The theoretical approaches about society and conflict locate the source of conflict not within the individual but outside it – in social interactions and social processes and in the way society is organised. Aggression thus is not inbuilt but its expression is dependent on factors outside the individual.
Social Process Theories
Social process theories see conflict and conflict resolution as processes. One of the first ones to write about social processes was Adam Smith. Smith was an economist as well as a philosopher. He gave importance to the fabric of social relationships. According to him, these fabrics of relationships could lead to the emergence of principles, which could be applied to conflict resolution. He felt that if markets were allowed to function naturally, they could be a great resolver of conflicts between humans.
Several theorists in the 20th century have paid attention to social process theories. Park and Burgess related conflict to competition. Conflict had a positive function for Simmel and Coser, as they were interwoven into social institutions and contributed positively to ―negotiated order‖. He suggested that human institutions grow through a process of negotiation. Negotiation thus was a fundamental process through which society was formed and constantly reconstituted.
Field Theory sees conflict and its resolution as products of a field of forces. This is reflected in the works of Field theorists like Kurt Lewin and Morton Deutsch. Lewin believed that behaviour was a product of a field of forces and how they came together. This determined the behaviour of those individuals who were involved. Deutsch analysed the concepts of competition and cooperation and sought to find out the conditions under which cooperation could emerge out of competition. Communication according to him was very critical for cooperation.
Systems Theory views conflict as a system of relationships. It seeks to find out how parts of a social system, that is social institutions, work together. Parts of social systems may ‘function‘ but they may also ‗dysfunction‘. When they dysfunction, they are not in complete harmony. This is where the concept of conflict and conflict resolution comes into the picture.
Social Exchange Theories have tried to apply the principles of economic exchange in markets to non-economic exchange such as in informal interactions and group patterns. George C. Homans analysed interactions in terms of rewards and costs. People try to maintain the behaviour that proves profitable. Kenneth E. Boulding‘s conflict related perspectives mainly drew from economic models. He recognized that conflict can involve negative exchanges – more ―bads’ than ―goods’, compared to economics, which mainly deals with positive exchange.
Dean Pruitt and Jeffrey Rubin paid attention to how conflicts could escalate. They identified five strategies of dealing with conflict – contending, yielding, problem solving, withdrawing and inaction. When both parties go for the contending strategy, conflict could escalate. Louis Kriesberg recognized the presence of intractable conflicts – conflicts which never seem to get resolved. He stressed that conflicts that seem easy to resolve initially may become intractable in the future while those that seem intractable may get resolved easily. Terell Northrup expanded on the idea of intractability. According to her, intractable conflicts are those in which the parties are not only opposed to each other but which also strongly incorporates a central sense of identity.
‘nature versus nature’ debate
The range of theories that explain the causes and sources of conflict can be categorised into two: firstly, Human Nature and Conflict and secondly, Society and Conflict. Theories under these two categories point towards the “nature versus nurture‘ debate. The “nature” theorists emphasise that human beings are primarily affected by genes, so conflict is basically in their nature. The “nurture” theorists insist that conflict emerges from the way society is organised. The various types of divisions within society lead to conflict.
Those who stress on human nature as a source of conflict are of the view that violence is inevitable, widespread and universal—irrespective of the social structures—as it is ‘inherent‘ in human beings or within the individual. Hence these theories are also referred to as Inherency Theories. The social structural theories argue that conflict is not located inside the human being but outside it. Conflict is thus dependent on factors external to the human being. Such theories are also known as Contingency Theories.
There is a third set of theories called as Interactionist Theories, which combine the features of inherency and contingency theories. This approach rejects the ‘nature versus nurture‘ debate as it believes that human behaviour is not caused by and should not be reduced to just one factor, either nature or nurture. Human behaviour, in fact, is a combination of both genetics and social structural conditions. John Burton‘s Human Needs Theory has features of both inherency and contingency. Burton says that human beings are driven by their needs and they will pursue them at all costs. So, needs are, thus, inherent in human beings. However, these needs have to be satisfied in the social context and not outside it. The latter aspect is determined by contingency. This unit will, largely focus on the various aspects of the inherency and contingency theories.
Subcribe on Youtube - IGNOU SERVICE
For PDF copy of Solved Assignment
WhatsApp Us - 9113311883(Paid)
0 Comments
Please do not enter any Spam link in the comment box