Social conflict theory was created on the basis of criticism of the metaphysical elements of Parsons' structural functionalism.

At the origins of the theory of "social conflict" was an American sociologist Charles Wright Mills (1916 - 1962). Based on the ideas of K. Marx,
T. Veblen, M. Weber, V. Pareto and G. Moski, Mills argued that any macro-sociological analysis is significant if it concerns the problems of the struggle for power between conflicting social groups. In The Power Elite, Mills notes that the United States is run by a small group of politicians, businessmen, and the military. In 2001, the work of Ch.R. was published in Russia. Mills, The Sociological Imagination. According to Ch.R. Mills, sociological imagination is a fruitful form of self-awareness of the intellectual, with the help of which the ability to wonder comes to life. People become reasonable - they begin to understand that now they are capable of correct generalizations, consistent assessments, which makes it possible to clarify the grounds for people's anxieties and society's indifference. freedom , according to Mills, is not a “recognized necessity” and not a “possibility of choice”, but the opportunity to identify options, discuss and make a decision . There can be no freedom without increasing the role of reason in human affairs.

The theory of "social conflict" was developed by R. Dahrendorf, T. Bottommore, L. Koser. Ralf Dahrendorf (1929) argues that all complex organizations are based on the redistribution of power. R. Dahrendorf tried to overcome the structural and functional theory of social equilibrium
and Marx's theory of class struggle. Human behavior is oriented towards norms. True, norms are not only followed, but they are also produced and interpreted. Those who obediently follow established norms have the best chance of social advancement. Classes are conflicting groupings fighting for dominance within any sphere. Thus, it becomes possible to apply political and legal terms to all spheres of social life. According to Dahrendorf, wherever there are relations of domination and subordination, there are classes. Since some people are excluded from the dominant groups, there is always conflict between classes. Society, in contrast to how it was described by the theorists of "equilibrium", is in a state of permanent conflict. The more difficult social mobility, the greater the tension between classes. A society where there is no uneven distribution of powers would be frozen, non-developing. Inequality is a condition of freedom. From this follows the liberal program of a highly mobile society that recognizes and regulates conflicts. “The sociological man” – conforming to norms – is a scientific and heuristic fiction. A real person is able to distance himself from institutions and norms. Its capacity for practical self-determination is the foundation of liberalism.

People with power through various means, and most importantly, coercion, seek benefits from people with less power. The possibilities for the distribution of power and authority are extremely limited, and therefore the members of any society struggle to redistribute them. According to Dahrendorf, conflicts are based not on economic contradictions, but on the desire of people to redistribute power. Since one redistribution entails another, conflicts are inherent in any society.

Theories of social systems– synthesis of structural and functional models equilibrium and models social conflict became the general theory of social systems. Social relations and structures are interpreted in terms close to the natural science approach, they are considered independent of people, their intentions and aspirations. The behavior of people is determined by the "imperative of the system". Reducing a person's characteristics to a single quality, such as needs, motivations, or attitudes, makes theoretical models simpler, but these models no longer correspond to real social processes. It is impossible to test theoretical propositions by empirical research. The question arose about the qualitative specifics of the object of sociological research. In works
J. Gurvich, T. Adorno, H. Schelsky, M. Polanyi, representatives of the philosophy of science, searched for the causes of failures, both in empirical sociology and in the macrotheory of society, based on assumptions inherent in the natural sciences. These reasons were, first of all, ignoring the conscious creative activity of the individual in the creation and development of the social process, giving broad worldview functions to unusual methods of natural science knowledge.

Structuralism. In France, structuralism played the role of structural-functional analysis. An attempt to build a new model of social reality was associated with language as an initially and transparently structured entity. Structuralists of France are followers of linguistic structuralism, semiotics. "Hyper-rationalist" approach
to social reality lies in the presence of the "collective unconscious" in all human manifestations - public institutions, cultural creativity.

Claude Levi-Strauss (1908– 1990) – a cultural anthropologist, studying the structure of thinking and life of primitive peoples, concludes that the historical approach (“diachronic section”) only facilitates the understanding of how certain social institutions arise. The main goal of the scientific study of society is a "synchronous cut", revealing how the "collective unconscious" forms the symbolic structures of a given society - its rituals, cultural traditions, speech forms. The study of historical and ethnic facts is only a step towards comprehending the collective unconscious. Fundamental ethnological works
Levi-Strauss have considerable heuristic value.

Structuralist constructivism P. Bourdieu (1930–2002) . The main task of sociology, according to Bourdieu, is to reveal the latent structures of various social worlds that influence
on individuals, and on the other hand, to explore, within the framework of the hermeneutic tradition, the selective ability of people, their predisposition to certain actions in specific social fields.

Bourdieu's theory: an attempt to synthesize structuralism and phenomenology. - Structuralist constructivism. The principle of double structuring of social reality: a) in the social system there are objective structures, independent of the consciousness and will of people who are able to stimulate certain actions and aspirations of people; b) the structures themselves are created agents' social practices.

