Dangerous social conflicts. What is social conflict? What are the consequences of social conflicts?

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Social conflicts play a big role in the lives of people, nations and countries. This problem became the subject of analysis by ancient historians and thinkers. Every major conflict did not go unnoticed.

Contradictions permeate all spheres of life: socio-economic, political, spiritual. The simultaneous aggravation of all these types of contradictions creates a crisis in society. The crisis of society is the result of profound changes in the content and forms of life of various social groups, a serious violation of the control mechanism in the economy, politics, and culture. A manifestation of the crisis of society is the sharp rise social tension. Social tension often develops into conflict.

I believe that the relevance of the topic is evidenced by the fact that the clash of points of view, opinions, positions is a very common phenomenon of life. Therefore, in order to develop the right line of behavior in various conflict situations, you need to know what conflict is and how people come to agreement.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the study consisted of three groups of sources. The first category includes author's publications on the issues under study. The second category includes educational literature (textbooks and teaching aids, reference and encyclopedic literature). The third includes science articles in periodical journals on the issues under study.

Object of work- social conflicts.

Subject of study- causes of occurrence social conflicts.

Goal of the work- identify the causes of social conflicts.

The set goal determines research objectives:

1. Define the concept of social conflict.

2. Consider examples of social conflicts in modern society.

3. Identify the causes, stages and consequences of social conflicts.

1. Existsocial conflict

1.1 Concept andsocial conflict concepts

Before moving on to the chosen topic, it is necessary to define the concept of “conflict”. The most general definition conflict (from lat. conflictus - collision) - a clash of contradictory or incompatible forces. More full definition-- a contradiction that arises between people or teams in the process of their joint work activity due to misunderstanding or opposing interests, lack of agreement between two or more parties. conflict social society

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 phenomenon 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.

The conflict has been the subject of study by many historians, scholars and researchers. However, until the end of the 18th century. thinkers reduced it to the problem of domination and subordination, resolved through the regulatory activities of the state.

Conflict as a social phenomenon was first formulated in Adam Smith's Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). It suggested that the conflict was based on the division of society into classes and economic rivalry. This division is driving force development of society, performing useful functions.

The problem of social conflict was also substantiated in the works of K. Marx, F. Engels, V.I. Lenin. This fact served as the basis for Western scientists to classify the Marxist concept as a “conflict theory.” It should be noted that in Marxism the problem of conflict received a simplified interpretation.

Yours theoretical basis The problem of the conflict received attention at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. The English sociologist Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), considering social conflict from the standpoint of social Darwinism, considered it an inevitable phenomenon in the history of society and a stimulus for social development. The same position was held by the German sociologist (founder of understanding sociology and the theory of social action) Max Weber (1864-1920). His compatriot Georg Simmel (1858-1918) first introduced the term “sociology of conflict”. Based on his theory of “social conflicts,” the so-called “formal school” later arose, whose representatives attach contradictions and conflicts as stimulants of progress.

In the modern theory of conflict, there are many points of view about the nature of this phenomenon, and the practical recommendations of various authors are also varied.

One of them, conventionally called socio-biological, argues that conflict is inherent in humans, like all animals. Researchers in this direction rely on the theory of natural selection discovered by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and from it derive the idea of ​​natural aggressiveness of humans in general. The main content of his theory biological evolution set out in the book “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life,” published in 1859. main idea work: the development of living nature is carried out in conditions of constant struggle for survival, which constitutes a natural mechanism for selecting the most adapted species. Following Charles Darwin, “social Darwinism” appeared as a trend, whose supporters began to explain the evolution of social life by the biological laws of natural selection. Also based on the principle of the struggle for existence, but purely sociological concept developed by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903). He believed that the state of confrontation is universal and ensures balance not only within society, but also between society and the surrounding nature. The law of conflict was considered by G. Spencer as a universal law, but its manifestations should be observed until, in the process of development of society, complete balance is achieved between peoples and races.

A similar point of view was held by the American social Darwinist William Sumner (1840-1910), who argued that the weak, the worst representatives of the human race perish in the struggle for existence. The winners (successful American industrialists, bankers) are the true creators of human values, the best people.

Currently, the ideas of Social Darwinism have few followers, but some of the ideas of this theory are useful in resolving current conflicts.

The second theory is socio-psychological and explains the conflict through the theory of tension. Its widest distribution dates back to the Second World War. It is based on the statement: the features of modern industrial society inevitably entail a state of tension for most people when the balance between the individual and the environment is disturbed. This is associated with overcrowding, crowding, impersonality and instability of relationships.

Explaining conflict using tension theory is somewhat difficult because it cannot determine at what level of tension conflict should occur. Indicators of tension manifested in a specific situation are individual states of individuals and can hardly be used to predict collective outbursts of aggression.

