Course

GE ELECTIVE 3 WEEK/DAY
Code
Course PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT
Duration & Schedule
Description EDUCATION
Meaning of Violence
Theories of Violence,
The interplay Between the Culture of
Peace and the Culture of Violence
Concepts thet Breed Violence
The system theory ,
Question on the enemy system theory,
Mercado,s danger Zones of Violence
(Warning Devices)
Meaning of conflict
Relative deprivation,
Lesson/Topic Seven elements of conflict resolution CHAPTER 2
process,
Some useful guidelines in seeking win-
win and non-coercive process,
Steps involve in formal negotiation,
factors affecting the use of a type of
conflict process,
Stages of conflict formulation (conflict
clues),
Conflict models,
The Satyagraha: Active Non-violence
At the end of the week the student can:
Learning 1. Discuss the meaning of conflict
Outcome/s 2. Express their insight about potential and actual violence using the current events
PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION:
An introduction to the core concepts in peace and development education for college students
Reference/s -Bienvenido L. Gregorio
C&E publishing, Inc 2009
Chapter 1pp- 1-15
Course RAYMUND T. BELANDRES, LPT, M.A.T.S.S.(CAR)
coach PROF. JAIME A. PANTALETA, Ph.D(ABD)

VIOLENCE
Galtung defines violence between potential and actual violence., between what could
have been and what is.

Structural Definition of violence, there is no object of violence as well as a physical

attribute involved.

When does structural violence occur?

Let us analyze the relationship between the actual and potential violence here. First,
when the potential violence is higher than the actual but the actual still occurs,
there is VIOLENCE. Second, when the actual is unavoidable as it occurs, there is
NO violence even if actual is lower than the potential. And third, when the actual
higher than potential and the actual occurs there is NO violence.

The first analysis suggests that structural violence is the result of the inability to foresee
violence coming despite the presence of capability to prevent it. e.g. the larger portion of
the population to suffer from diseases even when there is an adequate supply of
medicines. The inability of the medicine is brought by the corruption. The availability of
the medicine is potential while the prevailing diseases are the actual.

Second analysis suggests that an occurrence otherwise considered as structural

violence is not a violence at all when such occurrence is unavoidable despite the
presence of a strong potential. E.g. the flood caused by a typhoon may be considered
unavoidable, hence even if government has the complete facility and equipment for
early detection of the coming typhoon; it could not prevent a typhoon from coming. The
difference between the flood and government measures is the structural violence with
government as the potential and flood as the actual.

The third analysis suggest that the occurrence of the actual, however ugly it may be , is
not structural violence because there is not enough potential to prevent it or check
emergence of the actual. In a sense, becomes inevitable or unavoidable. This situation
arises in countries of the south. (also known as Third world countries) that experience
famine and malnutrition the lack of financial resources precludes their government
from allocating budgets for basic necessities such as food, and for health services. The
lack of government resources is the potential while malnutrition and famine are the
actual. Evidently, the actual is greater than the potential, hence no structural violence
exists.

The preceding definitions and illustrations of violence are in their structural form. As
already stated, structural violence is non-physical and is concealed in the very system
of society itself. It has no specific object to which violence is intended or directed.

Physical violence, in contrast, is manifest and has objects towards which violence is
perpetrated. However, as already explained, violence of this type is alarming because of
its immediate impact on people and environment although in reality, such physical
violence is simply the effect of a specific structural violence than its structural
counterpart.

Physical violence as commonly experience possesses a tendency to escalate beyond

proportion, the cause of which becomes obscure and its players polarized. The
escalation may reach a point where a condition of anarchy prevails.

THEORIES OF VIOLENCE

There are five theories or schools of thought that attempt to explain the origins or
causes of violence according to Fr. Mercado.

Biological Theories

Human behave violently because of an innate tendency or genetical tendency to be

violent. This is a position taken by some scientist. According to this theory, some
individuals are born criminals because of their genetical predisposition. Considered to
be violent by nature. These criminal attributes are discernable. If genetics is the cause
of their violent or criminal tendency, there is little the environment could do to changer
them.