The second is constructivism, which assumes that people's actions, conditioned by life experience, the process of socialization and acquired predispositions to act one way or another, are a kind of social action matrices that "form a social agent as a truly practical operator of object construction."

These methodological approaches, according to Bourdieu, make it possible to establish causal relationships between social phenomena in conditions uneven distribution of social realities in space and time. Thus, social relations are distributed uneven.
In a certain place and at a certain time they can be very intense and vice versa. Similarly, agents enter into social relations unevenly. Finally, people have uneven access to capital, which also affects the nature of their social actions.

The Main Theorem of Structuralist Constructivism The theorem allows one to study the nature of social practices in the context of an integral consideration of very different factors of social life. In its most general form, Bourdieu himself presents it as follows:

<(габитус) X (capital) > + field = practices

Habitus concept. Habitus is one of Bourdieu's central categories. The objective social environment produces habitus - a "system of strong acquired predispositions", which are subsequently used by individuals as an active ability to make changes to existing structures, as initial settings that generate and organize the practices of individuals. As a rule, these predispositions do not imply a conscious focus on achieving certain goals, because over a long period of time they are formed by opportunities and impossibilities, freedoms and necessities, permissions and prohibitions. Naturally, in specific life situations, people exclude the most incredible practices.

Habitus is fundamentally different from scientific assessments. If science, after research, involves constant correction of data, refinement of hypotheses, etc., then people who have perfectly adapted to past realities begin to act out of place in new realities, not noticing that there are no previous conditions.

Habitus allows in social practices to link together the past, present and future. Whatever our politicians promise, the future of Russia will somehow develop by reproducing past structured practices, incorporating them into the present, whether we like them or not today.

This is how, according to the structural-constructivist paradigm, history is made. Habitus, notes Bourdieu, is a product of history, producing individual and collective practices - again history - in accordance with the patterns generated by history. It causes the active presence of past experience, which, existing in every organism in the form of patterns of perception, thought and action, guarantees the “correctness” of practices, their constancy over time, more reliably than all formal rules and explicit norms. Such a system of predispositions, ie. present
in the present, the past, rushing into the future, by reproducing uniformly structured practices ... is the principle of continuity and regularity, which is noted in social practices.

The concept of habitus substantiates the methodological principles of predicting the future through overcoming the antinomy of determinism and freedom, the conscious and the unconscious, the individual and society. The principles of the concept of habitus guide researchers to a more objective analysis of "subjective expectations". In this regard, Bourdieu criticizes those political and economic theories that recognize only "rational" actions. The nature of the action depends on the specific chances that individuals have, the differences between individual habitus determine irregularity their social aspirations. People shape their expectations according to specific indicators of what is available and not available, what is "for us" and "not for us", thereby adjusting themselves to the likely future that they foresee and intend to realize.

As you can see, the concept of habitus makes it possible to debunk the illusions about equal "potential opportunities" whether in economics or politics, which exist only theoretically, on paper, for everyone.

Capital and its types. The predisposition of an agent to a particular action largely depends on funds, which they have at their disposal. In order to provide the means by which agents can satisfy their interests, Bourdieu introduces the concept capital. Capital can be represented as an equivalent of the concept resources used by Giddens.

Thus, capitals act as " structures of domination enabling individuals to achieve their goals. The greater the amount of capital, the more diverse they are, the easier it is for their owners to achieve certain goals. Bourdieu distinguishes four groups of capitals. This is economic capital, cultural capital, social capital and symbolic capital.

economic capital represents a variety of economic resources that can be used by an agent - money, goods, etc.

cultural capital includes resources of a cultural nature. This is, first of all, education, the authority of the educational institution that the individual graduated from, the demand for his certificates and diplomas.
in the labor market. The structural level of the individual himself is also a component of cultural capital.

social capital- means associated with an individual's belonging to a particular social group. It is clear that belonging to the upper class gives the individual more power opportunities and life chances.

Symbolic Capital- this is what is usually called name, prestige, reputation. A person who is recognizable on the TV screen has more resources to achieve his goals than those individuals who are not popular. Almost all capitals have the ability convert into each other. So, having symbolic capital, one can climb up the social ladder, thereby acquiring social capital. Only cultural capital can have relative independence. Even with a large amount of economic capital,
it is not easy to acquire cultural capital.

Capital conversion is carried out according to exchange qualification, which depends on the culture of the society, the state of the market, the demand on it for one or another type of capital.

Capitals give agents power over those who have less or none at all. Naturally, the nature of the actions of individuals who have a large amount of capital will be different in comparison with those who have less capital.

The volume and structure of capital is not so difficult to calculate empirically. This fact gives the theory of structuralist constructivism a practical orientation.

Field concept. According to Bourdieu, the social field is a logically conceivable structure, a kind of environment in which social relations are carried out. But at the same time, the social field is real social, economic, political and other institutions, for example, the state or political parties. Bourdieu is not interested in institutional structures per se, but in objective connections between different positions, the interests of the people involved in them, their entry into confrontation or cooperation with each other for mastering the specific benefits of the field. The benefits of the field can be very different - the possession of power, economic and social resources, the occupation of dominant positions.