The third point of view, traditionally called the class or violence theory, is the assertion that social conflict is reproduced by societies with a certain social structure. Among the authors of such views on the conflict are Karl Marx (1818-1883), Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), V.I. Lenin (1870-1924), Mao Zedong (1893-1976); German-American sociologist, representative of neo-Marxism Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), American left-wing sociologist Charles Wright Mills (1916-1962). The Italian school was formed not without the influence of Marxism political sociology, who created the theory of elites, the classics of which were Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923), Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941), Robert Michels (1876-1936).

K. Marx believed that conflict in society occurs due to the division of people into different classes in accordance with their position in economic system. The main classes of society, according to Marx, are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, between which there is constant hostility, since the goal of the bourgeoisie is the domination and exploitation of wage workers. Antagonistic conflicts lead to revolutions, which are the engines of history. The conflict in this case is seen as an inevitable clash that must be properly organized in the name of accelerating the development of society, and violence is justified by the tasks of future creation.

The fourth point of view on conflict belongs to functionalists: conflict is seen as a distortion, a dysfunctional process in social systems.

The leading representative of this trend, the American sociologist Talcott Parsons (1902-1979), interpreted the conflict as a social anomaly, a “disaster” that must be overcome. He formulated a number of social prerequisites that ensure the stability of society:

1. satisfaction of the basic biological and psychological needs of the majority of society;

2. effective activities of social control bodies that educate citizens in accordance with the norms accepted in a given society;

3. coincidence of individual motivations with social attitudes.

According to functionalists, in a well-functioning social system, consensus should prevail, and conflict should not find soil in society.

Later, modern, most popular concepts of social conflict appeared, conventionally called dialectical: conflict is functional for social systems. The most famous among them are the concepts of Lewis Coser, Ralph Dahrendorf and Kenneth Boulding.

Conflict is considered by researchers as an inevitable part of the integrity of people's social relationships, not as a pathology and weakness of behavior. In this sense, conflict is not the opposite of order. Peace is not the absence of conflict, it consists of creative communication with it, and peace is the working process of conflict resolution.

In 1956, the American sociologist Lewis Coser published the book “The Functions of Social Conflict,” where he outlined his concept, called the “concept of positive functional conflict.” He built it in addition to the classical theories of structural functionalism, in which conflicts are moved beyond the boundaries of sociological analysis. If structural functionalism saw conflicts as an anomaly, a disaster, then L. Coser argued that the more different conflicts intersect in a society, the more difficult it is to create a united front dividing members of society into two camps that are strictly opposed to each other. The more conflicts independent from each other, the better for the unity of society.

Europe also saw a renewed interest in the conflict in the 1960s. In 1965, the German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf published the work " Class structure and class conflict,” and two years later an essay entitled “Beyond Utopia.” His concept of a “conflict model of society” is built on a dystopian, real vision of the world - a world of power, conflict and dynamics. If Coser proved the positive role of conflicts in achieving social unity, then Dahrendorf believed that in every society there is disintegration and conflict, this is a permanent state of the social organism:

“All social life is conflict because it is changeable. There is no permanence in human societies because there is nothing stable in them. Therefore, it is in conflict that the creative core of all communities and the possibility of freedom are found, as well as the challenge to rational mastery and control over social problems.”

Contemporary American sociologist and economist Kenneth Boulding, author of the “general theory of conflict” in the work “Conflict and Defense. General theory"(1963) tried to present a holistic scientific theory conflict, covering all manifestations of living and inanimate nature, individual life and public.

He applies conflict to the analysis of both physical, biological, and social phenomena, arguing that even inanimate nature is full of conflict, waging "an endless war of sea against land and some forms of the earth's rocks against other forms."

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. The situation is more complicated with national-ethnic conflicts. In different regions former USSR these conflicts had different mechanisms of origin. For the Baltics special meaning there was the problem of state sovereignty, for the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict the territorial status issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, for Tajikistan - inter-clan relations.

People's behavior in conflict can be different. It can be expressed in the forms of avoidance, competition, accommodation, compromise or cooperation.

These strategies differ in the degree to which the interests of each party are satisfied.

1. Avoidance - a person ignores a conflict situation, pretends that it does not exist, and “walks away.” This strategy is optimal when the situation is not particularly significant and is not worth wasting your energy and resources. Sometimes it’s better not to get involved, since the chances of improving anything are close to zero.

2. Rivalry - satisfying only one’s own interests, without taking into account the interests of the other party. This strategy is often quite logical, for example, in sports competitions, when entering a university through a competition, or when finding a job. But sometimes the confrontation takes on a destructive character - “victory at any cost”, dishonest and cruel methods are used.

