home
Secrets of the world
Social conflict: types and causes of conflicts. Cheat sheet: Social conflicts, their causes, types and role in public life

Social conflict: types and causes of conflicts. Cheat sheet: Social conflicts, their causes, types and role in public life

17.10.2019

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 an important role in the lives of people, peoples and countries. This problem has become the subject of analysis by ancient historians and thinkers. Every major conflict has not gone unnoticed.

Contradictions permeate all spheres of life: socio-economic, political, spiritual. The simultaneous exacerbation 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 a sharp rise in 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 occurrence in life. Therefore, in order to develop the right line of conduct in various conflict situations, it is necessary to know what a conflict is and how people come to an agreement.

The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was made up of three groups of sources. The first includes author's publications on the subject under study. The second category includes educational literature (textbooks and teaching aids, reference and encyclopedic literature). The third category includes scientific articles in periodicals on the issues under study.

Work object- social conflicts.

Subject of study- Causes of social conflicts.

purpose of work- identify the causes of social conflicts.

The goal set determines research objectives:

1. Define the concept of social conflict.

2. Consider examples of social conflicts in modern society.

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

1. Existingness of social conflict

1.1 Concept andconcept of social conflict

Before proceeding to the consideration of the chosen topic, it is necessary to define the concept of "conflict". The most general definition of conflict (from lat. conflictus - clash) is a clash of conflicting or incompatible forces. A more complete definition is a contradiction that arises between people or teams in the process of their joint labor activity due to a misunderstanding or opposition of interests, a lack of agreement between two or more parties. conflict social society

Conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, views of the subjects of interaction. At the same time, the conflict is the most important side of the interaction of people in society, a phenomenon of social life. This is a form of relationship between potential or actual subjects of social action, the motivation of which is due to 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 XVIII century. thinkers reduced it to the problem of domination and subordination, resolved through the regulatory activity of the state.

Conflict as a social phenomenon was first formulated in Adam Smith's Inquiries into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). It expressed the idea that the conflict is based on the division of society into classes and economic rivalry. This division is the driving force behind the 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 a basis for Western scholars to rank the Marxist concept among the “conflict theories”. It should be noted that in Marxism the problem of conflict received a simplified interpretation.

The problem of conflict received its theoretical justification in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The English sociologist Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), considering social conflict from the positions of social Darwinism, considered it an inevitable phenomenon in the history of society and an incentive for social development. The same position was held by the German sociologist (the founder of understanding sociology and the theory of social action) Max Weber (1864-1920). His compatriot Georg Simmel (1858-1918) coined the term "sociology of conflict" for the first time. On the basis of his theory of “social conflicts”, the so-called “formal school” later arose, whose representatives attach importance to 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 non-one-dimensional.

One of them, conditionally called socio-biological, claims that the conflict is inherent in man as in all animals. Researchers in this area rely on the theory of natural selection discovered by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) and derive the idea of natural human aggression in general from it. The main content of his theory of biological evolution is set forth in the book "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Breeds in the Struggle for Life", published in 1859. The main idea of the work: the development of wildlife is carried out in a constant struggle for survival, which is the natural mechanism for selecting the most adapted species. Following C. Darwin, "social Darwinism" appeared as a direction, 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 already a purely sociological concept was 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 must be observed until a complete balance between peoples and races is achieved in the process of development of society.

A similar point of view was shared 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.

At present, the ideas of social Darwinism have few followers, but certain ideas of this theory are useful in resolving current conflicts.

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

Explaining conflict with tension theory presents some difficulty, since it cannot determine at what level of tension a conflict should arise. Indicators of tension that appear in a particular 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 theory or the theory of violence, 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 radical leftist sociologist Charles Wright Mills (1916-1962). Not without the influence of Marxism, the Italian school of political sociology developed, which 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 the conflict in society is due to the division of people into different classes in accordance with their position in the economic system. The main classes of society, according to Marx, are the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, between which there is constant enmity, since the goal of the bourgeoisie is the domination and exploitation of wage workers. Antagonistic conflicts lead to revolutions that are the locomotives of history. The conflict in this case is seen as an inevitable clash that needs to 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 "calamity" 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 activity 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, a well-functioning social system should be dominated by consensus, and conflict should not find ground in society.

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

The 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 in constructive communion 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, which was called the concept of positive-functional conflict. He built it in addition to the classical theories of structural functionalism, in which conflicts are taken out of sociological analysis. If structural functionalism saw an anomaly, a disaster in conflicts, then L. Koser argued that the more different conflicts intersect in a society, the more difficult it is to create a united front that divides members of society into two camps that are rigidly opposed to each other. The more independent conflicts, 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 Class Structure and Class Conflict, and two years later an essay called 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 Koser proved the positive role of conflicts in achieving social unity, then Dahrendorf believed that disintegration and conflict are present in every society, this is a permanent state of the social organism:

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

Modern American sociologist and economist Kenneth Boulding, the author of the “general theory of conflict” in his work “Conflict and Defense. The General Theory” (1963) tried to present a holistic scientific theory of conflict, covering all manifestations of animate and inanimate nature, individual life and social life.

He uses conflict in the analysis of both physical, biological and social phenomena, arguing that even inanimate nature is full of conflicts, waging an "endless war of sea against land and some forms of terrestrial rock against other forms."

The essential side of social conflict is that these subjects operate within the framework of some wider 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 found in a mass of very different assessments; they themselves will find a “field of collision” for themselves, while the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. It is likely that at each of the stages of the development 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 of the former USSR, these conflicts had a different mechanism of occurrence. For the Baltic States, the problem of state sovereignty was of particular importance, for the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict the territorial status issue of Nagorno-Karabakh, for Tajikistan - inter-clan relations.

The behavior of people in conflict can be different. It can take the form of avoidance, competition, accommodation, compromise, or cooperation.

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

1. Avoidance - a person ignores the conflict situation, pretends that it does not exist, "leaves". Such a strategy is optimal when the situation is not particularly significant and is not worth wasting your efforts and resources. Sometimes it's better not to get involved, because the chances of improving anything are close to zero.

2. Rivalry - the satisfaction of only one's own interests, without taking into account the interests of the other side. Such a strategy is often quite logical, for example, in sports competitions, when entering a university through a competition, in employment. But sometimes the confrontation becomes destructive - "victory at any cost", dishonest and cruel methods are used.

