Among basic concepts, which 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 collision different parts society due to the emerging contradictions. Moreover, it cannot be said that social conflict always leads to negative consequences, because it is not so. Constructive overcoming and solution of such contradictions allows the parties to get closer, to learn something, and the society to develop. But only if both sides are inclined towards a rational approach and looking for a way out.
The concept of conflict in society interested researchers long before sociology appeared as such. The English philosopher Hobbes was rather negative about this. He pointed out that some conflicts will constantly occur within society, natural state, in his opinion, was "a war of all against all."
But not everyone agreed with him. Collision issues in the late 19th century were actively explored by Spencer. He considered that we are talking about a natural process, as a result of which the best are, as a rule. Considering social conflicts and ways to resolve them, the thinker has highlighted the personality.
In contrast, Karl Marx believed that the choice of the group was more important for society as a whole. The scientist suggested that the class struggle is inevitable. His functions of social conflict are closely related to the redistribution of benefits. However, critics of this researcher's theory 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 importance of an individual person turned out to be belittled.
If we talk about the basic concepts related to modern conflict management (which has even taken 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 first is built around the inevitability of social inequality, which generates tension. Which leads to collisions. In addition, Coser points out that a struggle can begin when there is a contradiction between the idea of \u200b\u200bwhat should be and reality. Finally, the scientist does not ignore 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 contradict Dahrendorf's approach. But he puts the accents in a different way. 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 to get it than there are real opportunities. Which gives rise to endless changes and collisions.
Boulding also has his own concept of conflict. The scientist assumes that it is possible to isolate something in common that exists in any opposition. In his opinion, the structure of social conflict is submitted to analysis and study, which opens up wide opportunities for controlling the situation and managing the process.
Conflict cannot be completely separated from public life, Boulding said. And by it he understands a situation when both sides (or a greater number of participants) take positions that cannot be fully combined 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, behavior of the participant.
Boulding suggests that the consequences of social conflict in one case or another can be predicted with a certain degree of probability. Moreover, in his opinion, errors are often associated with a lack of information about what was the reason, what means are actually used by the parties, etc., and not with the impossibility of making 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
In the present, social scientists are actively studying social conflict and ways to resolve it, because today it is one of the most pressing and pressing problems. So, the premises of social conflict always concern something deeper than it might seem at first glance. A cursory study of the situation sometimes gives the impression that people are simply hurt by religious feelings (which also often matters), but upon closer examination it turns out that there are enough reasons.
Discontent often builds up over the years. For example, social conflicts in modern Russia - this is the problem of the collision of different ethnic groups, the economic disadvantage of some regions of the country in comparison with others, strong stratification within society, lack of real prospects, etc. At times it seems that the reaction is simply disproportionate, that it is impossible to predict the consequences of social conflicts in those or in other cases.
But in reality, the basis for a serious reaction is a long accumulated tension. It can be compared to an avalanche where snow constantly collected. 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 conflict are almost always studied in relation to how things actually happen. The objective circumstances of conflicts in society that have led to confrontation are considered. Moreover, not only from a sociological point of view, but also from an economic, political, psychological (interpersonal, confrontation between an individual and society), etc.
In fact, the task of the theorists is to find practical solutions to the problem. In general, such goals have always been relevant. But now ways of resolving social conflicts are of increasing importance. They are essential for 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. Dystopias are largely devoted to them. Finally, from the point of view of the social science study of the material, post-apocalyptic literature is of considerable interest. There are often social conflicts, the reasons 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 the 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, air emissions destroy the environment. Garbage and chemical pollution threaten rivers, soil.
Don't underestimate the danger either. nuclear war... 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 further. And what methods of resolving social conflicts it will use, destructive or constructive. A lot depends on this, and it's not just about loud words.
So let's get back to the classification. We can say that all types of social conflicts are divided into constructive and destructive. The first is a focus on resolution, on overcoming. Here the positive functions of social conflicts are realized, when society teaches us to overcome contradictions, build a dialogue, and also understands why this is generally necessary in specific situations.
We can say that as a result, people acquire experience that they can pass on to subsequent generations. For example, once mankind was faced with the legalization of slavery and came to the conclusion that this is 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 eliminating it. At the same time, formally, to indicate their position, they can use completely different terminology for various reasons. The problem of studying the situation is often associated with the fact that real goals are often hidden, disguised as others.
However, the typology of social conflicts does not stop there only. There is another division. For example, short-term and protracted ones are considered in terms of duration. The latter, in most cases, have more serious causes and consequences, although this relationship is not always traced.