3. Adaptation - compliance with the opponent, up to complete capitulation to his demands. Concessions may demonstrate goodwill, ease tensions in relations, even turn the situation from confrontation to cooperation. This strategy saves resources and preserves relationships. But sometimes a concession is perceived as a sign of weakness, which can lead to an escalation of the conflict. We can be deceived by expecting reciprocal concessions from our opponent.

4. Compromise - mutual concessions of the parties. The ideal compromise is to satisfy the interests of each party by half. But often one side makes greater concessions than the other, which can lead to even greater aggravation of relations in the future. Often a compromise is a temporary solution, since neither party has fully satisfied its interests.

5. Cooperation - satisfying the interests of both parties. Cooperation requires a transition from defending one's positions to a deeper level at which compatibility and common interests are discovered. With this strategy, conflict is resolved well and partnerships are maintained during and after the conflict. Cooperation requires the intellectual and emotional efforts of the parties, as well as time and resources.

It should be noted that none of the strategies can be clearly “good” or “bad”. Each of them may be optimal in a specific situation.

1.2 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 brightest forms of its manifestation is in modern Russia is a 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.

Socio-economic conflicts play a major role in modern life in Russia, that is, conflicts over means of life support, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the price level for various goods, regarding 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 realized in the form of presenting demands to the authorities on the part of dissatisfied social groups, in the mobilization public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest. Mass protest is an active form 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 rallies, demonstrations, pickets, civil disobedience campaigns, strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes and is effective means solutions to 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.

2. Characterteristics of social conflicts

Despite 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.

2.1 Causes of social conflictwho in

Determining the 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 it real reason, which allows for social control behind the behavior of social groups at the pre-conflict stage.

It is advisable to begin the analysis of the causes of social conflict with their typology.

The following types of reasons can be distinguished.

1. The presence of opposite orientations. Each individual and social group has a certain set of value orientations regarding the most significant parties social life. They are all different and usually opposite. At the moment of striving to satisfy needs, in the presence of blocked goals, which several individuals or groups are trying to achieve, opposite value orientations come into contact and can cause conflict.

2. Ideological reasons. Conflicts arising from ideological differences are a special case of a conflict of opposing orientations. The difference between them is that the ideological cause of the conflict lies in a different attitude towards the system of ideas that justify and legitimize relations of subordination, dominance and in the fundamental worldviews of various groups society. In this case, elements of faith, religious, socio-political aspirations become a catalyst for contradictions.

3. The causes of conflicts are various forms of economic and social inequality. This type of reason is associated with significant difference in the distribution of values ​​(income, knowledge, information, cultural elements, etc.) between individuals and groups. Inequality in the distribution of values ​​exists everywhere, but conflict arises only with such a magnitude of inequality that one of the social groups regards it as very significant, and only if such significant inequality leads to a blockade of important social needs in one of the social groups. The social tension that arises in this case can cause social conflict. It is caused by the emergence of additional needs among people, for example, the need to have the same amount of values.

4. The causes of conflicts lie in the relationships between elements of the social structure. They arise as a result of the different places occupied by structural elements in a society, organization or ordered social group. The conflict for this reason may be associated, firstly, with for various purposes, pursued by individual elements. Secondly, the conflict for this reason is associated with the desire for one thing or another. structural element take more high place in a hierarchical structure.

Any of the listed reasons can serve as an impetus, the first stage of a conflict, only in the presence of certain external conditions. In addition to the existence of a cause of conflict, certain conditions must exist around it that serve as a breeding ground for conflict. Therefore, it is impossible to consider and evaluate the cause of the conflict without taking into account the conditions that to varying degrees influence the state of relations of individuals and groups that fall within the scope of these conditions.

2.2 Acuteness and duration

Speaking about an acute social conflict, we first of all mean a conflict with a high intensity of social clashes, as a result of which, in a short period of time, a large number of psychological and material resources. An acute conflict is characterized mainly by open clashes, which occur so often that they merge into a single whole. The severity of the conflict depends to the greatest extent on the socio-psychological characteristics of the warring parties, as well as on the situation requiring immediate action. An acute conflict is much shorter-lived than a conflict with less violent clashes and long breaks between them. However, an acute conflict is certainly more destructive; it causes significant damage to the enemy’s resources, their prestige, status and psychological balance.

The duration of the conflict is of great importance for the warring parties. First of all, the magnitude and persistence of changes in groups and systems, resulting from the expenditure of resources in conflict encounters, depends on it. In addition, in long-term conflicts, the expenditure of emotional energy increases and the likelihood of a new conflict arising due to the imbalance of social systems and the lack of balance in them increases.

2.3 Stages of social conflicts

Any social conflict has a rather complex internal structure. It is advisable to analyze the content and characteristics of the course of a social conflict in four main stages:

1) pre-conflict stage;

2) the conflict itself;

3) stage of conflict resolution;

4) post-conflict stage.

