Week 11: Question 2

[zihan wang(Handy)]

How does the “conflict as opportunity” orientation differ from the “conflict as destructive” orientation?

[zan72h]

The “conflict as opportunity” orientation based on:

 

1. Conflict is a normal, useful process.
2. All issues are subject to change through negotiation.
3. Direct confrontation and conciliation are valued.

4. Conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract—a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships.

 

The “conflict as destructive” orientation based on:

 

1. Confl ict is a destructive disturbance of the peace.
2. The social system should not be adjusted to meet the needs of members; rather, members should adapt to established values.
3. Confrontations are destructive and ineffective.
4. Disputants should be disciplined.

 

The first one is a positive function, the second one is a negative function.

 

Annie

A2866

 

 

[Van Le]

In my opinion, to explain in a simple way, “conflict as opportunity” is based on the conflictions, we can understand each other more, adapt it, learn from it, and be friend. Meanwhile, “conflict as destructive” is something we can never adapt and it may destroy the relationship development.

 

In my culture, it is said that: “No fight, no friend”. It means we may have some conflict in the beginning and have fight, but after that, when the fight is over, just like we can clearance our conflict and be good friends. On an other hand, “Friends may become enemies” could be a good example for conflict as destructive.

 

Chris – A 3072

[dechaoqi]

Destructive conflict is worse than opportunity conflict. In gernal, the desturctive conflict happens with purpose, and the purpose is always bad, try to dominated something.

 

Opportunity conflict happens very normal, it always in our life, for a simple example, americans use forks to eat, and they think chopsticks are very hard to drive, but we dont think so. Opportunity conflict also can be changed sometimes, if there is only forks left for me to use, I will use it.

[A3095]

The “conflict as opportunity” orientation based on Conflict is a normal, useful process.All issues are subject to change through negotiation. Direct confrontation and conciliation are valued.Conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract—a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships.The “conflict as destructive” orientation based on Conflict is a destructive disturbance of the peace.The social system should not be adjusted to meet the needs of members; rather, members should adapt to established values.Confrontations are destructive and ineffective.Disputants should be disciplined.

[Julia Tian (A2854)]

Conflict as opportunity is based on four assumptions:

1. Conflict is a normal, useful process.

2. All issues are subject to change through negotiation.

3. Direct confrontation and conciliation are valued.

4. Conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract—a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships.

1. Conflict is a destructive disturbance of the peace.

2. The social system should not be adjusted to meet the needs of members; rather, members should adapt to established values.

3. Confrontations are destructive and ineffective.

4. Disputants should be disciplined.

Conflict as opportunity is an approach which based on a positive view. Cultural conflicts happen anytime and anywhere, but it’s an opportunity to know each other better, gather more information and strengthening relationship. However conflict as a destructive is an approach which based on a negative view. It always happen in groups.

[tiffanyyuan24]

If you view conflict as destructive, abnormal or unhealthy then you will most likely deny its existence, avoid it at all costs, and be suspicious of any attempt to resolve it. If, however, you view conflict as an opportunity to promote communication, increase understanding and to bring about positive and creative change then you will probably be eager to learn and use conflict resolution skills.

[a3001gavin]

         In my opinion, conflict as opportunity is the one most commonly represented. It is a normal, useful process; and all questions can change through negotiation; direct confrontation and conciliation are valued; and it is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract—a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships. Conflict as Destructive may be rooted in spiritual or cultural values. It is a destructive disturbance of the peace; and social members should adapt to established values of social system; confrontations are destructive and ineffective; finally, disputants should observe discipline.

ID a3001   Gavin

[xhuang0802]

“Conflict as opportunity” and “conflict as an destructive” are two opposite side of conflict. As their names, the “conflict as opportunity” will give us chances to experience new cultures, negotiate and adapt it; while “conflict as destructive” is a disadvantage in intercultural communication.

Conflict as opportunity may happen when we meet people from other cultures, get to know each other. Conflict as destructive does not only happen in the first time but it may destroy a long time built relationship. 

[a3000faye]

         I think conflict as opportunity is an active viewpoint. it means normal, useful process. And all issues are subject to change through negotiation. Direct confrontation and conciliation are valued. Conflict is a necessary renegotiation of an implied contract a redistribution of opportunity, release of tensions, and renewal of relationships. Many cultural groups view conflict as ultimately unproductive for relationships. Conflict as destructive is an inactive standpoint. It means destructive disturbance of the peace. And the social system members should adapt to the social system established values. Confrontations are destructive and ineffective. Disputants should be disciplined.

ID   a3000      Faye

[eason A2954]

In my opinion, conflict as opportunity means that different cultures contact and they mix together and become batter as a new culture. For example, traditional Chinese meal must have soup, because rice, vegetables, and meats will make you feel thirst. However, after America culture imports to east, soup is not necessary because soda replaces it. Conflict as destructive means that one part of culture replaces the part of another culture leading to some parts tradition culture are destructed and disappears. For instance, every culture has their traditional instruments. However, after American culture exports to all over the world, many countries abandon their traditional music. For example, in Taiwan, there is seldom children learn how to play Loquat, or Zheng and so on. These traditional instruments are gradually replaced by west instruments including piano, guitar, and cello. Conflict can be good or bad. It could help culture grew up but also destroy culture. 

[chaonan liu]

There is a example can explain that a French man moving to Netherlands during a few years after his country’s government told him if you want to keep your French citizenship you should be married. However the man married with a Dutch man, but he still lost his French citizenship, because the gay get married was legal in Netherlands but it was illegal in French. We do not often think that our personal relationships might cause us to lose our nationality or other group memberships, but there are also benefits to developing intercultural relation- ships, as he learned the Dutch language and now lives in the Netherlands.

Chaonan Liu

A2800