Psychological Theory

These theory espoused by Sigmund Freud. Accordingly, certain abnormal psychological

developments result from the conflict with the super ego, which leads to abnormal
behavior. Super Ego, refers `to the individual’s concept of self as something superior to
all others (Self Centered) The I or SELF is the center around which all things revolve.

Physical/Anthropological Theory

Violent is natural instinct humansand animals. This instincts stems from natural
tendency to self-preservation and the need to live or survive. Violence is necessary in a
competition for survival.

Social Science Theory

Social science makes human act violently, violence is learned, thus human learn
violence especially during childhood. It make them bad. The social factor influence. The
good environment makes human good while bad environment creates perverted
individuals. The process of molding the minds of the young requires the involvement of
the family.

POLITICAL SCIENCE THEORY

It explains the process of states formation and the purpose for which they are formed.
States are formed in order to protect the common good. States from its legitimate
government protect its individuals from violence which come either within (domestic
violence or from without (war aggression) When state compete for supremacy, the
ultimate result is war.

MEANING OF CONFLICT

Conflict is defined as a clash between individuals arising out of a difference in

thought process, attitudes, understanding, interests, requirements and even
sometimes perceptions. A conflict results in heated arguments, physical abuses and
definitely loss of peace and harmony. A conflict can actually change relationships.
Friends can become foes as a result of conflict just as in the case of Tim and Joe.

A Conflict not only can arise between individuals but also among countries, political
parties and states as well. A small conflict not controlled at the correct time may lead to
a large war and rifts among countries leading to major unrest and disharmony.

It is a well known fact that neighbours are our biggest assets as they always stand by us
whenever we need them. Let us take the example of India and China or for that matter
India and Pakistan. India and Pakistan are twin sisters as there is hardly any difference
in the culture, religion, climatic conditions, eating habits of the people staying in both the
countries, but still the two countries are always at loggerheads and the reason is
actually unknown. Small issues between the two countries have triggered a conflict
between them which has now become a major concern for both the countries.

PRINCIPLES OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION BY LOUISA WEINSTEIN

To resolve conflicts, heed these seven principles:

“Acknowledge the Conflict”

If you do not accept that a dispute exists, you risk letting it grow more severe. You can
question yourself to see if you have accepted the existence of a conflict. Do you find
yourself worrying about the situation at night? Do you find yourself seeking to avoid
someone? Do you find yourself gossiping about that person? If you find yourself
answering yes to any of these questions, you could be embroiled in a conflict.
“The language we use in a conflict situation can determine the escalation or
otherwise of that situation.”

That discovery does not mean you have to try to resolve the situation immediately. It
does indicate that you should accept the conflict as a current predicament. Recognizing
that you are in the conflict – whether you want to be or not – will help lift a likely cloud of
indecision hanging over you. You will see things more clearly and start to deal with your
conflict. Confronting a conflict requires courage. You need to discover what motivates
you and respond in a mature way. You must recognize that your differences might come
from trivial causes. You might take offense at something another person said, or feel
that a colleague has gone on a holiday at an inappropriate time. Any number of factors
might have set you off.

“Collaborating is an assertive and co-operative approach and is at the opposite

end of the scale to avoiding a situation.”

You might not address a conflict in the outside world because the nature of the conflict
highlights your need to resolve your own “internal conflicts.” Young people have
aspirations for their lives. However, in time, these objectives can seem unrealistic
because they conflict with demands such as earning money and supporting a family.
This generates internal conflict. When you encounter a problem in the outside world,
your internal conflicts can surface and determine how you respond. Once you begin to
understand your own conflicts you can make more sensible decisions.