Let's look at all the stages in more detail.

1. Pre-conflict stage.

No social conflict arises instantly. Emotional stress, irritation and anger usually accumulate over some time, so the pre-conflict stage sometimes drags on. At this stage we can talk about the hidden (latent) phase of conflict development. Representatives of a group of domestic conflictologists, A. Zaitsev, A. Dmitriev, V. Kudryavtsev, G. Kudryavtsev, V. Shalenko, consider it necessary to characterize this stage with the concept of “social tension”. Social tension is a special socio-psychological state of social consciousness and behavior of individuals, social groups and society as a whole, a specific situation of perception and assessment of events, characterized by increased emotional arousal, disruption of mechanisms social regulation and control.

Each form of social conflict may have its own specific indicators of social tension. Social tension arises when the conflict has not yet taken shape, when there are no clearly identified parties to the conflict.

A characteristic feature of each conflict is the presence of an object, the possession of which (or the achievement of which) is associated with the frustration of the needs of the two subjects drawn into the conflict. This object must be fundamentally indivisible or appear so in the eyes of rivals. An indivisible object is the cause of conflict. The presence and size of such an object must be at least partially understood by its participants or warring parties. If this does not happen, then it is difficult for opponents to carry out aggressive action, and conflict, as a rule, does not occur.

The pre-conflict stage is the period during which the conflicting parties evaluate their resources before deciding to conflicting actions or retreat. Such resources include material assets with which you can influence an opponent, information, power, connections, prestige, etc. At the same time, the consolidation of the forces of the warring parties takes place, the search for supporters and the formation of groups participating in the conflict.

The pre-conflict stage is also characteristic of the formation of a strategy or even several strategies by each of the conflicting parties. Moreover, the one that best suits the situation is used. Strategy is understood as the vision of the situation by the parties to the conflict, the formation of a goal in relation to the opposing side and, finally, the choice of a method of influencing the enemy. At making the right choice strategies and methods of action can prevent emerging conflicts.

2. Direct conflict.

This stage is characterized primarily by the presence of an incident, i.e. social actions aimed at changing the behavior of rivals. This is an active, active part of the conflict. Thus, the whole conflict consists of conflict situation, formed at the pre-conflict stage and incident.

Conflict behavior characterizes the second, main stage of conflict development. Conflict behavior is an action aimed at directly or indirectly blocking the opposing party from achieving its goals, intentions, and interests.

The actions that constitute an incident are divided into two groups, each of which is based on specific human behavior. The first group includes the actions of rivals in a conflict that are open in nature. This could be verbal debate, economic sanctions, physical pressure, political struggle, sports competition, etc. Such actions, as a rule, are easily identified as conflicting, aggressive, hostile. The second group includes the hidden actions of rivals in a conflict. A veiled, but nevertheless extremely active struggle aims to impose on the opponent an unfavorable course of action and at the same time reveal his strategy. The main course of action in the hidden internal conflict is reflexive management - a method of management in which the reasons for making a decision are transferred by one of the actors to another. This means that one of the rivals is trying to transmit and introduce into the consciousness of the other such information that forces this other to act in a way that is beneficial to the one who transmitted this information.

A very characteristic moment at the stage of the conflict itself is the presence critical point, upon reaching which conflict interactions between the warring parties reach maximum severity and strength. One of the criteria for approaching a critical point can be considered integration, the unidirectionality of the efforts of each of the conflicting parties, and the cohesion of the groups participating in the conflict.

It is important to know the time it takes to pass the critical point, since after this the situation is most manageable. At the same time, intervention at a critical moment, at the peak of a conflict, is useless or even dangerous. Reaching a critical point and its passage largely depend on circumstances external to the participants in the conflict, as well as on resources and values ​​brought into the conflict from the outside.

Conflict resolution and its consequences.

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 may take different shapes. 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.

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.

1) 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) participants must 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.

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 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:

1) competing groups increase;

2) it is a conflict over principles, rights or personalities;

3) the resolution of the conflict forms a significant precedent;

4) the conflict is perceived as win-lose;

5) the views and interests of the parties are not connected;

6) the conflict is poorly defined, non-specific, vague.

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. The conflict may turn out to be the only way out from a tense situation.

Conclusion

Social conflicts are increasingly becoming the norm social relations. Conflicts in the twentieth century became the main cause of death of a huge mass of people. Russia is the undisputed leader not only in human losses in conflicts, but also in their other consequences: material and moral. This fact has confronted Russia with a choice: either the government and the people will be able to at least keep social conflicts within a regulated framework, or the conflicts will be controlled by the people and the government. Today, every citizen needs knowledge about prevention methods and constructive permission conflicts at various levels.