3. Adaptation - compliance with the opponent, up to complete surrender to his demands. Concessions can show goodwill, ease tensions in a relationship, even turn the tide from confrontation to cooperation. This strategy conserves 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, expecting reciprocal concessions from the opponent.

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

5. Cooperation - meeting 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 revealed. With this strategy, the conflict is well resolved, partnerships are maintained during the conflict and after it. 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 unequivocally "good" or "bad". Each of them may be optimal in a particular situation.

1.2 Social conflicts in modern society.

In modern conditions, in essence, each sphere of public 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 - it is a conflict over the distribution of power,

dominance, influence, authority. This conflict can be covert or open. One of the brightest forms of its manifestation in modern Russia is the conflict between the executive and legislative authorities in the country that has continued throughout the entire time after the collapse of the USSR. The objective causes of the conflict have not been eliminated, and it has entered 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 authorities 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 an important role in the modern life of Russia, that is, conflicts over the means of subsistence, wage levels, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for various benefits, over real access to these benefits and other resources. Social conflicts in various spheres of public life can take the form of intra-institutional and organizational norms and procedures: discussions, requests, adoption of declarations, laws, etc. The most striking form of expression of the conflict are various kinds of mass actions. These mass actions are realized in the form of presentation of demands to the authorities by dissatisfied social groups, in the mobilization of public opinion in support of their demands or alternative programs, in direct actions of social protest. Mass protest is an active form of conflict behavior. It can be expressed in various forms: organized and spontaneous, direct or indirect, taking on the character of violence or a system of non-violent actions. Mass protests are organized by political organizations and so-called “pressure groups” that unite people for economic purposes, professional, religious and cultural interests. Mass protests may take the form of rallies, demonstrations, picketing, civil disobedience campaigns, and strikes. Each of these forms is used for specific purposes, is an effective means of solving very specific problems. Therefore, when choosing a form of social protest, its organizers must be clearly aware of what specific goals are set for this action and what is the public support for certain demands.

2. Harakteristics of social conflicts

Despite the numerous manifestations of conflict interactions in social life, they all have a number of common characteristics, the study of which allows us to classify the main parameters of conflicts, as well as to identify factors that affect their intensity. All conflicts are characterized by four main parameters: the causes of the conflict, the severity of the conflict, its duration and consequences.

2.1 Causes of social conflictswho 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 its real cause, which allows social control over the behavior of social groups at the pre-conflict stage.

It is expedient to start 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 aspects of social life. They are all different and usually opposite. At the moment of striving to satisfy needs, in the presence of blocked goals that several individuals or groups are trying to achieve, opposite value orientations come into contact and can cause a conflict.

2. Ideological reasons. Conflicts that arise on the basis of ideological differences are a special case of the conflict of opposite orientation. The difference between them lies in the fact that the ideological cause of the conflict lies in a different attitude towards the system of ideas that justify and legitimize the relationship of subordination, domination and in the fundamental worldviews of various groups of society. In this case, the elements of faith, religious, socio-political aspirations become a catalyst for contradictions.

3. Causes of conflicts, consisting in various forms of economic and social inequality. This type of causes is associated with a significant difference in the distribution of values (income, knowledge, information, elements of culture, etc.) between individuals and groups. Inequality in the distribution of values exists everywhere, but conflict arises only when there is such a magnitude of inequality that is regarded by one of the social groups as very significant, and only if such a significant inequality leads to the blockade of important social needs in one of the social groups. The social tension that arises in this case can serve as a cause of social conflict. It is due to the emergence of additional needs in people, for example, the need to have the same number of values.

4. Causes of conflicts that lie in the relationship between the elements of the social structure. They appear as a result of the different places that structural elements occupy in a society, organization or ordered social group. The conflict for this reason can be associated, firstly, with different goals pursued by individual elements. Secondly, the conflict for this reason is associated with the desire of one or another structural element to take a higher place in the hierarchical structure.

Any of these reasons can serve as an impetus, the first stage of a conflict only if certain external conditions are present. In addition to the existence of the cause of the conflict, certain conditions must develop around it, serving 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 affect the state of relations between individuals and groups that fall within the scope of these conditions to a different extent.

2.2 Sharpness and duration

Speaking about an acute social conflict, first of all, they mean a conflict with a high intensity of social clashes, as a result of which a large amount of psychological and material resources are spent in a short time. An acute conflict is characterized mainly by open clashes that occur so often that they merge into a single whole. The severity of the conflict to the greatest extent depends on the socio-psychological characteristics of the warring parties, as well as on the situation requiring immediate action. An acute conflict is much more short-lived than a conflict with less intense clashes and with long breaks between them. However, an acute conflict is certainly more destructive, it causes significant damage to the resources of the enemy, 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, which are the result of the expenditure of resources in conflict clashes, depend on it. In addition, in long-term conflicts, the expenditure of emotional energy increases and the likelihood of a new conflict increases due to the imbalance of social systems, the lack of balance in them.

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) direct conflict;

3) the stage of conflict resolution;

4) post-conflict stage.

Let's consider all the stages in more detail.

1. Pre-conflict stage.

No social conflict arises instantly. Emotional tension, irritation and anger usually accumulate over time, so the pre-conflict stage is sometimes delayed. At this stage, we can talk about the latent (latent) phase of the development of the conflict. Representatives of a group of domestic conflictologists, these are 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 public consciousness and behavior of individuals, social groups and society as a whole, a specific situation of perception and evaluation of events, characterized by increased emotional arousal, a violation of the mechanisms of 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 defined 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 as such in the eyes of the opponents. The indivisible object is the cause of the conflict. The presence and size of such an object must be at least partially realized by its participants or opposing sides. If this does not happen, then it is difficult for the opponents to carry out an aggressive action, and, as a rule, there is no conflict.

The pre-conflict stage is the period in which the conflicting parties evaluate their resources before deciding to take conflict action or retreat. These resources include material values that can be used to influence an opponent, information, power, connections, prestige, etc. At the same time, there is a consolidation of the forces of the opposing sides, the search for supporters and the formation of groups participating in the conflict.