The entire social space consists of several fields - the field of politics, the field of economics, the field of religion, the scientific field, the field of culture. Each social field cannot exist without the practice of agents adequate to the field: not everyone falls into the political field, but only those individuals who, one way or another, are related to politics; believers fall into the religious field.

By introducing the concept of an agent as opposed to a subject, Bourdieu distances himself from traditional structuralism, according to which the social structure completely determines both the social status of a person and his behavior. Agents are predisposed to their own activity. In order for the field to function, it is necessary not only to relate to the field,
but formal activity. You also need a predisposition to act according to his rules, the presence of a certain habitus, which includes knowledge of the rules of the field, willingness to recognize them and act appropriately.

The field always appears before the agent as already existing, given,
Specifically, individual practice can only reproduce and transform the field. So, for example, specific people who are ready and able to engage in entrepreneurship are included in economic field. Their entrepreneurial actions in this economic field both reproduce and, to a certain extent, transform the field. Then reproduced already new the field, for its part, provides an opportunity and means for the innovative economic practice of agents, while at the same time giving their behavior a normative assignment. And then the process is repeated again and again. On the one hand, the field rules imply at least minimal rationality(setting goals, choosing means and achievements), and on the other hand, spontaneous orientation. The field appears as a space of struggle and compromise, as well as the union of the most diverse forces, which are expressed in specific social practices. To a large extent, the relations of struggle and alliances, their nature depends on the differences in the agents' own characteristics. All competence is capital(economic, social, intellectual), to use the rules that exist for everyone.

Bourdieu's formula - <(габитус) X (capital) > + field = practices reflects the essence methodological strategy proposed by Bourdieu. If we have data on the habitus of an agent, the volume and structure of his capital, we know
in which particular social field the agent operates, we can get what we want - knowledge of character his social practices, his ability to construct certain structures.

MICROSOCIOLOGICAL THEORIES.

The problem of conflict is as old as the world. 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. In essence, it boiled down to a clash between antagonistic classes.

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 on the nature of this phenomenon, and the practical recommendations of various authors are non-one-dimensional.

▼ One of them, conventionally called socio-biological, States that conflict is inherent in man as in all animals . Researchers in this area rely on the discovery by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) the theory of natural selection, and from it they derive the idea of ​​the natural aggressiveness of man in general. 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 Ch. Darwin, "social Darwinism" appeared as a direction, the supporters of which 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. Representatives of social Darwinism gave a description of a variety of conflicts, identifying various types of aggressive behavior of people :

· territorial aggression;

· dominance aggression;

· sexual aggression;

· parental aggression;

· child's aggression

· moralistic aggression;

· robber aggression;

· aggression of the victim in relation to the robber.

Of course, in real life there are many manifestations of such types of aggression, but, fortunately, they are not universal.

▼ The second theory is socio-psychological, explains conflict through tension theory . 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.

The social background of tension is frustration, which manifests itself in the form of disorganization of the internal state of the individual into social obstacles to achieving the goal. The phenomenon of frustration is generated if all possible ways to achieve the goal are blocked and can manifest itself in reactions of aggression, regression or withdrawal into oneself.

But 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.

▼ A third perspective, traditionally called the class or violence theory consists in the statement: social conflict is reproduced by societies with a certain social structure . Among the authors of such views on the conflict - Karl Marx (1818-1883), Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), IN AND. Lenin (1870-1924), Mao Zedong (1893-1976); German-American sociologist, representative of neo-Marxism Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), American sociologist of left-wing radical orientation 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).

Marxist sociology has made significant adjustments to the prevailing ideas about the processes of social development.

The materialistic understanding of history is outlined by K. Marx in his book “On the Critique of Political Economy” (1859), where the structure of society is presented to him by four main elements:

· productive forces;

· relations of production;

· political superstructure;

· forms of social consciousness.

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 concept of class is central to Marxism, where it is defined in relation to the means of production. Outside Marxism the definition of classes (layers-strata are implied) is based on such criteria as attitude to power, property, income, lifestyle or standard of living, prestige (these are the main criteria of the theory of social stratification). But be that as it may, almost all authors agree with such features of classes as:

· collective inequality of living and working conditions;

· hereditary transfer of privileges (not only property, but also status).

Classes are characterized by unequal chances, which result from unequal levels of wealth, types of property, legal privileges, cultural advantages, etc., manifested in a certain way of life and a sense of belonging to the corresponding stratum.

The theory of K. Marx, which assigned the role of the main bearers of political antagonisms to classes, on the whole correctly described the situation in Western Europe in the middle XIX - the beginning of the twentieth century. However, this does not mean its unconditional applicability to the conditions of other eras and regions. At present, probably no less important role as participants in political action began to play territorial (nations and other formations within nations) and corporate (professional and paraprofessional) groups. So, belonging to a territorial group is realized with particular acuteness by a person, therefore conflicts between nations can be extremely fierce, surpassing even class relations in this.

