Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure." (Marx, p. 1)
This ideology would give way to more focused application of the Conflict Paradigm in smaller-scale contexts. For example, the text by Dhami & Olsson (2008) reports, Egon Brunswick first and Kenneth Hammond thereafter, would be instrumental in making the Social Conflict Theory applicable to interpersonal relations. Here, both thinkers advanced the concept that conflict may be understood also as the natural state of relations between individuals. This conflict may not be inherently hostile in nature but both thinkers bring research to the notion that 'cognitive conflict' finds individuals sometimes at cross-purposes even when working cooperatively. The text by Dhami & Olsson notes, "for instance, different parties may have different...
Inconsistency in how parties apply their judgment policies can also lead to disagreement." (p. 547)
Conclusion:
The Conflict Paradigm is of critical importance to our understanding of human relations. Indeed, the consideration of Marx demonstrates the importance of Conflict as an engine for broad system events, even where hostility and aggression may be required. The contributions of Brunswik first and, subsequently, Hammond, illustrate that the concept of conflict within the scope of interpersonal relations may actually be the natural path to cooperation.
Works Cited:
Dhami, M.K. & Olsson, H. (2008). Evolution of the Interpersonal Conflict Paradigm. Judgment and Decision Making, 3(7).
Marx, K. (1859). A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. Marxists.org.