The pre-conflict stage is also characteristic in the formation of each of the conflicting sides of the strategy or even several strategies. Moreover, the one that best suits the situation is used. Strategy is understood as the vision of the situation by the participants in the conflict, the formation of a goal in relation to the opposing side, and, finally, the choice of a way to influence the enemy. With the right choice of strategy, methods of action, conflicts can be prevented.

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 entire conflict consists of a conflict situation that is formed at the pre-conflict stage and an incident.

Conflict behavior characterizes the second, main stage in the development of the conflict. Conflict behavior is an action aimed at directly or indirectly blocking the achievement by the opposing side of its goals, intentions, interests.

The actions that make up the incident are divided into two groups, each of which is based on the specific behavior of people. The first group includes the actions of rivals in the conflict, which are open in nature. It can be verbal debate, economic sanctions, physical pressure, political struggle, sports competition, etc. Such actions, as a rule, are easily identified as conflict, aggressive, hostile. The second group includes the hidden actions of rivals in the conflict. A veiled, but nevertheless extremely active struggle pursues the goal of imposing an unfavorable course of action on the opponent and at the same time revealing his strategy. The main mode of action in a hidden internal conflict is reflexive control - a method of control in which the grounds for making a decision are transferred from one of the actors to another. This means that one of the rivals is trying to convey and introduce into the consciousness of the other such information that makes this other 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 of a critical point, at which the conflict interactions between the opposing sides reach their maximum sharpness and strength. One of the criteria for approaching a critical point can be considered integration, the single-mindedness of the efforts of each of the conflicting parties, the cohesion of the groups participating in the conflict.

It is important to know the time to pass the critical point, since after that the situation is most manageable. At the same time, intervention at a critical moment, at the height of the conflict, is useless or even dangerous. The achievement of a critical point and its passage largely depend on circumstances external to the participants in the conflict, as well as on resources and values introduced into the conflict from outside.

Conflict resolution and its consequences.

An external sign of conflict resolution may be the end of the incident. It is a completion, not a temporary cessation. This means that conflict interaction between the conflicting parties is terminated. Elimination, termination 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, to look for its causes. In this case, the conflict flares up again.

The resolution of social conflict is possible only when the conflict situation changes. This change can take many forms. But the most effective change in the conflict situation, which allows to extinguish the conflict, is considered to be the elimination of the cause of the conflict. With a rational conflict, the elimination of the cause inevitably leads to its resolution, but for an emotional conflict, the most important moment in changing the conflict situation should be considered a change in the attitudes of rivals relative to each other. It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the requirements of one of the parties: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

A 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 preponderance of 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 will certainly occur.

Modern conflictology has formulated the conditions under which a successful resolution of social conflicts is possible. One of the important conditions is the timely and accurate analysis of its causes. And this involves the identification of objectively existing contradictions, interests, goals.

Another, no less important condition is the mutual interest in overcoming contradictions on the basis of mutual recognition of the interests of each of the parties. To do this, the parties to the conflict must seek to free themselves from hostility and mistrust towards each other. To achieve such a state is possible on the basis of a goal that is meaningful to each group on a broader basis. The third, indispensable condition is the joint search for ways to overcome the conflict. Here it is possible to use a whole arsenal of means and methods: direct dialogue of the parties, negotiations with the participation of a third party, etc.

1) priority should be given to the discussion of substantive issues;

2) the parties must strive to relieve psychological and social tension;

3) the parties must demonstrate mutual respect for each other;

4) participants should strive to turn a significant and hidden part of the conflict situation into an open one, publicly and convincingly revealing each other's positions and deliberately creating an atmosphere of public equal exchange of views.

Conflicts, on the one hand, destroy social structures, lead to significant unreasonable expenditure of resources, and on the other hand, they are the mechanism that contributes to the solution of many problems, unites groups and, ultimately, serves as one of the ways to achieve social justice. The ambiguity in people's assessment of the consequences of conflict has led to the fact that sociologists involved in the theory of conflicts have not come to a common point of view about whether conflicts are beneficial or harmful to society. 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 therefore suggest 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 the supporters of this point of view, any finite object of the social world from the moment of its inception carries its own negation, or its own death. Upon reaching a certain limit or measure, as a result of quantitative growth, the contradiction that bears negation comes into conflict with the essential characteristics of the given object, in connection with which a new qualitative certainty is formed.

Constructive and destructive ways of conflict depend on the characteristics of its subject: size, rigidity, centralization, relationship with other problems, level of awareness. The conflict escalates 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 particular consequence of the conflict may be the strengthening of group interaction. Since interests and points of view within the group change from time to time, new leaders, new policies, new intra-group norms are needed. As a result of the conflict, new leadership, new policies and new norms can be quickly introduced. Conflict may be the only way out of a tense situation.

Conclusion

Social conflicts are increasingly becoming the norm of social relations. Conflicts in the twentieth century have become the main cause of death of a huge mass of people. Russia is the undisputed leader not only in terms of human losses in conflicts, but also in terms of their other consequences: material and moral. This fact put Russia before a choice: either the authorities and the people will be able to at least keep social conflicts within a regulated framework, or the conflicts will control the people and the authorities. Today, every citizen needs knowledge about how to prevent and constructively resolve conflicts at various levels.

This knowledge is difficult to obtain, relying only on common sense, and it is impossible to fully borrow it from foreign experts, since domestic conflicts are very specific. To solve this problem, it is important to systematize the existing knowledge about conflicts, to outline the prospects for priority conflict studies.

Therefore, conflicts in our life are inevitable. We need to learn how to manage them, strive to resolve them at the lowest cost to society.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

Social conflict: types and causes

There are different types of disputes and types of causes of social conflicts. Consider which classifiers are the most common.

Types of social conflicts

There are many types of social conflicts, which are determined by:

the duration and nature of the occurrence - temporary, prolonged, random and specially organized;
scale - global (global), local (in a specific part of the world), regional (between neighboring countries), group, personal (for example, family disputes);
goals and methods of resolution - a fight, a scandal with obscene language, a cultural conversation;
the number of participants - personal (in mentally ill people), interpersonal, intergroup;
direction - arise between people of the same social level or different.

This is not an exhaustive list. There are other classifications as well. The first three types of social conflicts are key.