This knowledge is difficult to obtain relying only on common sense; it cannot be completely borrowed from foreign specialists, since domestic conflicts are very specific. To solve this problem, it is important to systematize existing knowledge about conflicts and outline prospects for priority conflictological research.

Therefore, conflicts in our lives are inevitable. We must learn to manage them and strive to resolve them with the least cost to society.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

The study of the essence and nature of conflict - a collision of opposing goals, positions, opinions and views of opponents or subjects of interaction. Causes, functions and subjects of social conflicts. Features of the conflict of needs, interests, values.

abstract, added 12/24/2010


Social conflicts in modern Russian society. The formation of new social groups and growing inequality are the causes of conflicts in society. Characteristics of social conflicts, causes, consequences, structure. Ways to resolve them.

course work, added 01/22/2011


Basic aspects of social conflicts. Classification of conflicts. Characteristics of conflicts. Causes of conflicts. Consequences of social conflict. Conflict resolution. Social conflicts in modern society.

abstract, added 09/30/2006


Characteristics of social conflicts, stages of their occurrence and causes. The nature of social conflicts in modern conditions, socio-political, economic, interethnic, interethnic conflicts. Consequences and resolution of social conflict.

test, added 11/10/2010


Origin of conflicts. Causes, functions and subjects of social conflicts. Driving forces and motivation of conflict. Analytical framework for conflict research. Conflict of needs. Conflict of interest. Value conflict. Dynamics of social conflicts.

course work, added 10/24/2002


The place of social conflict in modern Russian society against the background of its radical reformation. Characteristics of theories of social conflicts. Causes and consequences, structure and stages of social conflicts, classical and universal methods their permissions.

abstract, added 04/19/2011


Conflict theories. Functions and consequences of social conflicts, their classification. Causes of social conflicts: personal and social. Personal motives for conflict. Object of aggression. Conflict between individuals and small groups.

abstract, added 02/22/2007


The concept of social conflict. The essence of conflict and its functions. Features of social conflicts in modern Russian society. Main characteristics of social conflicts. Mechanisms for resolving social conflict. Warning technology.

course work, added 12/15/2003


Types of social conflicts. Status and role of their participants. Types of possible positions of conflict participants. Ranks of the opposing sides. The problem of systemic information research of conflicts. Stereotypes of people's behavior, influence of a third party.

presentation, added 10/19/2013


The essence of social conflict. Features of types of conflicts, their forms and dynamics. Conflicts in various social structures. Specifics of ways to resolve social conflicts. Distinctive features social conflicts by Alain Touraine and M. Castells.

Conflict is a dispute, a clash between two people or social groups over the possession of something that is equally highly valued by both parties.

The participants in the conflict are calledsubjects of the conflict :

– witnesses – these are people observing the conflict from the outside;

– instigators – these are those who push other participants into conflict;

– accomplices – these are people who contribute to the development of the conflict with advice, technical assistance or other means;

– intermediaries – these are people who, through their actions, try to prevent, stop or resolve a conflict.

Not all parties to a conflict are necessarily in direct opposition to each other.

The issue or benefit that sparks the conflict, - This subject of conflict . The reason and reason for the conflict differ from its subject.

Cause of the conflict - objective circumstances that predetermine the emergence of conflict. The cause of the conflict is related to the needs of the conflicting parties.

Reason for conflict - a minor incident that contributes to conflict, but the conflict itself may not develop. The occasion can be either accidental or specially created.

For a correct and comprehensive understanding of the conflict, it is necessary to distinguish between it and contradiction. Contradiction – this is a fundamental incompatibility, disagreement of some important – political, economic, ethnic – interests.

Contradiction necessarily underlies any conflict and manifests itself in social tension - a feeling of dissatisfaction with the state of affairs and a readiness to change it. But a contradiction may remain a contradiction without reaching an open collision, that is, a conflict. Thus, contradiction expresses the hidden and static aspect of the phenomenon, and conflict is open and dynamic.

Social conflict – this is the highest stage of development of contradictions in the system of relations between people, social groups, social institutions, and society as a whole, which is characterized by the strengthening of opposing tendencies and interests of social communities and individuals.

In the history of sociology, there are various concepts that reveal the essence of social conflicts.

At the present stage of development of sociological science, there are two main paradigms in terms of the role of conflict in society. Scientists determine the following functions of social conflicts.

Conflicts arise from various reasons: external and internal, universal and individual, material and ideal, objective and subjective etc. The cause of the conflict is related to needs conflicting parties. The following causes of social conflicts can be identified:

– social heterogeneity of society, the presence of opposing orientations;

– differences in levels of income, power, culture, social prestige, access to education, information;

– religious differences;

– human behavior, his socio-psychological traits (temperament, intelligence, general culture, etc.).