Corporate groups are formed by people engaged in the same or similar activities (big business, the banking system, export industries, etc.). The fact of performing one type of professional activity often generates a strong sense of solidarity, especially in an unstable economy. In cases where the way of life of representatives of different classes does not differ very much, the corporate spirit can weaken class solidarity.

Regarding the Marxist idea of ​​revolution , then the experience of Russia and other countries shows the dubious quality of a society with liberated violence that is born in such a flame. The classic of conflictology, German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf considers “revolutions to be melancholy moments in history. A brief flash of hope remains drowned in misery and disappointment.”

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

The leading representative of this trend is an 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:

· meeting the basic biological and psychological needs of the majority of society;

· effective activity of social control bodies educating citizens in accordance with the norms accepted in a given society;

· 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.

A point of view close to this position was also defended by representatives schools of "human relations" ( public relations ) . Famous representative of this school Elton Mayo (1880-1949), an American sociologist and psychologist, one of the founders of industrial sociology, argued that it is necessary to promote the establishment of peace in industry, this is the main problem of our time. In his recommendations to the captains of industry, he argued the need to replace individual remuneration with group, economic - socio-psychological, implying a favorable moral climate, job satisfaction, and a democratic style of leadership.

Over time, it turned out that the expectations associated with the activities of the "human relations" school were excessive, and its recommendations increasingly began to be criticized. In the 1950s, a change in theoretical orientation began to be felt, a return to the conflict model of society was outlined. Functionalism was critically rethought, criticism of which was directed against the inability to give an adequate analysis of conflicts. The critical attitude to functionalism was promoted by the work of the American sociologist Robert Merton "Social Theory and Social Structure" (1949) in which he analyzed social anomalies in detail.

▼ At the same time, modern, most popular concepts of social conflict, conventionally called dialectical: conflict is functional for social systems. The most famous among them are the concepts 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 an American sociologist Lewis Coser published a book "Functions of Social Conflict", where he outlined his concept, called "concepts 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.

There was also a resurgence of interest in the conflict in Europe in the 1960s. In 1965 a German sociologist Ralph Dahrendorf published work "Class Structure and Class Conflict", and two years later an essay entitled "Beyond Utopia". His concept "conflict model of society" 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.

Contemporary American sociologist and economist Kenneth Boulding, author "general theory of conflict" in work “Conflict and defense. General Theory" (1963) tried to present a holistic scientific theory of conflict, covering all manifestations of animate and inanimate nature, individual 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 dialectical theories of conflict L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf and K. Boulding considered by us focus on the dynamic explanation of the process of change and emphasize the positive role of conflict in the life of society.

The positive role of the conflict by the supporters of the dialectical approach is seen in the following:

- conflict helps to clarify the problem;

- conflict enhances the organization's ability to change;

- conflicts can reinforce morality, deepening and enriching relationships between people;

- conflicts make life more interesting, awaken curiosity and stimulate development;

- conflicts can contribute to self-improvement of skills and knowledge;

- conflicts increase the quality of decisions made;

- conflicts contribute to the production of new creative ideas;

- conflicts help people understand who they really are.

It can be argued that modern foreign literature on conflictology is dominated by:

What's New Lewis Coser Contributes:

In contrast to the theory of structural functionalism, whose representatives take conflicts outside the social system as something unusual for it, he argues that conflicts are a product of the internal life of society, i.e. he emphasizes their stabilizing role for the social system.

But the concept of “positive-functional conflict” did not dominate for long. In the mid-1960s, Ralf Dahrendorf presented the justification for the “conflict model of society”.

The essence of the concept of Ralf Dahrendorf is as follows:

· any society is subject to change at every moment;

· social change is omnipresent;

· any society experiences social conflict at every moment;

· social conflict is ubiquitous;

· every element of society contributes to its change;

· Any society relies on the coercion of some of its members by others.

R. Dahrendorf: “Those who know how to cope with conflicts by recognizing and regulating them take control of the rhythm of history. The one who misses this opportunity gets this rhythm to his opponents.”

Among the concepts that claim to be universal is Kenneth Boulding's “general theory of conflict”.

From the main provisions of the theory of K. Boulding it follows that:

· conflict is inseparable from social life;

· in the nature of man lies the desire for constant enmity with his own kind;

· conflict can be overcome or limited;

· all conflicts have common patterns of development;

· the key concept of the conflict is competition;

Competition is broader than the concept of conflict, since not every competition turns into a conflict. The parties are not aware of the fact of their rivalry.

· in a genuine conflict, there must be awareness of the parties and the incompatibility of their desires.

In the 70-90sIn Western studies of the conflict, two main directions have been identified:

· first- common in Western Europe (France, Holland, Italy, Spain) and is associated with the study of the conflicts themselves;

· second- widespread in the United States and associated with the study of peace and harmony, as evidenced by some of the popular publications indicated by us in the list of recommended reading.