Causes of social conflicts

In general, objective circumstances are always the cause of social conflict. They may be explicit or hidden. Most often, the prerequisites lie in social inequality and differences in value orientations.

The main reasons for disputes:

Ideological. Differences in the system of ideas and values that determine subordination and dominance.
Differences in value orientations. The set of values may be the opposite of the set of another participant.
Social and economic reasons. Associated with the distribution of wealth and power.

The third group of causes is the most common. In addition, differences in the tasks set, rivalry, innovations, etc. can become the grounds for the development of the conflict.

Examples

The most striking and well-known example of a global social conflict is The Second World War. Many countries participated in this conflict, and the events of those years left their mark on the life of most of the population.

As an example of a conflict that arose due to a mismatch of value systems, we can cite student strike in France in 1968. This was the beginning of a series of uprisings involving workers, engineers and employees. The conflict was partially resolved thanks to the activities of the president. Thus, the society was reformed and progressed.

Yamalov Ural Buranbaevich, master
Bashkir State Agrarian University

MODELS (METHODS) CONFLICT RESOLUTION
STYLES OF BEHAVIOR IN CONFLICT
CONFLICT
CONTRADICTION
CONFLICT SITUATION

The article discusses the features of the course of the conflict. The outcome of a conflict situation will largely depend not only and not so much on the causes, factors and models of the course of the conflict, the degree of its development, but on the attitude of the participants themselves to the conflict situation.

Algorithms for effective conflict management

Social conflict is the highest stage in the development of contradictions in relations between people, social groups, social institutions, which is characterized by the strengthening of opposing tendencies, the clash of various interests.

The world is arranged in such a way that conflicts arise in almost all spheres of human activity, which are most often based on emotions and personal hostility, and they are associated with aggression, threat, hostility. The conflict is determined by the fact that the conscious behavior of one of the parties: an individual, a group or an organization, conflicts with the interests of the other party. Conflict management is one of the most important functions of a leader (on average, they spend about 20% of their working time). To manage them, it is necessary to know the types of conflicts, the causes of their occurrence, the features of the course, as well as the consequences to which they can lead.

Social conflicts in the life of society are inevitable, since social development is carried out in the conditions of confrontation of various interests, attitudes, and aspirations. However, in a developed society, there are mechanisms for the prevention and peaceful resolution of conflicts within the framework of normalized relations.

Individuals and social groups participating in the conflict are called the subjects of the conflict. The issue that needs to be resolved, or the good, because of which there is a collision, is called the subject of the conflict. The cause of the conflict is the objective social circumstances that predetermine its occurrence. The reason for the conflict is a specific incident or social action that provokes a transition to open confrontation.

The difference between a conflict and peaceful confrontation, competition and rivalry for the possession of certain benefits lies in the sharpness of the conflict, which can take the form of open aggression and violent actions.

At the heart of any social conflict is an acute contradiction.

A contradiction is a fundamental incompatibility of important interests and aspirations (political, economic, ethnic, cultural) of individuals and social groups. Dissatisfaction with the current situation and readiness to change it is expressed in the growth of social tension. A conflict arises when one of the parties begins to openly pursue its aspirations to the detriment of the other, which causes an aggressive response.

The contradiction does not always go into the stage of an open conflict, it can be resolved peacefully or persist in society as an implicit opposition of ideas, interests, trends.

Based on various criteria, types of conflicts are distinguished:

by duration: short-term and protracted conflicts;
by coverage of participants: global, interethnic, national, local conflicts;
by spheres of public life: economic, political, labor, socio-cultural, national-ethnic, family-domestic, ideological, spiritual-moral, legal-legal conflicts;
in the sphere of contradictions: interpersonal, intragroup, intergroup conflicts, as well as conflicts of the group with the external environment;
by the nature of development: deliberate, spontaneous;
by means used: violent (military, armed) and non-violent conflicts;
on social consequences: successful, unsuccessful, constructive, destructive conflicts.

Social conflict goes through several stages in its development:

pre-conflict situation - awareness by the parties of the existing contradiction and increasing social tension;
the conflict itself - open actions aimed at realizing the aspirations and satisfying the needs that caused the confrontation;
conflict resolution - the end of the confrontation, the elimination of the causes of the conflict or the reconciliation of the parties on the basis of a compromise;
after the conflict stage - the final elimination of contradictions, the transition to peaceful interaction.

Usually, a social conflict is preceded by a pre-conflict stage, during which contradictions between subjects accumulate and gradually become aggravated.

Before the start of the conflict, the parties are aware of the existence of tension due to the dissatisfaction of some important needs, they are looking for ways to resolve the contradiction that has arisen, and they choose ways to influence the enemy.

Most often, social conflict arises due to differences in the level of material well-being, access to power, cultural goods, education, information, as well as differences in religious, worldview, moral attitudes and standards of behavior.

The severity of the pre-conflict situation and the way out of it are determined not only by the significance of the contradiction, but also by the socio-psychological traits of the participants in the conflict: the characteristics of temperament, intelligence, the level of general culture, and communication skills.

The reason for the start of the conflict is an incident - an event or social action aimed at changing the behavior of the opposing side and entailing a transition to open confrontation (verbal debate, economic sanctions, changes in legislation, etc.).

The next stage in the development of the conflict is its escalation, i.e. growth, increase in the scale, number of participants, publicity.

The directly conflict stage of social confrontation is characterized by a set of certain actions that the participants take in order to realize their interests and suppress the enemy.

All participants in a large-scale conflict play a certain role in it, although not all of them are necessarily in a state of confrontation with each other.

Witnesses to the conflict observe the events from the outside, without taking an active part in them.

Mediators are people who try to prevent, stop or resolve a conflict, look for ways to reconcile conflicting interests, and participate in organizing negotiations. Instigators are people who provoke the beginning and further development of the conflict.

Accomplices may not take a direct part in an open clash of opposing subjects, but by their actions contribute to its development, supporting one of the parties.

The resolution of a social conflict is the overcoming of the main contradiction in the interests of the parties, its elimination at the level of the causes of the conflict. The solution to the conflict can be achieved by the conflicting parties themselves without the help of any third parties, or by connecting to the decision of any third party (intermediary). Thus, the conflict resolution model is a set of certain methods for overcoming it. This is far from a randomly chosen method, but directly dependent on the testimony of the diagnostics of a particular conflict.