Social conflict goes through three main stages:

1. Pre-conflict - conflict situation. The parties are aware of the existing emotional tension, strive to overcome it, understand the causes of the conflict, and evaluate their capabilities; choosing a method of influencing the enemy.

2. The conflict itself – distrust and lack of respect for the enemy; consent is impossible. The presence of an incident (or reason), i.e., social actions aimed at changing the behavior of rivals. Their overt and hidden actions.

3. Conflict resolution – completion of the incident, elimination of the causes of the conflict.

Types of social conflicts

By duration - long-term; short-term; one-time; protracted; repetitive.

By volume – global; national; local; regional; group; personal.

According to the source of occurrence - objective; subjective; false.

By means used - violent; non-violent.

According to the form - internal; external.

By influence on the course of development of society - progressive; regressive.

By the nature of development - deliberate; spontaneous.

In areas of public life - economic (production); political; ethnic; family and household.

By type of relationship - intra- and intersystem (individual-psychological) levels; intra- and intergroup (socio-psychological) levels; intranational and international (social) levels.

Experts identify the following ways to resolve social conflicts:

– compromise (lat. compromissum) – solving the problem through mutual concessions of the parties;

– negotiation – a peaceful conversation between both parties to resolve the problem;

– mediation – the use of a third party in solving the problem in absentia;

– arbitration (French arbitrage – arbitration court) – appealing to a government authority vested with special powers for help in solving the problem;

– use of force, authority, law - unilateral use of power or force by the party that considers itself stronger.

Possible ways out of conflicts are as follows:

– Restoration– return of society to the pre-conflict state: to previous forms of social life, social institutions that continue to exist taking into account the new situation.

– Non-interference (waiting) – the hope that “everything will work itself out on its own.” This is the path of delaying and delaying reforms, marking time. IN open society, if the confrontation does not threaten general collapse, this path, under certain conditions, can be fruitful.

– Update– an active way out of the conflict by discarding, abandoning the old, and developing the new.

Each social conflict is specific; it occurs in certain social conditions. Consequently, the ways out of it must correspond to the current specific situation.

The general strategy for exiting social conflict should be to combine these three paths. Renewal is necessary, this is the key to resolving any conflict, but it is impossible to update everything due to the inertia of human consciousness. A natural process of rollback (reaction) to some old values ​​and forms should be provided for.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which successful resolution of social conflicts is possible:

– timely and accurate diagnosis causes of the conflict, i.e. identifying existing contradictions, interests, goals.

– mutual interest in overcoming contradictions based on recognition of interests opposite side. This can be achieved based on a goal that is meaningful to both parties.

– joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue between the parties, negotiations through an intermediary, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

During negotiations, priority should be given to discussing substantive issues.

The conflicting parties should strive to relieve psychological and social tension.

Participants in a conflict must demonstrate mutual respect for each other.

All conflicting parties must show a tendency to compromise.

Thus, conflict is the most important aspect of interaction between people in society, a kind of cell of social existence. This is a form of relationship between subjects of emotional action, the motivation of which is determined by opposing values ​​and norms, interests and needs.

Sample assignment

B2. Below is a list of terms. All of them, with the exception of one, are associated with the concept of “social conflict”. Compromise; negotiation; arbitration; rehabilitation; witnesses.

Find and indicate a term that is not related to the concept of “social conflict”.

Answer: Rehabilitation.

Typology of conflicts

Factors of interethnic regional conflicts

Conditions and factors of social conflict

Conditions and factors of conflicts

Sources of conflicts

Causes of social conflict

Causes and sources of social conflict

Determinants and typology of social conflicts

Issues for discussion

1. What is conflict and what is its structure?

2. Which elements of the conflict structure are objective and which are subjective?

3. What are the main approaches to understanding the dynamics of conflict?

4. What is the essence of the latent period in the dynamics of the conflict?

5. Prove that conflict is a multidimensional dynamic phenomenon.

6. Graphically depict the structure of the conflict, the dynamics of the conflict.

In general philosophical terms, the concept "cause" means a phenomenon whose action causes or produces some other phenomenon, which is called a consequence. In society, as in nature, there is infinite set cause-and-effect relationships and dependencies. And conflicts here are no exception; they can also be generated by a variety of reasons: external and internal, universal and individual, material and ideal, objective and subjective, etc.

Causes of the conflict- these are problems, phenomena, events that precede the conflict and in certain situations that arise in the process of the activities of the subjects social interaction, call him.