The goals of the two scientific directions are essentially identical, but their achievement is associated with different methodological approaches.

Conflictology in Russia begins to develop in earnest only now, when we are faced with a number of acute labor and ethnic conflicts.

Social conflict is a process in which an individual or a group of individuals seek to achieve their own goals by eliminating, destroying or subjugating another individual or group of individuals.

2. Theory of social conflict

Theories of social conflict were created on the basis of criticism of the metaphysical elements of the structural functionalism of T. Parsons, who was accused of excessive emphasis on comfort, forgetfulness of social conflict, inability to take into account the central place of material interests in human affairs, unjustified optimism, emphasizing the importance of integration and harmony through radical change and instability.

The origins of the theory of "social conflict" was the American sociologist Ch.R. Mills. Based on the ideas of K. Marx, T. Veblen, M. Weber, V. Pareto and G. Mosca, Mills argued that any macrosociological analysis is worth something only if it concerns the problems of the struggle for power between conflicting social groups .

The theory of "social conflict" was more clearly formulated in the works of the German sociologist R. Dahrendorf, the English T. Bottommore, the American L. Koser and other Western sociologists.

Substantiating the main provisions of the theory of social conflict, R. Dahrendorf (b. 1929) argues that all complex organizations are based on the redistribution of power, that people in power are capable of using various means, among which coercion is the main one, to achieve benefits from people with less power. The possibilities for the distribution of power and authority are extremely limited, and therefore the members of any society struggle for redistribution. This struggle may not manifest itself openly, but the grounds for it exist in any social structure.

Thus, according to R. Dahrendorf, conflicts of human interests are based not on economic reasons, but on the desire of people to redistribute power. The source of conflicts is the so-called homo politicus (“political man”), and since one redistribution of power puts another in line, social conflicts are immanent in any society. They are inevitable and permanent, they serve as a means of satisfying interests, mitigating the manifestations of various human passions. “All relations of individuals built on incompatible goals, according to R. Dahrendorf, are relations of social conflict.”

2.1 Social systems theory

A kind of synthesis of the structural-functional model of equilibrium and the model of social conflict has become the general theory of social systems, formulated in functional terms. The behavior of people is determined by the "imperatives of the system", which determine the direction of their actions and dictate the types of decisions made.

Proponents of this approach are looking for conditions that provide positive consequences for the system, and the effectiveness of the "work" of the system is evaluated regardless of the analysis of the possible negative consequences of certain decisions for people. Reducing the characteristics of a person to a single quality, for example, to needs, motivations or attitudes, really makes theoretical models simpler, but they (the models) cease to correspond to the reality of the social processes analyzed through them.

parsons functionalism socialization conflict structuralism

2.2 Structuralism

In France, the role of the structural-functional approach to social reality was played by structuralism - a direction represented by such prominent sociologists as M. Foucault, C. Levi-Strauss. The main method of structuralism consisted in an attempt to build a new model of social reality. Such a model for the structuralists was language as an initially and transparently structured entity. The structuralists of France are followers of the linguistic structuralism that developed in the first quarter of the 20th century.

The "hyperrationalist" approach to social reality consists in emphasizing the presence in all human manifestations - public institutions, cultural creativity, etc., of a certain common substance - the "collective unconscious".

Claude Levi-Strauss (1908-1990), one of the greatest modern cultural anthropologists, studying the structure of thinking and life of primitive peoples, concludes that the historical approach (“diachronic section”) only facilitates the understanding of how certain social institutions arise. The main goal of the scientific study of society is a "synchronous section", tracing how the collective unconscious forms the symbolic structures of a given society - its rituals, cultural traditions, speech forms. The study of historical and ethnic facts is only a step towards comprehending the collective unconscious.

The fundamental ethnological works of Levi-Strauss have considerable heuristic value.

M. Foucault (1926-1984) sociohistorical studies of the cultures of the past, especially the Middle Ages, early and late Renaissance, classicism, are devoted to the most poorly studied areas of human existence by that time - such areas of the collective unconscious as illness, insanity, deviant behavior. Later he is working on a multi-volume treatise on the history of sexuality.

Foucault deduces "discursive" (mental) structures, meaning by these designations the normative systems and structuring of knowledge that operated in different periods of history. A truly scientific, objective study is, according to Foucault, the most rigorous and detailed study of each given mental structure as a structure of the collective unconscious in its relationship with the structure of "power".

Among the new microtheories, two varieties of social behaviorism can be distinguished, in which the main attention is paid to the observable fact of human behavior and interaction. The interaction is interpreted in two different versions: one according to the formula "stimulus (C) - reaction (R)", the other - "stimulus (C) - interpretation (I) - reaction (R)". The first form of behaviorism is represented by the psychological concept of social exchange by J. Homans and its various variations, the second - by "symbolic interactionism" by J. Mead and its variations.