There is also a division by the total number of participants. Internal ones are distinguished into a separate group, that is, those that occur within the personality. Here the functions of social conflict are not implemented in any way, since we are not talking about society at all, it is rather a question 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 taken separately. Therefore, the importance of such problems should not be underestimated. Then go interpersonal conflicts, collisions between separate individuals. And the next level is already group.
From the point of view of focus, 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 resolution methods: peaceful and armed. The main task of the government is to prevent the transition of the former to the latter. At least in theory. However, in practice, states often themselves become instigators of such a transformation, that is, provocateurs of armed clashes.
In terms of volume, personal or household, group ones are considered, for example, one department against the second within the corporation, a branch against the head office, one class in a school against another, etc., regional, which develop in a single locality, local (also a locality, only more, say, the territory of one country). And finally, the biggest ones are global. A prime example the latter are world wars. As the volume increases, the degree of danger to humanity also increases.
Pay attention to the nature of the development: there are spontaneous conflicts and planned, provoked. With a large scale of events, some are often combined with others. Finally, according to the content of the problem, industrial, household, economic, political, etc. are considered. But in general, one confrontation rarely affects only one specific 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 essence of the conflict raises a lot of controversy. Here are the opinions of several contemporary Russian scientists.
A.G. Zdravomyslov. "It is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to opposing values \u200b\u200band norms, interests and needs."
E. M. Babosov. "Social conflict is the ultimate case of social contradictions, expressed in various forms of struggle between individuals and different social communities, aimed at achieving economic, social, political, spiritual interests and goals, neutralizing or eliminating an imaginary rival and preventing him from achieving his interests."
Yu. G. Zaprudsky. “Social conflict is an explicit or latent state of confrontation between objectively diverging interests, goals and development trends social actors... a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity ”.
What unites these opinions?
As a rule, one side possesses some material and non-material (first of all, power, prestige, authority, information, etc.) values, the other is either completely devoid of them or does not have enough. At the same time, it is not excluded that the predominance may be imaginary, existing only in the imagination of one of the parties. But if any of the partners feels oppressed in the possession of something from the above, then a conflict state arises.
We can say that social conflict is a special interaction of individuals, groups and associations in the collision of their incompatible views, positions and interests; confrontation of social groups over the diverse resources of life support.
In the literature, two points of view are expressed: one is about the harm of social conflict, the other is about its benefits. In fact, we are talking about the positive and negative functions of conflicts. Social conflicts can lead to both disintegrative and integrative consequences. The first of these consequences intensifies bitterness, destroys normal partnerships, and distracts people from solving urgent problems. The latter help to solve problems, find a way out of the current situation, strengthen the cohesion of people, allow them to more clearly understand their interests. It is almost impossible to avoid conflict situations, but it is quite possible to achieve that they are resolved in a civilized manner.
There are many different social conflicts in society. They differ in their scale, type, composition of participants, causes, goals and consequences. The problem of typology arises in all sciences involving a multitude of heterogeneous objects. The most simple and easily explainable typology is based on the allocation of spheres of manifestation of the conflict. According to this criterion, economic, political, interethnic, everyday, cultural and social (in the narrow sense) conflicts are distinguished. Let us clarify that the latter include conflicts arising from contradictions of interests in the sphere of labor, healthcare, social security, education; for all their independence, they are closely related to such types of conflicts as economic and political.
Changes in social relations in modern Russia are accompanied by an expansion of the sphere of manifestation of conflicts, since not only large social groups are involved in them, but also territories, both homogeneous in the national relation and inhabited by different ethnic groups. In turn, interethnic conflicts (you will learn about them later) give rise to territorial, confessional, migration and other problems. Most modern researchers believe that in the social relations of modern Russian society there are two types of latent conflicts that have not yet clearly manifested themselves. The first is the conflict between employees and the owners of the means of production. This is largely due to the fact that after half a century of social security and all the rights in the field of social policy and labor relations, which they were vested with in Soviet society, it is difficult to understand and accept their new status as a hired worker forced to work in a market. Another is the conflict between the poor majority of the country and the rich minority, accompanying the accelerated process of social stratification.
Many conditions influence the development of social conflict. These include the intentions of the parties to the conflict (to achieve a compromise or completely eliminate the opponent); attitude to the means of physical (including armed) violence; the level of trust between the parties (how willing they are to follow certain rules of interaction); the adequacy of the conflicting parties' assessments of the true state of affairs.
All social conflicts go through three stages: pre-conflict, directly conflict and post-conflict.