It should also be noted that it is necessary to distinguish the cause of the conflict from its cause. The reason for the conflict serves as a phenomenon that contributes to its occurrence, but does not determine the emergence of a conflict with necessity. Unlike a reason, a reason arises by chance and can be created completely artificially, as they say, “from scratch.” The reason reflects the natural connection of things. Thus, the reason for a family conflict may be an under-salted (over-salted) dish, while the real reason may be the lack of love between spouses.

Among the huge variety of causes of conflicts, general and specific causes can be distinguished. General groups reasons:

1) socio-political and economic reasons related to the socio-political and economic situation in the country;

2) socio-demographic reasons, reflecting differences in people’s attitudes and motives due to their gender, age, ethnic groups, etc.;

3) socio-psychological reasons, reflecting socio-psychological phenomena in social groups: relationships, leadership, group motives, collective opinions, moods, etc.;

4) individual psychological reasons, reflecting individual psychological characteristics personality: abilities, temperament, character, motives, etc.

Among most common reasons social conflicts can be distinguished:

Different or completely opposite perceptions of people's goals, values, interests and behavior;

The unequal position of people in imperatively coordinated associations (some control, others obey);

Discord between people's expectations and actions;

Misunderstandings, logical errors and generally semantic difficulties in the communication process;

Lack and poor quality of information;

The imperfection of the human psyche, the discrepancy between reality and ideas about it.

Private reasons directly related to the specifics of a particular type of conflict. For example, dissatisfaction with the conditions of labor relations, violation of work ethics, non-compliance with labor laws, limited resources, differences in goals and means of achieving them, etc.

Let us dwell on the causes of conflicts determined by the labor process. Indeed, for many work collectives they are the leading source of conflict situations.

There are several ways or methods to determine the causes of conflict behavior. As an example, consider one of them - conflict mapping method. Its essence consists in a graphical display of the components of the conflict, in a consistent analysis of the behavior of the participants in the conflict interaction, in the formulation of the main problem, the needs and fears of the participants, and ways to eliminate the causes that led to the conflict.

The work consists of several stages.

At the first stage, the problem is described in general outline. If, for example, we are talking about inconsistency in work, about the fact that someone does not “pull the strap” along with everyone else, then the problem can be displayed as “load distribution.” If the conflict arises from a lack of trust between an individual and a group, then the problem can be expressed as “communication.” On at this stage It is important to determine the very nature of the conflict, and for now it does not matter that this does not fully reflect the essence of the problem. The problem should not be defined in the form of a binary choice of opposites “yes or no”; it is advisable to leave the possibility of finding new and original solutions.

At the second stage, the main participants in the conflict are identified. You can enter individuals or entire teams, departments, groups, or organizations into the list. To the extent that the people involved in a conflict have common needs in relation to a given conflict, they can be grouped together. A combination of group and personal categories is also allowed.

For example, if a conflict map is drawn up between two employees in an organization, then these employees can be included in the map, and the remaining specialists can be combined into one group, or the head of this department can also be identified separately.

The third stage involves listing the basic needs and concerns associated with them of all the main participants in the conflict interaction. It is necessary to find out the motives of behavior behind the participants’ positions on this issue. People's actions and their attitudes are determined by their desires, needs, and motives that need to be established.

The term “fear” means concern, anxiety of an individual when it is impossible to realize some of his needs. In this case, you should not discuss with the parties to the conflict how justified their fears and concerns are until they are included in the map. For example, one of the participants in the conflict had a concern about something that seemed unlikely when drawing up a map. At the same time, fear exists and it must be included in the map, its presence must be acknowledged. The advantage of the cartography method is that it is possible to speak out during the process of drawing up a map and reflect irrational fears on it. Fears may include the following: failure and humiliation, fear of making a mistake, financial ruin, the possibility of rejection, loss of control over the situation, loneliness, the possibility of being criticized or judged, job loss, low wages, fear of being bossed around that everything will have to start all over again. Using the concept of “fear,” it is possible to identify motives that are not publicly stated by the participants in the conflict. For example, some people find it easier to say that they do not tolerate disrespect than to admit that they need respect.

As a result of drawing up a map, the points of convergence of interests of the conflicting parties are clarified, the fears and concerns of each party are more clearly manifested, and possible ways out of the current situation are determined.

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 psychological states subject, in which the goal-setting and emotional components of social action are fused 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, they are more conflict-generating than northern peoples. Subjective causes of social conflicts can be a feeling of fear, love, indignation, hatred, pride, etc.