“Take Control of Your Response”

When you feel emotionally overwhelmed, try to control your reactions, especially if they
begin to lead you in a harmful direction. Most people react instinctively and that typically
means that they do not think through how they respond. And that may mean they will
not act sensibly. If you decide to take action in your conflict, think clearly about what
confronts you, your emotional predilections and the choices before you. First, take a
break. This gives you a moment to evaluate your position and decide how to act. In Eric
Berne’s book, Games People Play, he sets out his ideas about “transactional analysis.”
He describes the “ego states” of “parent, adult and child” that people pass through in
dealing with others. If you can move into an adult state in a conflict you can see its
issues in context and make the most thoughtful choices.

“Apply the Resolution Framework for Difficult Conversations”

To use the first stage of the resolution framework, prepare for the conversation and then
gear up with the right tools for the conversation itself. Take these steps:

“Manage your physical and emotional response”

– By focusing on your bodily feelings, you can manage the situation you encounter
advantageously. Listen to your breath and heartbeat. Breathe slowly to calm your body.

“Write down your initial fears, wants and needs” – If you write down your
apprehensions about a situation you reduce the need to discuss it with anyone else.

“Change perspectives and see the bigger picture” – To deal with a difficult situation,
accept responsibility for how you act and respond. That means accepting the
consequences of your actions, so consider how you might act and what consequences
your actions might provoke.
“Get your facts straight”

– Prepare yourself with correct information so you do not err when you enter into a
conversation. Make sure your emotions don’t lead you to distort the facts of the
situation.

“Identify and think through outcomes and options” – A challenging situation could open
up new territory. Think through the options that await you and the other person.

“Any difficult conversation will include a negotiation, and in any negotiation it is

helpful to know the boundaries before we go in.”

You never know what you will encounter in a conversation. In the second stage of
applying the resolution framework, practice expansive listening to make sure that you
give the other person a chance to speak before rushing to premature judgment. Use
“summarizing and paraphrasing techniques” to clarify the situation. This means saying
back to other people in your own words what you think they just said. Then, if you
misunderstood, you give them a chance to clarify. This also demonstrates that you are
paying attention.

“The most effective agreements are generally those that have been carefully
constructed rather than imposed.”

You can also attempt “reframing.” Try to present the situation using a new perspective.
Inevitably, your own values could influence how you reframe. However, those who are
listening will know if you distort what they intend to say. Go beyond listening and heed
the words people use. Watch their body language and whether they seem
uncomfortable about certain subjects. Give them time to reveal whatever is on their
minds.

“Manage the Resolution – the Soft Mediation Assignment”

You can act as a “resolution agent” in situations where the conflicting sides have not
become intransigent. A resolution agent undertakes many of the same activities as a
conflict coach or a mediator. Unlike other roles in conflict resolutions, the resolution
agent has an interest in helping the conflicting sides come to an agreement. The
resolution agent needs to construct an environment in which the opposing sides can
trust each other and the resolution agent.

“When we are empathizing with someone else’s feelings it is much harder to feel
like a victim to them. They stop being a tyrant and become a human being.”

Deliver a speech to the discordant parties that set out your approach. Explain your
perspective and reinforce your neutrality. Set out the options you see so the parties to
the conflict know what to expect from you. Help them set boundaries, set an agenda
and arrange joint meetings. Help create “SMART agreements,” which are “Specific,
Measurable, Agreed, Realistic and Time-bound.” The parties will then subscribe to the
agreements rather than accept terms under duress.

“Build a Culture of Early Conflict Resolution”

Create a context in which people can accept their role in conflict and use the situation to
educate themselves. With this approach, you can add versatility and efficiency to your
firm and reduce emotional and legal conflicts. Implementing such an approach calls for
organizational culture change. It means adopting new ways of thinking and new
processes. This takes time and generates resistance. Be patient.

“Walk the Walk”

As you learn more about conflict resolution, consider how you deal with conflict in daily
life. Your success in helping other people handle it depends on your level of awareness
of how you handle it yourself. Use the “Can Inventory” to gain clarity about a conflict:
First you can become conscious of conflict, then you can acknowledge it and then you
can act to resolve it. Encourage your colleagues to learn to manage conflict resolution
as a way of strengthening their leadership skills.