The models that are used in conflict resolution are formed on the basis of the cultural and legal attitudes in relation to the conflict that exist in society, encouraging or prohibiting one or another way of resolving the conflict. The model for resolving any conflict is based on the use of various methods - violent (repression, demonstration of force, various forms of coercion) or peaceful (negotiations, agreements, compromises).

There are four principal ways (models) by which the conflicting parties can resolve their contradictions and get out of the state of conflict:

Power (one-sided dominance).
Compromise.
integral model.
Separation of the parties. A certain combination of these four methods is also possible (symbiotic model).

one sided domination(power model) - a method that involves the satisfaction of the interests of one of the conflicting parties at the expense of the interests of the other. Forceful methods of resolving the conflict, in fact, lead to the destruction or complete suppression of the interests of one of the parties to the conflict. In this case, various means of coercion are used, from psychological to physical. This is often a way of transferring blame and responsibility to the weaker party. Thus, the true cause of the conflict is replaced and the dominant will of a stronger subject is unilaterally imposed.

Separation of the parties to the conflict. In this case, the conflict is resolved by terminating the interaction, breaking off relations between the conflicting parties, isolating them from each other (for example, divorce of spouses, separation of neighbors, transfer of workers to different areas of production). Separation of the conflicting parties can be done by their retreat, when they both leave the "battlefield". This is how, for example, a skirmish between bus passengers ends when one of them leaves at their stop or a quarrel between neighbors in a communal apartment, which stops after they are relocated.

Model of compromise- a way of reconciling conflicting interests, which consists in mutual concessions in the positions of the conflicting parties. It is important to know that the compromise model for resolving conflicts is based on concessions to conflicts precisely in their interests. Thus, the concept of compromise is used in different senses: in the ordinary sense, these are various concessions to each other, and in the conflict of logic, this is the mutual renunciation of the parties to the conflict from any part of their claims, the mutual sacrifice of interests, for the sake of reaching agreement.

The main advantage of the peaceful resolution of the conflict through compromise is the introduction of the conflict into a constructive framework and the establishment of a process of communication between the parties, finding certain points of agreement (compromise). Nevertheless, a compromise, according to the well-known Western conflict logger K. Lasswell, is “a patchwork quilt that the conflicting parties pull over themselves.” Compromise, as a model for resolving a conflict, is certainly preferable and more civilized than force or disunity, but it is not universal and has its limits of applicability. Do not think that on its basis you can easily resolve any conflict.

Integral model (integral strategy)- provides for the possibility of satisfying the interests of all conflicters, subject to the revision (revision) of their previously formed positions, the goals that they intended to achieve in the conflict. It is called integral not because it combines the qualities and advantages of previous models, but because it is able to integrate the interests of conflicters. When using it, no one sacrifices their interests. Each conflicter seeks to satisfy his interests, and therefore feels like a winner. To achieve such a desirable outcome, the conflictors must abandon their position, reconsider their goals that they set in this conflict.

As a rule, the integral model is achieved as a result of negotiations between the conflicting parties, ending with the adoption of an agreed decision. In order for the conflict to be truly resolved, it is important that the conflicting parties agree among themselves, so that they themselves find the most convenient way out of the conflict situation. In practice, conflicting parties usually enter into some sort of negotiation before resorting to violence or breaking up. The integral model of conflict resolution is an important discovery of the twentieth century in the field of public institutions. One of the many paradoxes of modern Russian society is that the most effective and rational way to resolve conflicts is used much less frequently than it should be. In Russia, most of our fellow citizens do not know that there is a similar model for resolving conflicts, and if they do, they do not like to use it. This is explained by a complex of reasons, among which we note the peculiarities of the mentality of Russians, expressed in an increased commitment to forceful decisions, with the peculiarities of education - we are always taught that the goal is above all else and the Russians' misconceptions about adherence to principles. Many identify adherence to principles with stubbornness on their own, with a refusal to revise their position in a conflict, regardless of what this position is caused by. At the same time, it is overlooked that the interests of people and their groups are always more important than the goals that they set for themselves in order to achieve these interests. You need to be flexible in setting and changing your short-term goals, constantly looking after your long-term vital interests. Unfortunately, many do the opposite. Refusing to revise their positions, not taking into account the new conditions that have made them unreasonable, they continue to defend them, which complicates the achievement of fundamental interests.

There are also symbioses of conflict resolution methods - models that combine in a certain sequence - force, compromise, disengagement and integral models of conflict resolution.

In conclusion, it should be noted that it is difficult to foresee all the variety of conflict situations that life creates for us. Therefore, in resolving conflicts, much should be decided on the spot, based on the specific situation, as well as the individual psychological characteristics of the participants in the conflict.

Bibliography

Igebaeva F.A. Interpersonal conflict in the organization and its consequences. // Language and Literature in the Conditions of Bilingualism and Polylingualism. Collection of materials of the II All-Russian scientific-practical conference. - Ufa: RIC BashGU, 2012. S. 249 - 252.
Igebaeva F.A. Leader and his role in preventing conflicts in organizations // Development of modern society in Russia in the new economy. Materials of the V All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference. - Saratov: Publishing House "KUBiK", 2012. - P. 39 - 42.
Igebaeva F.A. Social conflicts and ways to solve them. Socio-economic development of society: education system and knowledge economy. Collection of articles IV International scientific-practical conference. Penza. 2007. - P.33 - 35.
Andreeva G.M. "Social psychology", M., 2011. - 678s.
Borodkin F.N. "Attention, conflict!", Novosibirsk, 2012. - 679p.
Ageev V.S. “Intergroup interaction. Socio-psychological problems”, M., 2013. – 456p.
Social Psychology. / Ed. Semenova V.E., 2015. - 888s.
Igebaeva F.A. The art of managing people is the most difficult and highest of all the arts in the collection: Science, technology and life - 2014 proceedings of the international scientific conference. editors v.a. iljuhina, v.i. zhukovskij, n.p. ketova, a.m. gazaliev, g.s.mal". 2015. pp. 1073 - 1079.
Igebaeva F.A. Conflicts in the organization and their consequences. In the collection: Zprávy vědeckė ideje - 2014. Materiàly X mezinàrodní vědecká-praktická konference. 2014. - S. 27 - 29.
Igebaeva F.A. Some ethical and organizational aspects of personnel management In the collection Problems and prospects of the Russian economy. VII All-Russian scientific and practical conference March 26-27, 2008. Penza. 2008. - P. 43 - 45.
Igebaeva F.A. Sociology: a textbook for university students. – M.: INFRA-M, 2012. – 236 p. – (Higher education – Bachelor’s degree).
Igebaeva F.A. Workshop on sociology: /F.A. Igebaeva. - Ufa: Bashkir State Agrarian University, 2012. - 128p.
internet resource. Available at: http://www.studfiles.ru/preview/2617345/

social conflict(from lat. conflict- clash) is the highest stage of development of contradictions in relations between people, social groups, society as a whole, which is characterized by a clash of opposing interests, goals, positions of subjects of interaction. Conflicts may be covert or overt, but they are always based on a lack of agreement between two or more parties.