Beliefs represent the ideological and psychological state of the 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 (goodness, 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 functional, dynamic, organizational, psychological system regulation of the subject’s activity, but not 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 desire for satisfaction driven by need, representing a powerful conscious - psychological mechanism of regulation 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 nightmarish social conflict in Russia, which ended in 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 of wages, etc.), social (inequality between different social groups), political (collapse of the USSR, war in Chechnya, etc.), ideological (struggle liberalism and communism in post-Soviet Russia) processes beyond the limits of existing norms in society and threatening the 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
The objective causes of social conflicts are often cited as the inequality of opportunities of social actors in everyday life, economic, political, national, educational, religious spheres. 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 a 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 discovered: achieving social equality in political, social, economic spheres and led the USSR to totalitarianism, stagnation in the economy and living standards of the population, loss of incentives to work and self-development, and 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 actors, to mitigate social inequality, to establish democratic order in society, and not to infringe upon one social subject another in his needs.

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.

Concept of social conflict- much more capacious than it might seem at first. Let's try to figure it out.

In Latin, conflict means “clash.” In sociology conflict- this is the highest stage of contradictions that can arise between people or social groups; as a rule, this clash is based on the opposing goals or interests of the parties to the conflict. There is even a separate science that studies this issue - conflictology. For social science, social conflict is another form of social interaction between people and groups.

Causes of social conflicts.

Causes of social conflicts are obvious from the definition social conflict- disagreements between people or groups that pursue some socially significant interests, while the implementation of these interests is to the detriment of the interests of the opposite party. The peculiarity of these interests is that they are somehow connected with each other by some phenomenon, subject, etc. When a husband wants to watch football and a wife wants to watch a TV series, the connecting object is the TV, which is alone. Now, if there were two televisions, then interests would not have a connecting element; the conflict would not have arisen, or it would have arisen, but for a different reason (the difference in the size of the screen, or a more comfortable chair in the bedroom than a chair in the kitchen).

German sociologist Georg Simmel in his social conflict theories stated that conflicts in society are inevitable because they are determined by the biological nature of man and the social structure of society. He also suggested that frequent and short-lived social conflicts are beneficial to society because, when resolved positively, they help members of society to shed hostility towards each other and achieve understanding.

The structure of social conflict.

Structure of social conflict consists of three elements:

• the object of the conflict (that is, the specific cause of the conflict - the same TV mentioned earlier);
• subjects of the conflict (there may be two or more of them - for example, in our case, the third subject could be a daughter who wanted to watch cartoons);
• incident (the reason for the start of the conflict, or rather its open stage - the husband switched to NTV+ Football, and then it all started...).

By the way, development of social conflict does not necessarily proceed in an open stage: the wife may be silently offended and go for a walk, but the conflict will remain. In politics, this phenomenon is called a “frozen conflict.”

Types of social conflicts.

1. By the number of participants in the conflict:
   • intrapersonal (of great interest to psychologists and psychoanalysts);
   • interpersonal (for example, husband and wife);
   • intergroup (between social groups: competing firms).
2. According to the direction of the conflict:
   • horizontal (between people of the same level: employee versus employee);
   • vertical (employee versus management);
   • mixed (both).
3. By functions of social conflict:
   • destructive (a fight on the street, a fierce argument);
   • constructive (a duel in the ring according to the rules, an intelligent discussion).
4. By duration:
   • short-term;
   • protracted.
5. By means of resolution:
   • peaceful or non-violent;
   • armed or violent.
6. According to the content of the problem:
   • economic;
   • political;
   • production;
   • household;
   • spiritual and moral, etc.
7. By the nature of development:
   • spontaneous (unintentional);
   • deliberate (pre-planned).
8. By volume:
   • global (II World War);
   • local (Chechen war);
   • regional (Israel and Palestine);
   • group (accountants versus system administrators, sales managers versus storekeepers);
   • personal (household, family).

Resolving social conflicts.

The resolution and prevention of social conflicts is the responsibility of the state's social policy. Of course, it is impossible to prevent all conflicts (every family has two TVs!), but anticipating and preventing global, local and regional conflicts is a primary task.

Ways to resolve socialsconflicts:

1. Avoiding conflict. Physical or psychological withdrawal from conflict. The disadvantage of this method is that the cause remains and the conflict is “frozen.”
2. Negotiation.
3. Use of intermediaries. Here everything depends on the experience of the intermediary.
4. Postponement. Temporary surrender of positions to accumulate forces (methods, arguments, etc.).
5. Arbitration, litigation, third party resolution.

Conditions necessary for successful conflict resolution:

• determine the cause of the conflict;
• determine the goals and interests of the conflicting parties;
• the parties to the conflict must want to overcome differences and resolve the conflict;
• determine ways to overcome the conflict.

As you can see, social conflict has many faces: this is a mutual exchange of “courtesy” between fans of “Spartak” and “CSKA”, and family disputes, and the war in Donbass, and events in Syria, and a dispute between a boss and a subordinate, etc., and etc. Having studied the concept of social conflict and earlier the concept of a nation, in the future we will consider the most dangerous type of conflict -