“Engage the Safety Net”

You may encounter situations where “informal conflict resolution” doesn’t work.
Evaluate your options before you act. Get the best legal advice about the strength of
your position. Consult with subject matter experts. Reevaluate your business objectives.
You might decide to take legal action to reinforce the impression that you plan to take a
tough position.

Setting Your Priorities

Examine your financial and personal priorities to see if you have the inclination to
pursue a fight. Consider mediation as a way to deal with problems without having to
resort to the legal process. Though typically informal, mediation presents a path to
resolution. Decide if it might work in your situation. For mediation to work, the person on
the other side of the conflict must communicate with you readily. Success depends on
using the tools of conflict resolution to attain clarity and to make sensible decisions.

Conflict Management Techniques

A conflict is a situation when the interests, needs, goals or values of involved parties
interfere with one another. In the workplace, conflicts are common and inevitable.
Different stakeholders may have different priorities; conflicts may involve team
members, departments, projects, organization and client, boss and subordinate,
organization needs vs. personal needs. Often, a conflict is a result of perception. Is
conflict a bad thing? Not necessarily. Often, a conflict presents opportunities for
improvement. Therefore, it is important to understand (and apply) various conflict
resolution techniques.

Forcing
Also known as competing. An individual firmly pursues his or her own concerns despite
resistance from the other person. This may involve pushing one viewpoint at the
expense of another or maintaining firm resistance to another person’s actions.

Examples of when forcing may be appropriate:

 In certain situations when all other, less forceful methods, don’t work or are
ineffective
 When you need to stand up for your own rights, resist aggression or pressure
 When a quick resolution is required and using force is justified (e.g. in a life-
threatening situation, to stop aggression)
 As a last resort to resolve a long-standing conflict

Possible advantages of forcing:

 May provide a quick resolution to a conflict

 Increases self-esteem and draws respect when firm resistance or actions were
the response to aggression or hostility

Some caveats of forcing:

 May negatively affect your relationship with the opponent in the long run
 May cause the opponent to react in the same way, even if the opponent did not
intend to be forceful originally
 Cannot take advantage of the strong sides of the other side’s position
 Taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting to some
individuals

Win-Win (Collaborating)

Also known as confronting the problem or problem solving. Collaboration involves an

attempt to work with the other person to find a win-win solution to the problem at hand -
the one that most satisfies the concerns of both parties. The win-win approach sees
conflict resolution as an opportunity to come to a mutually beneficial result. It includes
identifying your opponent’s underlying concerns and finding an alternative which meets
each party's concerns.
Examples of when collaborating may be appropriate:

 When consensus and commitment of other parties is important

 In a collaborative environment
 When addressing the interests of multiple stakeholders is required
 When a high level of trust is present
 When a long-term relationship is important
 When you need to work through hard feelings, animosity, etc.
 When you don't want to take full responsibility

Possible advantages of collaborating:

 Leads to solving the actual problem

 Leads to a win-win outcome
 Reinforces mutual trust and respect
 Builds a foundation for effective collaboration in the future
 Shared responsibility of the outcome
 You earn a reputation as a good negotiator

For those involved, the outcome of the conflict resolution is less stressful (however, the
process of finding and establishing a win-win solution may be very involved – see the
caveats below)

Some caveats of collaborating:

 Requires a commitment from all parties to look for a mutually acceptable solution
 May require more effort and more time than some other methods. A win-win
solution may not be evident
 For the same reason, collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial
and a quick solution or fast response is required
 Once one or more parties lose their trust in an opponent, the relationship falls
back to other methods of conflict resolution. Therefore, all involved parties must
continue collaborative efforts to maintain a collaborative relationship

Compromising

Also known as reconciling. Compromising looks for an expedient and mutually

acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties.

