The Functions of Social Conflict, Lewis Coser

The following lineaspodran find a summary of the book "The Functions of

Social Conflict" by Lewis Coser, the Fondo de Cultura Economica, the idea is
to deliver a small tool to understand a part of the conflict theory.

Anyway I recommend reading the entire book, which can be found in the
library of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, University
of Chile

"The bad side is the one that produces the movement which makes history,
generating a struggle"
Karl Marx: The Poverty of Philosophy

Proposition 1: Functions Connectives group, developed by the conflict.

The conflict is a very important agent to establish the full identity and
autonomy of the ego, that is, for the full differentiation of personality from
the outside world.

Simmel says that the conflict set the boundaries between internal groups in
a social system, strengthening group consciousness and sense of detente,
which establishes the identity of the groups within the system.
At the same time, the mutual "repulsion" maintains complete social system,
it creates a balance between various groups.

The conflict with other groups helps to establish and reaffirm the identity of
the group and maintains its own borders in relation to the social world
around him
Enmities and mutual antagonisms consecrated retain social divisions and
stratification systems. These traditional antagonisms prevent social
disappearance, and determine the position of the various subsystems within
a whole system.

In social structures that seek a wide range of mobility, it is very likely that
there is attraction of high strata of the lower and mutual hostility between
the layers. In this case it is often hostile feelings of the lower strata take the
form of resentment, which is mixed with hostility attraction. These
structures tend to provide many conflicting opportunities, since, as veramas
on, the frequency of the possibilities of conflict varies directly according to
the intimacy of relationships.

Social conflict, always denotes a social interaction, while attitudes or

feelings are predispositions to action, these biases do not necessarily lead to
conflict, the degree of legitimacy and gender who have the power and the
systems in place are critical variables affect the increase of conflict.

Proposition 2: Functions of the conflict in protecting the group, and meaning

of the institutions that act as safety valves.

Conflict is not always dysfunctional, for relations within which happens;

conflict is often necessary to maintain relationships. If you do not have the
means to evacuate the hostility of one another, and to express their dissent,
group members may feel completely overwhelmed and react to separation
or apartment. The conflict serves to maintain relationships, to leave free the
trapped feelings of hostility.

Social systems provide specific institutions that serve to output hostile and
aggressive feelings. These institutions safety valve helps maintain the
system, they prevent conflicts that otherwise would be likely or reduce its
destructive effects. Provide substitutes moving targets that hostile feelings
as well as means of abreaction. Through these safety valves prevents the
hostility is directed against its original purpose; but these movements also
entail a cost to both the social system and the individual: the pressure with
the intention of changing the system and deal with changing conditions, and
also builds the tension in the individual is reduced, and creates possibilities
of an explosion catastrophic. The release of hostile feelings on a substitute
target creates a new conflict with that object.

Proposition 3: The Real Conflict and Unreal

The real conflict and strife between unreal dispute involves a conceptual
abstraction of concrete reality, the real conflict situations may be

accompanied, especially when there are appropriate conditions of struggle,

fictitious feelings that originally each show deviations.

Unreal conflicts but also involve interaction between two or more parties,
are not caused by rival late antagonists, but by the needs of releasing
tension at least one of them. In this case the choice of antagonists depends
on us determinants that are directly related to the matter in dispute, and is
not oriented towards achieving specific results.

Proposition 4. The conflict and hostile impulses

Aggressive or hostile impulses are not sufficient to explain the social

conflict. I Hate, like love, requires an object. The conflict can only arise in
the interaction between object and subject, is always a relationship.

The real conflict is not necessarily accompanied by aggression or hostility,

tensions in the psychological sense are not always associated with an
antagonistic behavior still may be desirable to hate the opposite.

The propagandist is confident that such hatred strengthen the emotional

involvement in the conflict, and therefore, strengthen the willingness to take
it to its logical ..

Conversely, the main function of the mediator is to divest the conflicting

situations of all the fictional elements of aggressiveness, so that the
contestants can discuss, subject to divergent reality demands that occur in
the dispute.

Proposition 5: The social hostility in intimate relationships

The antagonism generally is considered as an element of intimate

relationships. Convergent and divergent motives can be so intertwined in
the real relations, which can only be separated for analytical purposes and
classification, while the actual relationships have a unitary character sui
generis.

It can be argued that social relations of an intimate nature, characterized by

frequent reciprocal action and full participation of the participants, included
in the structure of an essential ambivalence motivated by the fact that they
contain positive and negative aspects inextricably intertwined.

Proposition 6: The more intimate the relationship, the stronger the conflict

A conflict is more passionate and radical when it arises from intimate

relationships. The coexistence of unity and opposition in such relationships
contribute to the peculiar acrimony of conflict. The enmity reveals more
deep and violent reactions, as is greater participation of partners from
whom it arises.

In conflicts within a closed group, a sector more intensely hates the other to
the extent that most considered the threat to the unity and identity of the
group.

Greater participation in group life and a fuller contribution of personality of

the members provide a greater opportunity to engage in an intensely
contradictory behavior and therefore lead to more violent reactions against
disloyalty. In that sense the intensity of the conflict and group loyalty are
two facets of the same relationship.

Proposition 7: Impact and function of conflict in group structures

To the extent that the conflict means the relaxation of tension between
antagonists, full stabilizing functions and becomes an integrated component
of the relationship, only those concerning the goals, values or interests that
do not contradict the basic assumptions on which the relationship is
established.

The groups with a not very coherent structure and open societies, by
allowing conflicts, establish safeguards against the kind of conflict likely to
endanger the fundamental consensus and thus decrease the risk of
differences affecting core values. The interdependence of opposing groups
and inextricability of conflicts in such societies that contribute to the social
cohesion system, reciprocal elimination of conflicts prevent the
disintegration along a major fault line.

