The Conflict Paradigm

Conflict Paradigm

Key Figures and Concepts in the Development of the Conflict Paradigm

Sociologists are engaged in constant discourse on house best to define the forces that direct our relationships with ourselves, with one another and with the culture as a whole. A number of distinct perspectives guide this discourse. These perspectives are referred to as paradigms and, among them, the conflict paradigm stands out as particularly relevant as a lens for understanding the society around us today. The conflict paradigm, or social conflict theory, is discussed hereafter with greater depth and a focus on the contributions of several key thinkers and sociological theorists.

Core Sociological Paradigms:

The Conflict Paradigm was selected for evaluation here and proceeds from the idea that human evolution is not achieved by defending the status quo implied by social order but instead is shaped by those who challenge social order. According to the Conflict Paradigm, the thrust of human development is founded on conflict and achieved through dissent of empowered but unequal forces.

Key Persons and Concepts:

Certainly, the revolutionary implications of the Conflict Paradigm imply that its early advocates were themselves revolutionary-minded. Indeed, Karl Marx stands out as the first major advocate of the Conflict Paradigm. The father of communism perceived that prevailing social order generally caused inequality and therefore inherently encouraged a constant state of conflict which generally gravitated toward the advancement of equality. According to Marx, "at a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or -- this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms -- with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. From forms of development of the productive forces these relations turn into their fetters. 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 policies for solving a judgment problem in terms of the information they rely on. Inconsistency in how parties apply their judgment policies can also lead to disagreement." (p. 547)