social conflict is an open confrontation, a clash of two or more subjects of social interaction, the causes of which are incompatible needs, interests and values. Social conflict also includes the activity of an individual or groups that block the functioning of the enemy or cause damage to other people (groups).

The reasons for them can be a variety of life problems: material resources, the most important life attitudes, powers of authority, status-role differences in the social structure, personal (emotional-psychological) differences, etc.

Conflicts cover all spheres of people's life, the totality of social relations, social interaction. The conflict, in fact, is one of the types of social interaction, the subjects and participants of which are individuals, large and small social groups and organizations. conflicts are based only on those contradictions caused by incompatible interests, needs and values. Such contradictions, as a rule, are transformed into an open struggle of the parties, into a real confrontation.

STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONFLICT

Pre-conflict stage

No social conflict arises instantly. Emotional stress, irritation and anger usually accumulate over time, so the pre-conflict stage sometimes drags on so much that the root cause of the conflict is forgotten.

Direct conflict

This stage is characterized primarily by the presence of an incident. 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 resolution

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.

57. Types of social conflict and methods of resolution

All conflicts can be classified depending on the areas of disagreement as follows.

1. Personal conflict. This zone includes conflicts occurring within the personality, at the level of individual consciousness.

2. Interpersonal conflict. This zone includes disagreements between two or more members of the same group or groups.

3. Intergroup conflict. A certain number of individuals forming a group (that is, a social community capable of joint coordinated action) come into conflict with another group that does not include individuals from the first group.

4. Conflict of ownership. Occurs due to the dual membership of individuals, for example, when they form a group within another, larger group, or when an individual is simultaneously in two competitive groups pursuing the same goal.

5. Conflict with the external environment. The individuals who make up the group are under pressure from outside (primarily from cultural, administrative and economic norms and regulations). Often they come into conflict with the institutions that support these norms and regulations.

According to their internal content, social conflicts are divided into rational and emotional. To rational include such conflicts that cover the sphere of reasonable, businesslike cooperation, redistribution of resources and improvement of the managerial or social structure. Rational conflicts are also encountered in the field of culture, when people are trying to free themselves from obsolete, unnecessary forms, customs and beliefs. Respect for the opponent, recognition of his right to a certain amount of truth - these are the characteristic features of a rational conflict.

Political conflicts- a clash over the distribution of power, forms of struggle for power.

social conflict represents contradictions in the system of relations between people (groups), which is characterized by the strengthening of opposing interests, tendencies of social communities and individuals. For example, in the sphere of labor activity, the consequence is strikes, pickets, performances by large groups of workers.

Economic conflicts represent a wide range of conflicts, which are based on contradictions between the economic interests of individuals and groups. This is a struggle for certain resources, benefits, spheres of economic influence, distribution of property, etc. These types of conflicts are common at different levels of government.

Ways to resolve conflicts

The conflict exit strategy is the main line of behavior of the opponent during conflict resolution. . There are five main strategies:rivalry; compromise; cooperation; avoidance; fixture.

Rivalry consists in imposing on the other side a solution that is beneficial to oneself.

Compromise consists in the desire of opponents to end the conflict with partial concessions.

Adaptation or concession is considered as a forced or voluntary refusal to fight and surrender of one's positions.

Avoidance or avoidance is an attempt to get out of the conflict with minimal losses.

Cooperation is considered the most effective strategy for dealing with conflict. It implies the desire of opponents to constructively discuss the problem.

social conflict(from lat. conflict- clash) is the highest stage in the 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 their achievement of 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 is aware (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-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. Conflict but in essence is 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 the 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 recognized;
• 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.

social conflict

social conflict- conflict, the cause of which is the disagreement of social groups or individuals with a difference in opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of social connections of people.

In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science dedicated to conflicts - conflictology. 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 kind of cell 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 essential side of social conflict is that these subjects act 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.

Causes of social conflicts

The reason for social conflicts lies in the definition itself - it is a confrontation between individuals or groups pursuing socially significant goals. It occurs when one side of the conflict seeks to implement its interests to the detriment of the other.