The concept of social conflict

It is one of the varieties of social conflict.

The word "" (from lat. conflict) means clash (of parties, opinions, forces). The concept of social conflict as a collision of two or more subjects of social interaction is widely interpreted by representatives of various areas of the conflictological paradigm. Thus, in the view of K. Marx in a class society, the main social conflict manifests itself in the form of an antagonistic class struggle, the culmination of which is a social revolution. According to L. Koser, conflict is one of the types of social interaction, during which there is a "struggle for values and claims to status, power and resources, during which opponents neutralize, damage or eliminate their rivals." In the interpretation of R. Dahrendorf, social conflict is a variety of intensity types of clashes between conflicting groups, in which the class struggle is one of the types of confrontation.

It is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects (sides) of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values.

The conflict is based on subjective-objective contradictions. However, not every contradiction develops into a conflict. The concept of contradiction in its content is broader than the concept of conflict. Social contradictions are the main determinants of social development. They "penetrate" all spheres of social relations and for the most part do not develop into a conflict. In order for objectively existing (periodically arising) contradictions to transform into a social conflict, it is necessary that the subjects (subject) of interaction realize that this or that contradiction is an obstacle to achieving their vital goals and interests. According to K. Boulding, the conflict arises when the "matured" contradictions are recognized by the parties as incompatible and each of the parties seeks to seize a position that excludes the intentions of the other side. Therefore, conflict contradictions are subjective-objective in nature.

Objective contradictions are those that actually exist in society, regardless of the will and desire of the subjects. For example, the contradictions between labor and capital, between the managers and the ruled, the contradictions between "fathers" and "children", etc.

In addition to objectively existing (arising) contradictions, imaginary contradictions may arise in the imagination of the subject, when there are no objective reasons for the conflict, but the subject recognizes (perceives) the situation as a conflict. In this case, we can talk about subjective-subjective contradictions. Another situation is also possible, when conflict contradictions really exist, but the subject believes that there are no sufficient reasons for the conflict.

Contradictions can exist for quite a long period of time and not develop into a conflict. Therefore, it must be borne in mind that the conflict is based only on those contradictions caused by incompatible interests, needs and values. Such contradictions, as a rule, give rise to an open struggle of the parties, confrontation.

The causes of the conflict can be a variety of problems, for example, a conflict over material resources, over values and the most important life attitudes, over power (domination problems), over status and role differences in the social structure, over personal (including emotional -psychological) differences, etc. Thus, conflicts cover all spheres of people's life, the totality of social relations, social interaction. The conflict is essentially one of the types of social interaction, the subjects and participants of which are individual individuals, large and small social groups and organizations. However, conflict interaction involves the confrontation of the parties, i.e. with. actions of subjects directed against each other.

The form of clashes - violent or non-violent - depends on many factors, including whether there are real conditions and opportunities (mechanisms) for non-violent conflict resolution, what goals the subjects of confrontation pursue, what attitudes the conflicting parties are "guided", etc.

So, a social conflict is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects (sides) of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values.

Structure of social conflict

In a simplified form, the structure of social conflict consists of the following elements:

object - the specific reason for the collision of subjects;
two or more subjects, conflicting because of any object;
incident - a formal reason for the start of an open confrontation.

Conflict is preceded by conflict situation. These are contradictions that arise between subjects about the object.

Under the influence of growing social tension, the conflict situation is gradually transforming into an open social conflict. But the tension itself can exist for a long time and not develop into a conflict. In order for the conflict to become real, an incident is needed - a formal reason for the start of the conflict.

However, the real conflict has a more complex structure. For example, in addition to subjects, it involves participants (direct and indirect), supporters, sympathizers, instigators, mediators, arbitrators, etc. Each of the participants in the conflict has its own qualitative and quantitative characteristics. An object can also have its own characteristics. In addition, the real conflict develops in a certain social and physical environment, which also influences it. Therefore, a more complete structure of the social (political) conflict will be discussed below.

The essence of social conflict

Sociological understanding and modern understanding of social conflict was first laid down by a German sociologist G. Simmel. In work "Social Conflict" he notes that the process of development of society goes through social conflict, when obsolete cultural forms become obsolete, “demolished” and new ones are born. Today, a whole branch of sociology is already engaged in the theory and practice of regulating social conflicts - conflictology. The most famous representatives of this trend are R. Dahrendorf, L. Koser. C. Bouldinghydr.

German sociologist R. Dahrendorf created theory of the conflict model of society. According to the scientist, in any society, social conflicts can arise every moment, which are based on a conflict of interests. Dahrendorf considers conflicts as an indispensable element of social life, which, being sources of innovation, contribute to the constant development of society. The main task is to learn to control them.

The American sociologist L. Koser developed the theory of positive-functional conflict. By social conflict, he understood the struggle for values and claims to a certain status, power and resources, a struggle in which the goals of opponents are to neutralize, damage or eliminate the enemy.

According to this theory, social inequality, which inevitably exists in every society and causes natural social dissatisfaction of people, often leads to social conflicts. L. Koser sees the positive functions of conflicts in the fact that they contribute to the renewal of society and stimulate social and economic progress.