The modification of the key concepts of structural functionalism, which is currently ongoing, taking into account the achievements in the field of empirical sociological research, which have been achieved by sociologists of various schools and directions. 3. Theoretical sociology of the USA of the 20th century The beginning of the formation of American sociology dates back to the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. Its first representatives...

public opinion. 1996, No. 1. 31a. Zaslavskaya T.N. Stratification of modern Russian society. // economic and social changes: public opinion monitoring. 1996, No. 1. 32. Klopov E.V. Transitional state of the labor movement // Sociological journal. 1995, No. 1. 33 Kondratiev V.Yu. Economic sociology: the search for interdisciplinary foundations//Sociological research. 1993, No. 8. ...

Consultants in the development of government projects and major social programs at the national and international level. However, since the 1970s, there has been a slight decrease in the "sociological boom". Modern Western sociology is an extremely complex and contradictory formation, represented by many different schools and trends. They differ from each other in their theoretical...

There was a need for them, but there was also a real opportunity to conduct such studies. 2. Formation of the discipline The birth of a new direction in ethnic sociology was helped by subjective circumstances. In the mid 60s. Director of the Institute of Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR (now the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences) was Yu.V. Bromley, a broad-minded scientist interested in ...

In the 1950s, a special conflictological direction emerged in modern sociology as a kind of reaction to the emphasis of structural functionalism on harmony, stability, and integration of social. systems and inattention to social. conflicts, radical transformations. The problem of social many sociologists of the past (Marxism, Gumplovich, Weber, Pareto) dealt with the conflict. We are talking about a special and systematic study of social. conflicts within the framework of a special "theory of conflicts", which developed and became widespread only in the 2nd half of the 20th century. The merit of Mils, Coser, Dahrendorf, Rex is especially great in this. Social conflicts are studied not only by sociology, but also by psychology, social. philosophy, etc.

Conflictology as a whole is an interdisciplinary branch of scientific knowledge that studies the emergence, formation, development and resolution of conflicts. Conflicts are recognized as an important factor in social development. In the social approach to conflicts, the study of their place in the role of the social system comes to the fore.

Lewis Coser (1913) is considered one of the founders of the functionalist theory of social conflict. He tried to combine evolutionary functionalism and the theory of social conflict. Social conflicts develop not outside, but within society as a social. system as a result of strengthening its differentiation and the growth of the isolation of its structures. Emphasizes the positive role of social conflicts (representatives of classical functionalism - negatively). In the works "Functions of social. conflict”, “Continuation of the study of social. conflict” and others. He draws attention to the important role of social. collisions in the integration and stabilization of social life and emphasizes that the path of movement towards a stable social order does not exclude, but involves the struggle of various interests of individuals and social. groups and social clashes between them, because at the same time, the flexibility of social system and its institutions, their ability to overcome the consequences of these conflicts. In the overdue renewal of society, the conflict gives rise to new social. institutions and norms, stimulates economics. and technological progress.

Ralph Dahrendorf (1929) - the largest representative of modern conflictology, created his own "conflict model of society". Social conflict always exists, it is the norm of social development. systems, because people and their groups have different interests. Main works: "Social classes and class conflict in an industrial society", "Society and freedom", "Exit from utopia".

He made a great contribution to modern social theory. differentiation and social conflicts, showed that classes - social. groups of people that differ in participation and non-participation in dominance and are in conflict, tk. some have power and want to keep it, while others do not and want to change the status quo. Relations of domination and subordination are characteristic of any society. Aggravation and explosion of social. conflict, the essence of which lies in the confrontation between power and anarchy, which resists the existing power, is the source and driving force of social. change, social progress. The conflict itself grows out of the inequality of the status of people and their groups, primarily in relation to power, the management of society. Recognizing the inevitability, necessity and usefulness of social inequality, the possibility of combining social. conflict and peaceful coexistence of those in conflict, he prefers the conflict model of society in comparison with the model of a society of universal social. equality, social order and stability.

social conflict is a process in which an individual or a group of individuals seek to achieve their own goals by eliminating, destroying or subjugating another individual or group of individuals.

Characteristics of the concepts of social conflict

The problem of conflict is as old as the world. However, until the end of the XVIII century. thinkers led him to the problem of domination and subordination, resolved through the regulatory activity of the state.

Conflict as a social phenomenon was first formulated in the work of Adam Smith "Studies on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" (1776). the basis of the conflict lies division of society into classes and economic rivalry. This division will be the driving force behind the development of society, performing useful functions.

The problem of social conflict also received substantiation 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. In fact, he was heading towards a clash between antagonistic classes.

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 German sociologist (the founder of understanding sociology and the theory of social action) Max Weber (1864-1920) adhered to the same position. His compatriot Georg Simmel (1858-1918) first introduced the term “sociology of conflict”. On the basis of his theory of “social conflicts”, the so-called “formal school” later arose, the representatives of which attach the importance of stimulants to progress to contradictions and conflicts.

Let us note the fact that in the modern theory of conflict there are many points of view on the nature of the ϶ᴛᴏth phenomenon, and the practical recommendations of various authors are non-one-dimensional.