Types of social conflicts

Political conflicts- these are conflicts, the cause of which is the struggle for the distribution of power, dominance, influence and authority. They arise from various interests, rivalry and struggle in the process of acquiring, distributing and exercising political and state power. Political conflicts are directly related to winning leading positions in the institutions and structures of political power.

Main types of political conflicts:

conflict between branches of government;

conflict within parliament;

conflict between political parties and movements;

conflict between various parts of the administrative apparatus, etc.

Socio-economic conflicts- these are conflicts caused by means of subsistence, the use and redistribution of natural and other material resources, the level of wages, the use of professional and intellectual potential, the level of prices for goods and services, access and distribution of spiritual benefits.

National-ethnic conflicts- 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 of typology by D. Katz, there are:

conflict between indirectly competing subgroups;

conflict between directly competing subgroups;

conflict within the hierarchy over rewards.

see also

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

See what "Social Conflict" is in other dictionaries:

social conflict- a type of interaction of social subjects, in which the actions of one side, faced with the opposition of the other, make it impossible to realize their goals and interests. Social conflict is a clash of parties (two or more subjects), ... ... Elementary principles of the general theory of law

social conflict- (see Social conflict) ... human ecology

social conflict- - the struggle between segments of society for valuable resources ... Social Work Dictionary

SOCIAL CONFLICT is one of the types of social relations; a state of confrontation, struggle between individuals or groups of people, penetrating all areas of social relations and spheres of human activity. In theory… … Philosophical Encyclopedia

Conflict, the cause of which is the disagreement of social groups or individuals with a divergence of opinions and views, the desire to take a leading position; manifestation of social connections of people. In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate ... ... Wikipedia

A set of problems that characterize the complex process of interaction, dependence and manifestation of conflicts in public life. Social conflict, like any complex social phenomenon, is connected by thousands of threads with those social structures ... Political science. Vocabulary.

LEGAL CONFLICT- - a social conflict in which the contradiction is associated with the legal relations of the parties (their legally significant actions or states) and, therefore, the subjects or the motivation of their behavior, or the object of the conflict have legal features ...

SOCIO-POLITICAL CONFLICT OF THE TRANSITION PERIOD- - a conflict in a society that is transforming from a totalitarian to a democratic form of functioning. In different socio-political systems, the same social conflict can perform different functions: in pluralistic ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

CONFLICT IS DESTRUCTIVE- - a conflict, the negative consequences of which after the end of the struggle of the parties as a whole noticeably exceed its positive results. The destructive consequences of conflicts are associated primarily with the death, injury and stress of people. Besides,… … Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONFLICT- - social conflict, which is based on contradictions of an economic nature. In modern Russian society, the confrontational nature of the emerging socio-economic relations is determined by contradictory processes ... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology and Pedagogy

Books

• Social intelligence. The Science of Successful Interaction Skills, Karl Albrecht. IQ is valued. But has it ever happened to you, a smart person, when communicating with colleagues, clients, parents, children, to look like a "complete idiot", to be absolutely helpless, and not find the right words? Yes……

For the first time, conflict as a social problem was pointed out by Adam Smith. He believed that the causes of social conflicts are connected with the conflict of class interests and economic struggle.

There are several ways to resolve conflicts. They are characterized by the behavior of the participants.

The parties may choose one of the following tactics:

1. Evasion. The participant does not want to conflict and is eliminated.
2. Adaptation. The parties are ready to cooperate, but respect their own interests.
3. Confrontation. Each of the participants seeks to achieve their goals, not taking into account the interests of the other side.
4. Cooperation. Participants are ready to find a solution in a team.
5. Compromise. It implies concessions of the parties to each other.

The result of the conflict is a complete or partial solution. In the first case, the causes are completely eliminated, in the second, some of the problems may appear later.

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 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:

1. Ideological. Differences in the system of ideas and values ​​that determine subordination and dominance.
2. Differences in value orientations. The set of values ​​may be the opposite of the set of another participant.
3. 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.

The subjective causes of social conflicts lie in certain features of the worldview, mentality, character (psychology), and the level of intelligence of social subjects (Fig. 8.1). More specifically, these subjective characteristics of the subjects are manifested in certain feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas, under the influence of which the subjects act and social conflict begins.

Feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas as the causes of social conflicts
Mental motives of subjects to activity are feelings, beliefs, interests, ideas, in which emotions and goals are united. A goal is a representation of the intended result of an action, indicating why it is performed. The goal always involves a plan (program) for its implementation. Emotion is a spiritual (mental) and physical energy, with the help of which the subject performs actions.

Feelings are the psychological states of the subject, in which the goal-setting and emotional components of social action are merged. The subject performs actions under the influence of emotions of envy, fear, aggressiveness, revenge to some extent irrationally, thoughtlessly, thoughtlessly. A sensual impulse to social action, caused by resentment, fear, envy, revenge, hatred, often becomes the cause of social tension and social conflict. Southern peoples, due to their emotionality, are more conflict-prone than northern peoples. The subjective causes of social conflicts can be a feeling of fear, love, indignation, hatred, pride, etc.

Beliefs are the ideological and psychological state of the subject, including: 1) knowledge about something that the subject considers true (correct); 2) knowledge that the subject can argue to himself and others; 3) knowledge that evokes positive emotions (and thus turns into a form of faith), by which the subject is guided in his activities.

Social conflict often arises due to the clash of different beliefs of subjects, different views (knowledge) on the same problem: industrial, economic, political, territorial, religious, etc. For example, there is still a conflict between the Catholic and Orthodox churches over the problem of God, rituals, etc., a conflict between communists and liberals over the issue of justice, democracy, political order.

Interest is the intellectual and mental desire (attraction) of the subject to objects that are values ​​(goods) for him. Depending on these benefits, material interests (food, clothing, housing, etc.), economic (money, jewelry, shares, etc.), political (power, status, official position, etc.), religious (God, the communist idea, etc.), moral (goodness, duty, honor, justice, etc.), aesthetic (beauty, comic, tragic, etc.).

Interests include: 1) the purpose of the activity, i.e. the idea of ​​the good necessary for the subject (material, economic, political, etc.) in the mind of the subject; 2) a plan (program) of actions and operations aimed at achieving it (realization of the goal); 3) emotional-volitional desire (attraction) of the subject to the subject of interest. In general, interest is a functional, dynamic, organizational, psychological system of regulation of the activity of the subject, but not this activity itself.

Obviously, material, aesthetic and other interests differ in the nature of goals, activity programs, emotional and volitional aspirations. But at the same time, there is much in common between interests in their psychological, organizational, dynamic form, which allows them to be distinguished as specific regulatory mechanisms for the activity of subjects (individuals, organizations, communities).

Interests common to many individuals characterizing social organizations (parties, states, unions, etc.), social institutions (family, educational, economic, etc.) and social communities (professional, political, territorial), historical communities ( ethnic groups, nations, civilizations), appear in the form of ideas: national self-determination, world domination, communist equality, God, etc. These ideas are associated with the interests of individuals, and through them - with the emotions of people and become regulators (motives) of their activities. Therefore, Marx emphasized that an idea always loses its motivating power when it is separated from the interest of individuals.

The subjective causes of social conflicts can be:
1) the contradictions between the interests of people and the norms of behavior in society, which Parsons drew attention to.
For example, the norm requires concern for others, and economic interest pushes for profit. This always causes social conflict both within the subject and between subjects;
2) the contradiction between the same interests of different subjects, aimed at the same subject (power, oil, territory, sovereignty, etc.);
3) opposing interests of different subjects (for example, Chechen extremists strive for sovereignty, and Russia - for territorial integrity);
4) misunderstanding of interests, intentions, actions by subjects who begin to see them as a threat to themselves. These include economic difficulties, and national self-determination, and national pride, and the desire for leadership, etc.

Need as a cause of social conflict
The deepest basis of social conflict is the needs of social actors. They form the essence of emotions, beliefs, interests, ideas and other subjective motives of social conflicts. Social conflicts are ultimately the result of dissatisfaction or infringement (partial satisfaction) of some basic needs of social actors for security, well-being, self-assertion, identity.