General theory of conflict owned by American sociologist K. Boulding. The conflict in his understanding is a situation in which the parties realize the incompatibility of their positions and at the same time strive to get ahead of the opponent, beat him. In modern society, according to Boulding, conflicts are inevitable, so it is necessary to control and manage them. Main signs of conflict are:

the presence of a situation that is perceived by the opposing parties as a conflict;
the parties to the conflict have opposite goals, needs, interests and methods of achieving them;
interaction of the conflicting parties;
results of conflict interaction;
using pressure and even force.

Of great importance for the sociological analysis of social conflicts is the identification of the main types. There are the following types of conflicts:

1. by the number of participants in the conflict interaction:

intrapersonal- the state of dissatisfaction of a person with any circumstances of his life, which are associated with the presence of contradictory needs, interests. aspirations and can cause affects;
interpersonal - disagreement between two or more members of one group or several groups;
intergroup - occur between social groups that pursue incompatible goals and interfere with each other by their practical actions;

2. according to the direction of conflict interaction:

horizontal - between people who are not subordinate to each other;
vertical - between people who are subordinate to each other;
mixed - in which both are presented. The most common are vertical and mixed conflicts, averaging 70-80% of all conflicts;

3. according to the source of occurrence:

objectively determined- caused by objective reasons, which can be eliminated only by changing the objective situation;
subjectively conditioned related to the personal characteristics of conflicting people, as well as situations that create barriers to satisfying their desires, aspirations, interests;

4. According to its functions:

creative (integrative) - contributing to renewal, the introduction of new structures, policies, leadership;
destructive (disintegrative) - destabilizing social systems;

5. according to the duration of the course:

short-term - caused by mutual misunderstanding or mistakes of the parties, which are quickly realized;
protracted - associated with deep moral and psychological trauma or with objective difficulties. The duration of the conflict depends both on the subject of the contradiction and on the character traits of the people involved;

6. according to its internal content:

rational- covering the sphere of reasonable, business rivalry, redistribution of resources;
emotional - in which participants act on the basis of personal dislike;

7. according to the ways and means of resolving conflicts there are peaceful and armed:

8. taking into account the content of the problems that caused conflict actions, they distinguish economic, political, family, household, industrial, spiritual, moral, legal, environmental, ideological and other conflicts.

The analysis of the course of the conflict is carried out in accordance with its three main stages: pre-conflict situation, the conflict itself and the resolution stage.

Pre-conflict situation- this is the period when the conflicting parties evaluate their resources, forces and consolidate into opposing groups. At the same stage, each of the parties forms its own strategy of behavior and chooses a way to influence the enemy.

The direct conflict this is the active part of the conflict, characterized by the presence of an incident, i.e. social actions aimed at changing the opponent's behavior. The actions themselves are of two types:

actions of rivals that are open in nature (verbal debate, physical impact, economic sanctions, etc.);
hidden actions of rivals (associated with the desire to deceive, confuse the opponent, impose on him an unfavorable course of action).

The main course of action in a hidden internal conflict is reflective control, meaning that one of the opponents, through "deceptive movements", is trying to get the other person to act in this way. how beneficial to him.

Conflict resolution is possible only when the conflict situation is eliminated, and not only when the incident is exhausted. The resolution of the conflict can also occur as a result of the depletion of the resources of the parties or the intervention of a third party, creating an advantage for one of the parties, and, finally, as a result of the complete exhaustion of the opponent.

Successful conflict resolution requires the following conditions:

timely determination of the causes of the conflict;
definition business conflict zone- causes, contradictions, interests, goals of the conflicting parties:
mutual desire of the parties to overcome contradictions;
joint search for ways to overcome the conflict.

There are various conflict resolution methods:

avoidance of conflict leaving the “stage” of conflict interaction physically or psychologically, but the conflict itself is not eliminated in this case, since the cause that gave rise to it remains;
negotiation - avoid the use of violence, achieve mutual understanding and find a way to cooperate;
use of intermediaries conciliation procedure. An experienced mediator, which can be an organization and an individual, will help to quickly resolve the conflict there. where without his participation it would not have been possible;
postponing - in fact, this is a surrender of its position, but only temporary, since as the forces accumulate, the party will most likely try to return what was lost;
arbitration or arbitration, - a method in which the norms of laws and rights are strictly guided.

The consequences of conflict can be:

1. positive:

resolution of accumulated contradictions;
stimulation of the process of social change;
convergence of conflicting groups;
strengthening the cohesion of each of the rival camps;

2. negative:

tension;
destabilization;
disintegration.

Conflict resolution can be:

complete - the conflict ends completely;
partial- the conflict changes the external form, but retains motivation.

Of course, it is difficult to foresee all the variety of conflict situations that life creates for us. Therefore, in resolving conflicts, much should be decided on the spot based on the specific situation, as well as the individual psychological characteristics of the participants in the conflict.

The social heterogeneity of society, the difference in income levels, power, prestige, etc. often leads to social conflicts.

They are an integral part of social life and are always associated with the subjective consciousness of people, the inconsistency of their interests of certain social groups. Aggravations of contradiction give rise to open or closed conflicts only when they are deeply experienced by people and are realized as incompatibility of goals and interests.

Conflict- this is a clash of opposing goals, opinions, interests, positions of opponents or subjects of interaction.

social conflict- this is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It occurs when one side seeks to realize its goals or interests to the detriment of the other.

English sociologist E. Giddens gave the following definition of conflict: "by social conflict, I understand the real struggle between acting people or groups, regardless of what the sources of this struggle are, its methods and means mobilized by each side."

Conflict is a ubiquitous phenomenon. Every society, every social group, social community is subject to conflicts to one degree or another.

In science, there is a special branch of sociological knowledge that directly studies this social phenomenon - conflictology.

The main subjects of conflicts are social groups, since their needs, claims, goals can only be realized through the use of power. That is why such political forces as the state apparatus, political parties, parliamentary groups, factions, “influence groups”, etc. take part in conflicts. It is they who are the spokesmen for the will of large social groups and the main bearers of social interests.

In conflictology, much attention is paid to the concept of the strength of the participants in a social conflict.

Force- this is the ability of the opponent to realize his goal against the will of the interaction partner. It includes a number of different components:

1) physical force, including technical means used as an instrument of violence;

2) an information-civilizational form of the use of social force, requiring the collection of facts, statistical data, analysis of documents, study of expert materials in order to ensure complete knowledge about the essence of the conflict, about one’s opponent in order to develop a strategy and tactics of behavior, use materials that discredit the opponent, etc. d.;

3) social status, expressed in socially recognized indicators (income, level of power, prestige, etc.);

4) other resources - money, territory, time limit, psychological resource, etc.