Socio-biological theory

Conflict is inherent in man as in all animals.

Researchers of the ϶ᴛᴏth direction rely on the discovery by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882) the theory of natural selection, and from it they derive the idea of ​​the natural aggressiveness of man in general.
It is worth noting that 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 Ch. 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). It is worth noting that 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.

The American social Darwinist also adhered to a similar position. 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) will be the true creators of human values, the best people.

Today, the ideas of social Darwinism have few followers, but certain ideas of the ϶ᴛᴏ theory are useful in resolving current conflicts. Representatives of social Darwinism gave a description of a variety of conflicts, identifying various types of aggressive behavior of people:

• territorial aggression;
• dominance aggression;
• sexual aggression;
• parental aggression;
• child's aggression
• moralistic aggression;
• robber aggression;
• aggression of the victim in relation to the robber.

Of course, in real life there are many manifestations of such types of aggression, but, fortunately, they are not universal.

Socio-psychological - theory

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.

The social background of tension is frustration, which manifests itself in the form of disorganization of the internal state of the individual into social obstacles to achieving the goal. The phenomenon of frustration is generated if all possible ways to achieve the goal are blocked and can manifest itself in reactions of aggression, regression or withdrawal into oneself.

But explaining the conflict with tension theory presents some difficulty, since it cannot determine at what level of tension the conflict should arise. Indicators of tension, manifested in a particular situation, will be individual states of individuals and can hardly be used to predict collective outbursts of aggression.

Note that the theory of violence

Social conflict is reproduced by societies with a certain social structure.

Among the authors of such views on the conflict - Karl Marx (1818-1883), Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), IN AND. Lenin (1870-1924), Mao Zedong (1893-1976); German-American sociologist, representative of neo-Marxism Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), American sociologist of left-wing radical orientation Charles Wright Mills (1916-1962). Not without the influence of Marxism, the Italian school of political sociology developed, which created the theory of elites, which became classics Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923), Gaetano Mosca (1858-1941), Robert Michels (1876-1936).

Marxist sociology has made significant adjustments to the prevailing ideas about the processes of social development.

The materialistic understanding of history is outlined by K. Marx in his book “On the Critique of Political Economy” (1859), where the structure of society is presented to him by four main elements:

• productive forces;
• relations of production;
• political superstructure;
• forms of social consciousness.

K. Marx believed that the conflict in society is due to the division of people into different classes in ϲᴏᴏᴛʙᴇᴛϲᴛʙ and their position in the economic system.
It is worth noting that the main classes of society, according to Marx, will be the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, between which there is constant enmity, since the goal of the bourgeoisie will be the domination and exploitation of hired workers. Antagonistic conflicts lead to revolutions, which will be the locomotives of history. The conflict in this case is seen as an inevitable clash, which 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 concept of class is central to Marxism, where it is defined in relation to the means of production. Outside of Marxism, the definition of classes (strata-strata are implied) is based on such criteria as attitude to power, property, income, lifestyle or standard of living, prestige(϶ᴛᴏ the main criteria of the theory of social stratification) But be that as it may, almost all authors agree with such features of classes as:

• collective inequality of living and working conditions;
• hereditary transfer of privileges (not only property, but also status)

Classes are characterized by an inequality of chances that results from unequal levels of wealth, types of property, legal privileges, cultural advantages, etc., will remain in a certain way of life and a sense of belonging to the ϲᴏᴏᴛʙᴇᴛϲᴛʙ stratum.

It should be noted that the theory of K. Marx, which assigned the role of the main bearers of political antagonisms to classes, on the whole correctly described the Western European situation in the middle of the 19th and early 20th centuries. At the same time, ϶ᴛᴏ does not mean its unconditional applicability to the conditions of other eras and regions. Today, probably no less important role as participants in political action began to play territorial(nations and other formations within nations) and corporate(professional and paraprofessional) groups. So, belonging to a territorial group is realized with particular acuteness by a person, therefore conflicts between nations can be extremely fierce, surpassing even class relations in ϶ᴛᴏm.

Corporate groups formed by people engaged in the same or closely related activities (big business, the banking system, export industries, etc.) The fact of performing the same type of professional activity often generates a strong sense of solidarity, especially in an unstable economy. In cases where the way of life of representatives of different classes does not differ very much, the corporate spirit can weaken class solidarity.

Regarding the Marxist idea of ​​revolution, then the experience of Russia and other countries shows the dubious quality of a society born in such a flame with liberated violence. The classic of conflictology, German sociologist Ralf Dahrendorf considers “revolutions to be melancholy moments in history. A brief flash of hope remains drowned in misery and disappointment.”

Note that the functionalist theory

The conflict is seen as a distortion, a dysfunctional process in social systems.

