He is using an inappropriate notion of cause, and therefore of solution:
Alternatives to Violence Creating Alternatives to Violence Although conflict is part of everyday life, it does not have to lead to violence. Dealing positively with conflict can help people understand each other better, build confidence in their own ability to control their destinies, and develop the skills they need to lead successful, productive lives.
A wide variety of methods and programs have been developed to deal positively with conflict and resolve disputes before they become destructive. Many people believe that violence is basic to human nature; that violence has been deeply imbedded in the human brain since the beginning of time; that there is nothing we can do about it.
But many scientists who study human behavior think differently. They believe that humans have learned to use violence in response to a more basic fact of life—conflict.
Some of these scientists suggest that, if human beings have learned to use violent methods to deal with conflict in the past, they can learn to use other, more constructive methods to deal with conflict in the future.
For example, when people are able to describe a conflict clearly, they stand a better chance of solving a problem before it turns violent. In order to describe a conflict, it is helpful to understand what elements, or ingredients, must be combined to produce a conflict.
Although conflicts usually arise out of a number of elements, they are always influenced by cause and effect. Cause and effect can link a series of elements into a chain that leads to violence. What are some of the links in that chain?
According to Carol Miller Lieber, an educator at Washington University, conflict usually begins with a lack of information. This lack of information leads to misunderstanding and the discovery of different goals, needs, values, or opinions.
Barriers of race, language, age, or gender can turn up the heat on conflict. These differences can be described as opposing points of view. At this stage in a conflict, people who hold opposite points of view will begin to argue.
If they do not deal positively with their problem, they will resort to verbal threats or attacks to describe their differences. At this stage, the conflict often generates a flashpoint, behavior that triggers a physical attack from another group or individual.
Of those, 43 percent think that violence is learned from parents. Another 20 percent say it is learned from television.
Approximately 15 percent say it is learned from friends or others in the neighborhood. Additionally, young people who have carried a knife or gun in the past year are significantly more likely to believe that violence is learned.
Today, educators, social service experts, and psychologists are developing programs that teach young people how to resolve conflicts without using violence. What are these programs and how do they work?
Have they gotten good results? Can anyone start a conflict resolution program? There are several different types of conflict resolution programs.
Most of these programs move beyond a simple avoidance of violence to bring people face to face with the deeper, underlying elements of conflict. Conflict Resolution Programs Most conflict resolution programs are based on the premise that people can control emotions that arise out of conflict and lead to violent action.
These programs are usually designed to provide people with skills they need to deal with conflict as it unfolds. Most conflict resolution programs focus on developing strong communication and problem-solving skills. The primary goal of conflict resolution is to deal with the problem of violence, to keep individuals safe, healthy, and alive.
But conflict resolution also encourages young people to peacefully address cultural and racial differences—skills that are necessary for survival in a multicultural world.
The school resonates to the sound of 15 different languages. In the past, racial issues often led to violence. By using conflict resolution techniques to explore the causes and effects of racial tension, students are now sharing their different cultural backgrounds instead of fighting over them.
Dealing skillfully and methodically with a serious problem like racism on campus can help young people overcome feelings of helplessness and distrust. As they explore the causes and effects of racial conflict, they begin to feel more powerful and in control of their lives.
Peer Mediation Mediation relies on a neutral third party to help groups or individuals deal with conflict. Peer mediation is one of the most popular forms of conflict resolution.
Peer mediation is particularly effective in dealing with conflict between young people. They were part of a response to the increase in violence that affected many middle and high schools.
Early peer mediation programs were modeled after successful adult programs, where community volunteers intervened to settle conflicts between landlords and tenants, consumers and local merchants, or squabbling neighbors.Violence is an illegal way of solving conflict. Wars mongers only justifies warring as a form of necessary means of ending states and non states aggression, but states’ laws doesnt allow for self-help in solving conflicts.
E-leader, Prague Non-Violent Conflict Resolution In Our Home Ikechukwu Nathaniel Okonkwo Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt Abstract Conflict is a state of opposition, disagreement or incompatibility between two or more people or groups of.
Conflict resolution often involves compromise and more importantly de-escalation. Take it from a cop who deals with a lot of domestic disputes that turn violent.
Are there cases where violence is necessary? 83% Say Yes Perhaps if black America had adopted some of the Southeast Asian principles of organized violence against their open enemies their situation would not be as desultory as it is today.
Violence is the WORST way to solve conflict.
It is exactly the same as getting shot in the leg. Argument, War and the Role of the Media in Conflict Management. Marcelo Dascal. Should we not analyze [power] primarily in terms of struggle, conflict and war? One would then confront the original hypothesis with a second hypothesis to the effect that power is war, a war continued by other means.
This does not mean that violence is never necessary, but you can deny that violence is the ultimate solution, unless you don't see peace/lack of violence as a moral end.
Another similar argument: if your opponent were true, you could save your real-life problem .