Why some conflicts seem impossible to resolve
It is time to turn to those conflicts that seem to us to be incapable of resolution, those arguments that go nowhere, that are always about the same issues, and that always end with us feeling frustrated and more convinced that this particular argument will just never be solved.
In reaction we avoid that discussion, ignore the person and, in the workplace or a marriage, that assessment of an intractable conflict of course leads to far more negative consequences.
Before we study a few specific examples of conflict resolution methods that can be used in such situations, we need to understand the emotions and realities that cause and drive such conflicts. Here our first rather uncomfortable realisation is to understand that in these arguments the objective facts (as we see them) are not always enough to convince people.
As much as we like to see ourselves as rational thinkers driven by facts, we are also emotional, social beings, and we often rationalise our emotional conclusions with factual arguments after the fact.
Very few people really understand to what extent their views are influenced and shaped by such emotional and sometimes irrational factors.
We form strong emotions, which we internally refer to as “facts”, regarding our families, friends, our political convictions, what it takes to be a good person and several other important aspects of life.
Research clearly shows how, for example, politically liberal people regard the term fairness as implying equality, while more conservative people regard fairness more as “proportionality”, that people should be rewarded in proportion to what they contribute.
In both these instances, both people or groups would regard their approach as based on facts; as examples of what good people should believe and do; as their position being “fair”.
Arguing with either of these sides to “be fair” or to work from the facts is a futile exercise, because those concepts mean different things to them.
Research and case studies similarly show that attacking people holding such views by using objective facts (as you see them) actually cause them to become more entrenched in their views (the so-called backfire effect).
We see this vividly in arguments involving politics, religion and Covid-19 topics (masking, vaccinations).
If the facts do not help in resolving these conflicts, what are we to do in those situations? Next week we start changing the way we have these arguments.