Examples of when compromise may be appropriate:

 When the goals are moderately important and not worth the use of more
assertive or more involved approaches, such as forcing or collaborating
 To reach temporary settlement on complex issues
 To reach expedient solutions on important issues
  As a first step when the involved parties do not know each other well or haven’t
yet developed a high level of mutual trust
 When collaborating or forcing do not work

Possible advantages of compromise:

 Faster issue resolution. Compromising may be more practical when time is a

factor
 Can provide a temporary solution while still looking for a win-win solution
 Lowers the levels of tension and stress resulting from the conflict

Some caveats of using compromise:

 May result in a situation where both parties are not satisfied with the outcome (a
lose-lose situation)
 Does not contribute to building trust in the long run
 May require close monitoring and control to ensure the agreements are met

Withdrawing

Also known as avoiding. This is when a person neither pursues their own concerns nor
those of their opponent. He or she does not address the conflict but sidesteps,
postpones or simply withdraws.

Examples of when withdrawing may be appropriate:

 When the issue is trivial and not worth the effort

 When more important issues are pressing, and you don't have time to deal with it
 In situations where postponing the response is beneficial to you, for example -
 When it is not the right time or place to confront the issue
 When you need time to think and collect information before you act (e.g. if you
are unprepared or taken by surprise)
 When you see no chance of getting your concerns met or you would have to put
forth unreasonable effort
 When you would have to deal with hostility
 When you are unable to handle the conflict (e.g. if you are too emotionally
involved or others can handle it better)

Possible advantages of withdrawing:

When the opponent is forcing or attempts aggression, you may choose to withdraw and
postpone your response until you are in a more favorable circumstance for you to push
back

 Withdrawing is a low stress approach when the conflict is short

 Gives the ability/time to focus on more important or more urgent issues instead
 Gives you time to better prepare and collect information before you act
Some caveats of withdrawing:

 May lead to weakening or losing your position; not acting may be interpreted as
an agreement. Using withdrawing strategies without negatively affecting your
own position requires certain skill and experience
 When multiple parties are involved, withdrawing may negatively affect your
relationship with a party that expects your action

Smoothing

Also known as accommodating. Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of other

people first, rather than prioritizing one’s own concerns.

Examples of when smoothing may be appropriate:

When it is important to provide a temporary relief from conflict or buy time until you are
in a better position to respond or push back

 When the issue is not as important to you as it is to the other person

 When you accept that you are wrong
 When you have no choice or when continued conflict would be detrimental

Possible advantages of smoothing:

In some cases smoothing will help to protect more important interests while giving up on
some less important ones

Gives an opportunity to reassess the situation from a different angle

As a rule, does not require much effort

Some caveats of smoothing:

The risk of being abused is real, i.e. the opponent may try to constantly take advantage
of your tendency toward smoothing/accommodating. Therefore, it is important to
maintain the right balance and this requires some skill

 May negatively affect your confidence in your ability to respond to an aggressive

opponent
 Makes it more difficult to transition to a win-win solution in the future
 Some of your supporters may not like your smoothing response and be turned off
ACTIVITY

WATCH THE VIDEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o97fVGTjE4w

1. What is the video all about? Discuss.20pts

2. How can we consider conflict as a healthy part of any relationship? Discuss in 100
words. 20pts

A. ASSESSMENT

Identification: Write the correct answer in the space provided before each number.

_______1. This theory, some individuals are born criminals.

_______ 2. Under this theory, the States are formed in order to protect the common
good.

_______ 3. clash between individuals arising out of a differences.

_______ 4. It a form of violence where there is no object of violence as well as a

physical attribute involved.

_______ 5. ,Form of violence where it is manifest and has objects towards which
violence is perpetrated.

B. Essay

1. Define conflict and cite an example base in your own experience. 100words. 30pts

2. How can you relate the concept of Potential Violence and Actual Violence to the
current conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Which part of it is the Actual Violence and
which part of it is the Potential Violence? Discuss in 200 words. 30pts