict is considered in the relationship of people and social groups, in psychology, conflict is also deep intrapersonal experiences and contradictions that give rise to life crises, depression, but this does not always lead to negative consequences. Very often, an internal conflict is a stimulus for development, opening up new life horizons and hidden potential hidden by a person.
The study of conflict is based on a combination of various concepts that make up this complex phenomenon: its dynamics, methods of conflict management and its typology. Moreover, these concepts can be correlated with various conflicts - social, interpersonal and intrapersonal, but in each of them they will have their own characteristics.
Dynamics of the conflict
Conflict is a dynamic, evolving process. The following main stages of its development are distinguished: the pre-conflict situation is an open conflict and the stage of its completion.
The latent stage preceding the open conflict is the formation of all its structural elements. First of all, the cause of the confrontation arises and its participants appear, and then there is an awareness by the parties of the confrontation of the current situation as a conflict. The dynamics of the conflict may develop further if, at the first stage, the main contradictions are not resolved peacefully and amicably.
The second stage is the transition of its participants to conflict behavior, the features of which are defined in psychology and conflictology. The dynamics of the conflict at this stage is characterized by an increase in the number of participants in the confrontation, disorganizational actions of the parties directed against each other, a transition from solving problems by business methods to personal accusations, and very often with a sharply negative emotional attitude, as well as a high degree of tension, leading to stress.
The dynamics of the development of the conflict at this stage is denoted by the term escalation, i.e. an increase in destructive, destructive actions of the conflicting parties, often leading to irreversible catastrophic consequences.
Finally, the dynamics of the conflict in the last stage is the search for ways to resolve it. Various methods, techniques and strategies for managing conflict are used here, conflict specialists and psychologists are involved. As a rule, resolution is carried out in two ways: the transformation of the reasons underlying it, and the restructuring of the subjective ideal perception of this situation in the minds of its participants.
It should be noted that conflict resolution strategies do not always lead to complete success. Quite often, everything ends with a partial result, when the visible forms of the emergence and course of a conflict situation are eliminated, and the emotional stress of the participants is not removed, which can cause new confrontations.
The complete resolution of the conflict situation occurs only when all its external contradictions and causes are removed, as well as all internal, emotional and psychological factors are eliminated.
The most difficult task at the last resolution stage of the conflict is the transformation, the change in the subjective ideal perception of the causes of the confrontation in the minds of the participants in each of the parties. If this goal is achieved by the mediators or the leadership of the organization, then the resolution of the conflict will be successful.
The conflict, interpersonal or intrapersonal, proceeds according to the standard scheme and has the same stages and methods of resolution, only, of course, with its own specifics.
Summarizing the work of the American scientist E. Mayo and other representatives of the functionalist (integration) direction, the following negative consequences of conflicts are distinguished:
- · destabilization of the organization, generation of chaotic and anarchic processes, decrease in controllability;
- Distraction of personnel from the real problems and goals of the organization, shifting these goals towards group selfish interests and ensuring victory over the enemy;
- An increase in emotionality and irrationality, hostility and aggressive behavior, distrust of the “main” and others;
- · weakening the possibilities of communication and cooperation with opponents in the future;
- · distraction of the parties to the conflict from solving the problems of the organization and the fruitless waste of their strength, energy, resources and time to fight each other.
Positive Consequences of the Conflict
In contrast to the functionalists, supporters of the sociological approach to conflicts (they are represented, for example, by the largest modern German conflictologist R. Dahrendorf) consider them as an integral source of social change and development. Under certain conditions, conflicts have functional, positive results:
- Initiating change, renewal, progress. The new is always the negation of the old, and since certain people always stand behind both new and old ideas and forms of organization, any renewal is impossible without conflicts;
- · articulation, a clear formulation and expression of interests, publicizing the real positions of the parties on a particular issue. This allows you to see the urgent problem more clearly and creates fertile ground for its solution;
- the formation of a sense of ownership among the participants in the conflict in the decision taken as a result of it, which facilitates its implementation;
- · Encouraging participants to interact and develop new, more effective solutions that eliminate the problem itself or its significance. This usually happens when the parties show understanding of each other's interests and realize the disadvantage of deepening the conflict;
- · the development of the ability of the parties to the conflict to cooperate in the future, when the conflict is resolved as a result of the interaction of both parties. Competitive fair competition enhances the mutual respect and trust necessary for further cooperation;
- defusing psychological tension in relations between people, a clearer clarification of their interests and positions;
- development of skills and abilities among the participants in the conflict regarding the painless solution of problems that arise in the future;
- Strengthening group cohesion in the event of intergroup conflicts. As is known from social psychology, the easiest way to unite a group and muffle or even overcome internal discord is to find a common enemy, a competitor. An external conflict is able to extinguish internal strife, the causes of which often disappear over time, lose their relevance, sharpness and are forgotten.
The real ratio of functional and dysfunctional consequences of the conflict directly depends on their nature, their causes, as well as on the skillful management of conflicts.
conflict behavior problematic