Need, need, satisfaction form the cycle of functioning of the social subject. Need is a contradiction between the necessary and the actual state of the "body" of the subject, reflected in the form of emotions, feelings, judgments of discontent ("I am hungry", "I have no rights", etc.). Satisfaction is the unity of the necessary and actual state of the “body” of the subject, reflected in emotions, feelings, judgments of satisfaction (“I am full”, “I am full”, etc.). These are passive states of the subject under the influence of the interaction of the internal (body) and external environment.

A need is a need-driven desire for satisfaction, which is a powerful consciously-psychological mechanism for regulating human activity. This is not an activity, but a mechanism for regulating the activity in which the need is realized.

The need includes: 1) representation - the goal of the social good that is necessary for its satisfaction; 2) a set of interests-goals that act as means of realizing the need-goals; 3) a program of evaluative-cognitive actions of environmental objects to select the desired good among them; 4) a program of consumer actions and operations that turn the object of consumption into an object of satisfaction and the "body" of the social subject.

All needs of people can be divided into material (in food, clothing, housing, etc.), social (in security, in respect, in self-affirmation, etc.), spiritual (in goodness, in justice, in beauty, in God, etc.). They differ in their subjects and conscious-psychological mechanisms of realization. The need, being realized, does not always lead to the state of satisfaction of the subject. Then the need either increases, or is replaced, or disappears. The latter leads to the transformation of the subject, since the needs form its essence.

Intellect and the social ideal as the causes of social conflicts
The most important subjective cause of social conflicts is the level of intelligence. A lack of intelligence often becomes a subjective cause of social conflicts, when the organizing and aggressive side cannot "calculate" the balance of their own and others' forces, the price of victory and defeat, and gets involved in a conflict counting on an easy victory, when there are corresponding needs, interests, beliefs, etc. P. This happened to the Russian leadership led by Yeltsin during the first Chechen war. One of the main subjective reasons for the collapse of the USSR and the collapse of the proletarian-socialist formation was the lack of sufficient intelligence and the dogmatism of the then political leadership of the country.

The rational activity of a social subject represents the unity of the social ideal and intellect. Only in relation to the social ideal we have can we evaluate our actions as right or wrong. The social ideal is different for different social subjects, therefore it forms the most important subjective cause of social conflicts. The Bolsheviks, for the sake of the ideal of social equality, unleashed a nightmarish social conflict in Russia, culminating in a civil war, collectivization, industrialization, the elimination of religion, the expulsion of the Russian intelligentsia and unanimity. The presence of a liberal or socialist ideal is the most important subjective condition for social conflict in modern society.

Objective causes of social conflicts
The subjective causes of social conflicts are an expression of objective causes and their interpretations by subjects. Objective causes are those that are outside the consciousness and will of people, social communities, institutions, organizations. Many objective causes of social conflicts can be grouped into several general rows (Fig. 8.2).

Disorganization of society as a cause of social conflict
First of all, such an objective cause of social conflicts is, according to the well-known Polish sociologist J. Szczepanski, the disorganization of society, i.e. output of production (stopping production and unemployment), economic (inflation, non-payment of wages, etc.), social (inequality between different social groups), political (collapse of the USSR, war in Chechnya, etc.), ideological (struggle liberalism and communism in post-Soviet Russia) processes beyond the norms existing in society and threatening the interests of individuals, social groups, organizations.

So, for example, what happened after the collapse of the USSR, when instead of the state distribution of goods and money, a market one was introduced, instead of social equality of people, a pronounced division into the poor and the rich arose, when the leading role of the party disappeared, and the judicial and legal systems had not yet emerged, when the communist the ideology was recognized as utopian, and another, except for the enrichment ideology, was not proposed.

The disorganization of society is associated with the disintegration of state and public (family, school, trade union, etc.) institutions (organizations) that are not able to keep environmental, production, economic, political, ideological processes within the limits normal for this (in our case, post-Soviet) society . This also includes natural (earthquakes, floods, tsunamis), man-made (Chernobyl), economic (depreciation of deposits, privatization, financial cataclysms, etc.), political (the shooting of the building of the Russian parliament in October 1993, the reform of the vertical of power, initiated by President V. Putin, etc.), military (Chechen war) disasters and events.