The leading representative of the ϶ᴛᴏth direction is an American sociologist Talcott Parsons (1902-1979) interpreted the conflict as a social anomaly, a “disaster”, which is extremely important to overcome. It is worth noting that he formulated a number of social prerequisites that ensure the stability of society:

• meeting the basic biological and psychological needs of the majority of society;
• effective activity of social control bodies educating citizens in accordance with the norms accepted in this society;
• 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.

A point of view close to the ϶ᴛᴏth position was also defended by representatives schools of "human relations" (publicrelations) . Famous representative of the ϶ᴛᴏ school Elton Mayo (1880-1949), an American sociologist and psychologist, one of the founders of industrial sociology, argued that it was extremely important to promote peace in industry, ϶ᴛᴏ the main problem of our time. In his recommendations to captains of industry, he argued the need to replace individual remuneration with group, economic - socio-psychological, implying a favorable moral climate, job satisfaction, and a democratic style of leadership.

Over time, it turned out that the expectations associated with the activities of the "human relations" school were excessive, and its recommendations increasingly began to be criticized. In the 1950s, a change in theoretical orientation began to be felt, a return to the conflict model of society was outlined. Functionalism was critically rethought, criticism against which was directed against the inability to give an adequate analysis of conflicts. The critical attitude to functionalism was promoted by the work of the American sociologist Robert Merton "Social Theory and Social Structure" (1949), in which he analyzed social anomalies in detail.

Dialectical theories

In ϶ᴛᴏ the same time appeared modern, most popular concepts of social conflict, conventionally called dialectical: conflict is functional for social systems. The most famous among them are the concepts 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 context, 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 an American sociologist Lewis Coser published a book "Functions of Social Conflict", where he outlined the ϲʙᴏ concept, called "concepts of positive-functional conflict". It is worth noting that 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.

There was also a resurgence of interest in the conflict in Europe in the 1960s. In 1965 a German sociologist Ralph Dahrendorf published work "Class Structure and Class Conflict", and two years later an essay entitled "Beyond Utopia". His concept "conflict model of society" 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 in every society there is disintegration and conflict, a permanent state of the social organism:

“The whole social life will be 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 ϲʙᴏboda, as well as the challenge to rational mastery and control over social problems, are located.

Contemporary American sociologist and economist Kenneth Boulding, author "general theory of conflict" in work “Conflict and defense. General Theory" (1963) tried to present a holistic scientific theory of conflict, covering all manifestations of animate and inanimate nature, individual 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 dialectical theories of conflict L. Coser, R. Dahrendorf and K. Boulding considered by us focus on the dynamic explanation of the process of change and emphasize the positive role of conflict in the life of society.

The positive role of the conflict by the supporters of the dialectical approach is seen in the following:

• conflict helps to clarify the problem;
• conflict enhances the organization's ability to change;
• conflicts can reinforce morality, deepening and enriching relationships between people;
• conflicts make life more interesting, awaken curiosity and stimulate development;
• conflicts can contribute to self-improvement of skills and knowledge;
• conflicts increase the quality of decisions made;
• conflicts contribute to the production of new creative ideas;
• conflicts help people understand who they really are.

It can be argued that modern foreign literature on conflictology is dominated by:

What's New Lewis Coser Contributes:

Unlike the theory of structural functionalism, whose representatives take conflicts outside the social system as something unfamiliar to it, he proves that conflicts will be a product of the internal life of society, i.e. he emphasizes their stabilizing role for the social system.

But the concept of “positive-functional conflict” did not dominate for long. In the mid-1960s, Ralf Dahrendorf presented the justification for the “conflict model of society”.

The essence of the concept of Ralf Dahrendorf is as follows:

• any society is subject to change at every moment;
• social change is omnipresent;
• any society experiences social conflict at every moment;
• social conflict is ubiquitous;
• every element of society contributes to its change;
• Any society relies on the coercion of some of its members by others.

R. Dahrendorf: “Those who know how to deal with conflicts by recognizing and regulating them take control of the rhythm of history. The one who misses such an opportunity gets ϶ᴛᴏt rhythm into his opponents”.

Among the concepts that claim to be universal is the “general theory of conflict” by Kenneth Boulding.

From the main provisions of the theory of K. Boulding it follows that:

• conflict is inseparable from social life;
• in the nature of man lies the desire for constant enmity with his own kind;
• conflict can be overcome or limited;
• all conflicts have common patterns of development;
• the key concept of the conflict will be competition;

Competition is broader than the concept of conflict, since not every competition turns into a conflict. The parties are not aware of the fact of their rivalry.

• in a genuine conflict, there must be awareness of the parties and the incompatibility of their desires.

In the 70-90s In Western studies of the conflict, two main directions have been identified:

• first- common in Western Europe (France, Holland, Italy, Spain) and is associated with the study of the conflicts themselves;
• second- common in the United States and associated with the study of peace and harmony, as evidenced by some popular publications indicated by us in the list of recommended reading.

The goals of the two scientific directions are essentially identical, but their achievement is associated with different methodological approaches.

Conflictology in Russia begins to develop in earnest only now, when we are faced with a number of acute labor and ethnic conflicts.