Let's consider a concrete example. At one enterprise, due to a real threat of bankruptcy, the staff had to be cut by a quarter. This prospect worried almost everyone: employees were afraid of layoffs, and management had to decide who to fire. When it was no longer possible to postpone the decision, the administration announced a list of those who were to be fired first. The candidates for dismissal were followed by legitimate demands to explain why they were being dismissed, applications began to come to the labor dispute committee, and some decided to go to court. The settlement of the conflict took several months, the company continued to work with a smaller number of employees. The pre-conflict stage is a period during which contradictions accumulate (in this case, caused by the need to reduce the staff). The directly conflict stage is a set of certain actions. It is characterized by a clash of opposing sides (administration - candidates for dismissal).
The most open form of expression of social conflicts can be all sorts of mass actions: the presentation of demands for power by disgruntled social groups; using public opinion in support of their claims or alternative programs; direct actions of social protest.
Forms of protest can be rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes, hunger strikes, etc. Organizers of social protest actions should be clearly aware of what specific tasks can be solved with the help of a particular action and what public support they can receive -read. Thus, a slogan that is sufficient for organizing a picketing can hardly be used to organize a campaign of civil disobedience. (What historical examples of similar actions do you know?)
To successfully resolve a social conflict, it is necessary to timely determine its true causes. The opposing sides should be interested in a joint search for ways to eliminate the causes that gave rise to their rivalry. At the post-conflict stage, measures are taken to finally eliminate the contradictions (in the example under consideration, the dismissal of employees, if possible, the removal of social and psychological tension in the relationship between the administration and the remaining employees, the search for optimal ways to avoid such a situation in the future).
The resolution of the conflict can be partial or complete. Full resolution means the end of the conflict, a radical change in the whole conflict situation... At the same time, a kind of psychological restructuring takes place: the "enemy image" is transformed into a "partner image", the attitude towards struggle is replaced by the attitude towards cooperation. The main disadvantage of a partial resolution of the conflict is that only its external form changes, but the reasons that gave rise to the confrontation remain.
Let's look at some of the most common conflict resolution methods.
The method of avoiding conflicts means leaving or threatening to leave, is to avoid encounters with the enemy. But avoiding conflict does not mean eliminating it, because its cause remains. The negotiation method assumes that the parties exchange views. This will help reduce the severity of the conflict, understand the arguments of the opponent, and objectively assess both the true balance of forces and the very possibility of reconciliation. Negotiations allow us to consider alternative situations, achieve mutual understanding, come to agreement, consensus, and open the way for cooperation. The method of using mediation is expressed in the following: the opposing parties resort to the service of intermediaries ( public organizations, individuals, etc.). What conditions are necessary for a successful conflict resolution? First of all, it is necessary to timely and accurately determine its causes; to reveal objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals. The parties to the conflict must free themselves from mistrust of each other and thereby become participants in the negotiations in order to publicly and convincingly defend their positions and deliberately create an atmosphere of public exchange of views. Without such a mutual interest of the parties in overcoming contradictions, mutual recognition of the interests of each of them, a joint search for ways to overcome the conflict is practically impossible. All participants in the negotiations must show a tendency towards consensus, that is, agreement.
Summarizing the works 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, the generation of chaotic and anarchic processes, reduced controllability;
- · Diverting personnel from the real problems and goals of the organization, shifting these goals towards group selfish interests and ensuring victory over the enemy;
- · The growth of emotionality and irrationality, hostility and aggressiveness of behavior, distrust of the "main thing" and others;
- · Weakening of opportunities for 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 forces, energy, resources and time to fight with 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) regard them as an integral source of social change and development. Under certain conditions, conflicts have functional, positive results:
- · Initiation of changes, updates, progress. The new is always a negation of the old, and since both new and old ideas and forms of organization always have certain people behind them, any renewal is impossible without conflicts;
- · Articulation, clear formulation and expression of interests, making public the real positions of the parties on a particular issue. This allows you to see more clearly the urgent problem and creates a fertile ground for its solution;
- · The formation of the participants in the conflict a sense of belonging to the decision made 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 disadvantages of deepening the conflict;
- · Development of the parties to the conflict the ability to cooperate in the future, when the conflict will be resolved as a result of the interaction of both parties. Honest competition that leads to agreement increases the mutual respect and trust necessary for further cooperation;
- · Relaxation of psychological tension in relations between people, a clearer clarification of their interests and positions;
- · The development of the participants in the conflict of skills and abilities relatively painless solution of problems arising in the future;
- · Strengthening of group cohesion in the event of intergroup conflicts. As is known from social psychology, the easiest way to rally 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, acuteness and are forgotten.
The actual ratio of functional and dysfunctional consequences of a conflict directly depends on their nature, the causes that give rise to them, as well as on the skillful management of conflicts.
conflict behavior problem