The state of disorganization and disintegration of society causes many social conflicts, which are externally manifested in the spread of alcoholism, sexual promiscuity, the growth of crime, the increase in mental illness, the spread of suicides, etc.

Inequality of opportunities of social actors
As the objective causes of social conflicts, the inequality of opportunities for social actors in the everyday, economic, political, national, educational, and religious spheres is often cited. This inequality refers to the resources, statuses, values ​​of subjects. There are subjects with the same interests that lack resources. For example, there is not enough (deficit) of housing, work, security, power, etc. So, now a significant part of people do not have enough money for living, paying for housing, buying medicines, maintaining security, etc. The most important objective cause of social conflicts is the clash of different interests. For example, liberals are focused on a market economy at the expense of the interests of the common people. And the common people do not want to sacrifice their lives, habits, beliefs for the sake of liberal ideas, plans, reforms. Obviously, with the development of mankind, the deficit of many goods will deepen, becoming an objective cause of social conflicts, as well as the opposition of interests of different social subjects.

The desire to eliminate these causes and thus social conflicts, especially class conflicts (between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat), gave rise to socialist projects for the elimination of this or that type of inequality in general, especially class inequality. And this was done in the USSR and other countries of proletarian socialism. The foundations of many social conflicts were not, in fact, eliminated, but driven deep into the depths, as happened with conflicts between the intelligentsia and the proletariat and interethnic ones. As a result, negative consequences were revealed: the achievement of social equality in the political, social, and economic spheres led the USSR to totalitarianism, stagnation in the economy and living standards of the population, loss of incentives for work and self-development, aggravation of interethnic relations. As a result, the USSR lost its motives for self-promotion and found itself in a state of stagnation during the Brezhnev period, which ultimately led the country to collapse.

This once again indicates that each inequality is an incentive for self-development of people and society. Inequality cannot be completely eliminated, it only needs to be softened up to a certain limit. Social inequality also exists in the countries of liberal (USA and others) and democratic (Germany and others) capitalism; for example, in the United States to a greater extent, and in Germany to a lesser extent.

Scientists have long discovered the relationship between social inequality (equality) and the efficiency of social production: the higher the social inequality, the greater the efficiency of social production, the pace of social development and social instability. In market countries there is a universal mechanism for finding the balance (unity) of these two sides. This is a mechanism of political democracy, the presence of right, center and left parties in the political superstructure of society. When right-wing parties are in power, society is oriented primarily towards the efficiency of production. Gradually, the fair distribution of the produced goods is being violated, indignation of the working people and political instability arise. As a result, left-wing parties come to power, focused on a more equitable redistribution of the goods produced. There is a decrease in the efficiency of social production. Post-Soviet Russia still has a very long way to go in this direction.

Objective factors motivators of subjective causes
Objective causes - subjective causes - social conflict - this is the causal chain that connects the conflict with its causes.

And can subjective factors without objective prerequisites, i.e. by themselves, cause social conflict? Yes. In this case, intrapersonal or interpersonal conflicts, which, by our definition, are not social, will become the causes of social conflict, as may have been the case in the relationship between Yeltsin and Dudayev before the start of the first Chechen war.

If we consider that it is the infringement (dissatisfaction or partial satisfaction) of the needs of a social subject that is the ultimate cause of social conflict, then the approach to its settlement also changes. To do this, it is necessary, first of all, to eliminate the objective reasons for the infringement of the needs of social subjects, to mitigate social inequality, to establish democratic order in society, not to infringe on one social subject of another in his needs.

The resolution of a social contradiction due to a social good must always be guided by the needs of the subjects. The subject of the conflict can be fairly divided only when the needs of potential or actual opponents are just. Therefore, a genuine resolution of a social conflict is possible only with a deep analysis by the opposing subjects of their needs, interests, and claims. It is no coincidence that J. Barton, the head of a team of researchers dealing with the problem of resolving social conflict, believes:

Only organizational efforts that fully satisfy basic human needs can bring about a true end to the conflict, i.e. such a resolution that fully affects the subject of the dispute and establishes new, self-sufficient relations between opponents.