The stage of conflict behavior is characterized by the maximum use of force by the participants in the conflict, the use of all means at their disposal. A significant influence on the development of the conflict is exerted by the surrounding social environment, which determines the conditions in which the social conflict proceeds.

It can act either as a source of external support for the participants in the conflict, or as a deterrent, or as a neutral factor.

Social conflict usually goes through major stages.

In conflictology, it is customary to distinguish the following stages of the course of the conflict:

1) a hidden stage, at which the contradictions between the participants in the conflict are not yet recognized and are manifested only in explicit or implicit dissatisfaction with the situation;

2) the formation of a conflict - a clear understanding of the claims, which, as a rule, are expressed to the opposite side in the form of demands;

3) incident - an event that takes the conflict to the stage of active actions;

4) active actions of the parties that contribute to the achievement of the highest point of the conflict, after which it subsides;

5) the end of the conflict, and it is not always carried out by satisfying the claims of the parties.

It is also necessary to remember that at any of these stages, the conflict can end either independently, or by agreement of the parties, or with the participation of a third party.

2. Types of conflicts

In modern sociological literature, there are many classifications of types of conflicts on various grounds.

From the point of view of the subjects entering into the conflict, four types of conflicts can be distinguished:

1) intrapersonal (may take the following forms: role - occurs when conflicting requirements are made to one person about what the result of his work should be; intrapersonal - can also arise as a result of the fact that production requirements are not consistent with personal needs or values );

2) interpersonal (can manifest itself as a clash of personalities with different character traits, attitudes, values and is the most common);

3) between the individual and the group (occurs if the individual takes a position that differs from the position of the group);

4) intergroup.

Conflicts can be classified by spheres of life into political, socio-economic, national-ethnic and others.

Political- these are conflicts over the distribution of power, dominance, influence, authority. They arise from the clash of different interests, rivalry and struggle in the process of acquiring, redistributing and exercising political and state power.

Political conflicts are associated with consciously formulated goals aimed at winning leading positions in institutions in the structures of political power. The main political conflicts are:

1) between branches of government;

2) inside the parliament;

3) between political parties and movements;

4) between various links of the administrative apparatus.

Socio-economic- these are conflicts over the means of subsistence, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access to the distribution of material and spiritual wealth.

National-ethnic- these are conflicts that arise in the course of the struggle for the rights and interests of ethnic and national groups.

According to the classification D. Katz conflicts are:

1) between indirectly competing subgroups;

2) between directly competing subgroups;

3) within the hierarchy and about remuneration.

Conflict Explorer K. Boulding identifies the following types of conflicts:

1) real (existing objectively in a certain social subsystem;

2) random (depending on minor points in relation to the fundamental contradictions that cause conflict);

3) substitutive (which are a visible manifestation of hidden conflicts);

4) based on poor knowledge (the result of inept management);

5) hidden, latent (participants for various reasons cannot fight openly);

6) false (creating only appearance).

The current view is that some conflicts are not only possible, but may even be desirable.

Accordingly, there are two types of conflicts:

1) the conflict is considered functional if it leads to an increase in the efficiency of the organization;

2) the conflict can also be dysfunctional and lead to a decrease in personal satisfaction, group cooperation and organizational effectiveness.

3. Compromise and consensus as a form of completion of social conflict

An external sign of conflict resolution may be the end of the incident.

Elimination of the incident is necessary, but this is not a sufficient condition for resolving the conflict. Complete resolution of the conflict situation is possible only when the conflict situation changes.

This change can take many forms, but the most radical change is the one that removes the causes of the conflict.

It is also possible to resolve a social conflict by changing the demands of one side: the opponent makes concessions and changes the goals of his behavior in the conflict.

In modern conflictology, two types of successful conflict resolution can be distinguished: compromise and consensus.

Compromise is such a way of resolving a conflict when the conflicting parties realize their interests and goals through either mutual concessions, or concessions from a weaker side, or from the side that managed to prove the validity of its claims to the one who voluntarily renounced part of his claims.

Consensus- the presence between two or more individuals of similar orientations in any respect, one or another degree of agreement and consistency in actions. It is easy to see that it is precisely at the stage of conflict resolution that such a situation is possible under certain conditions.

M. Weber considers consensus as an integral characteristic of any human community, as long as it exists and does not disintegrate.

He contrasts consensus with solidarity, arguing that behavior based on consensus does not require it as a condition.

At the same time, it must be remembered that consensus does not completely exclude the conflict of interests between the parties. Also, the consensus does not completely rule out the possibility of a new conflict flaring up.

According to M. Weber, consensus is an objectively existing probability that, despite the absence of a preliminary agreement, the participants in one form or another of interaction will treat each other's expectations as significant for themselves. Thus, consensus is not always associated with conflict behavior.

It is easy to see that Weber's interpretation considers this social phenomenon in the broadest sense of the word.

From this we can conclude that consensus is not always generated by conflict, just as conflict does not always end in consensus.

With this understanding of consensus, behavior based on consent is different from behavior based on contract. At the same time, consensus is the primary form - it arises in the minds of people.

The treaty is secondary, since it is the normative consolidation of consensus.

Achieving consensus in society presupposes achieving political consensus.

It is usually understood as a state of agreement in relation to a particular political course in general or its individual aspects.

At the same time, such consent is not identical with joint actions and does not necessarily imply cooperation in the implementation of the relevant goals and objectives. The very degree of agreement in consensus may be different, although it is understood that it must be supported, if not by an overwhelming, then at least by a significant majority.

Varying from problem to problem, the degree of consensus is usually higher in views on provisions of a more general, abstract nature.

That is why the conflicting parties, for more successful negotiations, need to start them precisely with such topics, as this will give them more chances to find a common consensus.

In order to maintain consensus in society, three circumstances must be taken into account.

First, the natural willingness of the majority to follow the laws, regulations, and norms in force.

Secondly, a positive perception of institutions designed to implement these laws and regulations.

Thirdly, the feeling of belonging to a certain community, which contributes to a certain leveling of the role of differences.