Proposition 8: Conflict as an index of stability of a relationship

The absence of conflicts should not be taken as an indicator of the strength

and stability of relationships. Stable relationships may be characterized by
disruptive behavior. Intimacy gives rise to frequent cases of conflict, but as
long as these relationships are tenuous, participants will avoid, fearful of
endangering the continuity of relationships.

When intimate relationships are characterized by frequent disputes rather

than by accumulation of hostile and ambivalent way, we can find a
justification provided that such conflicts do not affect the basic consensus,
considering these frequent conflicts as an index of the stability of relations.

Proposition 9: Conflicts with foreign groups increase internal cohesion

The conflict with other groups leading the mobilization of energies, among
members of the group itself, and therefore the strengthening of the
cohesion of the same.

The trend towards centralization accompany a strengthening of cohesion,

depends both on the nature of the conflict as the type of group,
centralization appears as more likely in the case of a war and in different
structures that require a marked division of labor .

Despotism seems to be related to a lack of coherence; It is required to

conduct hostilities where group solidarity is insufficient to mobilize the
energies of members.

In groups engaged in the fight against the foreign enemy, the emergence of
both centralization and despotism, depends on the system of common
values and group structure, prior to the initiation of the conflict.

Proposition 10: The conflict with other groups defines the group structure
and the consequent reaction to internal conflict

The groups dedicated to an ongoing struggle with the outside tend to be

intolerant inside. But not limited deviations allow its members. Such groups
tend to acquire a sectarian character, its members are selected because of
special characteristics, they tend to be very limited in number and calling
for the full participation of its members. Social cohesion depends on the
participation of their members integrated in all aspects of the life of the
group and is reinforced by the affirmation of the unity of this in their
struggle against dissident, the only way to solve the problems created by
Dissent is the voluntary or forced exclusion of dissident.

Proposition 11: The search for enemies

Rigidly structured militant groups may seek real enemies with the deliberate
purpose or unconscious result of maintaining the unity and internal cohesion
of the group. Such groups may actually perceive an external threat but this
is not obvious. Under certain conditions that still need to be exploited, the
imaginary threats serve the same integrative function of the actual group.

The invention of such an enemy strengthens social cohesion is threatened in

the group. Likewise search or an internal dissident Invesiones can serve to
maintain a structure which is threatened from outside. Such mechanisms
like "Scapegoat" appear particularly those groups whose structure prevents
the outbreak of the real conflict within the group. There shifting nuances
between the exaggeration of a real danger, the attraction of a real enemy
and the complete invention of a threatening agent.

Proposition 12: Ideologies and Conflict

The conflicts in which the contenders feel they only participate as

representatives of communities and groups, who do not fight for
themselves, but only by the ideas of the group they represent, likely to be
more radical and ruthless than others whose animosity moves for personal
reasons.

Element removal tends to sharpen the conflict, the absence of modifying

elements that usually introduce personal factors. The modern Marxist labor
movement radicalizadores exemplifies the effects of objectification of the

conflict. Strict ideological alignments tend to occur rather than in rigid

structures flexible.

The objectification of the conflict is likely to be a unifying element for the

contending parties as both serve the same purpose: for example in scientific
controversies, in which the matter discussed is the establishment of the
truth.

Proposition 13: The conflict league contenders

Conflict can initiate other types of interactions between the conflicting

parties, although they have not previously existed relationships between
them. It also occurs within a set of rules that prescribe the ways in which the
conflict is usually solved. The conflict acts as a stimulus for the
establishment of new rules, regulations and institutions, becoming an agent
of socialization between the two contending parties. Besides reaffirming the
latent conflict rules, and thus enhances the participation of social life.

As an incentive for the creation and modification of rules makes the

adjustment of relations with the changed conditions.

Proposition 14: Interest in the unification of the enemy

Given the advantages of a unified organization, in order to succeed in the

conflict, it should be assumed that each party wants the disunity of his
antagonist. However, this is not always true. If there is a relative balance of
power between contenders, the unified party will prefer a unified adversary.

Continued participation in conflict tends to facilitate the acceptance by both

parties of common rules governing its development. Now we can add that,
under the conditions described, the conflict also requires an organizational
structure to facilitate the acceptance and observance of common rules.

Proposition 15: The conflict sets and maintains the balance of power

The conflict is a test potential between antagonistic parties. The

arrangement is only possible if each of the contenders is conscious of their
relative strength. But paradoxically, this knowledge, very often, can only be
achieved through conflict, when are apparently non-existent, other
mechanisms to test the respective strength of the contenders.

Consequently, the struggle can be an important way to prevent unbalance

conditions, changing the basis of the relationship of forces.
The conflict far from destructive and disruptive, may in fact be a means to
balance, and therefore maintain a society.

The conflict sets links between the contenders, 1) creates and modifies
common measures for the readjustment of relations, 2) leads to each of the
parties to the conflict, given a certain equality of force, to prefer the other
copy your own organizational structure to equalize the fighting techniques,
3) allows for more precise relative strength, and thus serves as a balancing
mechanism that helps maintain and strengthen societies.

Proposition 16: The conflict creates partnerships and coalitions

The struggle may result in the union of individuals or groups that otherwise
would remain unconnected. Of the conflicts that play a major role pragmatic
interests of the participants, are temporary associations and coalitions, and
no more permanent and more cohesive groups. Is more likely to occur in
such structures are rigid flexible societies, because in these repressed
conflicts erupt, they tend to take a more intense character and,
consequently, more ideological. Coalitions and partnerships structured
individualist society and prevent its disintegration spray. Most coalitions
between previously existing groups are formed exclusively defensive
purposes, this fact leads to the creation of new partnerships and coalitions,
stimulating, well, greater social participation.