This DePauw University website is devoted to Conflict Studies, a major that brings together a number of academic disciplines that focus on conflict as one of their organizing concepts. Because of its ubiquity and significance in human life, the study of the process and resolution of conflict is increasingly claiming a central place in the study of conflict development in general and peaceful change in particular. A quick introduction to conflict studies can be gained by considering the various definitions of the noun "conflict" listed in the Oxford English Dictionary. Conflict is:

  • An encounter with arms; a fight, battle.
  • A prolonged struggle.
  • A mental or spiritual struggle within a man.
  • The clashing or variance of opposed principles, statements, arguments, etc.
  • The opposition, in an individual, of incompatible wishes or needs of approximately equal strength; also, the distressing emotional state resulting from such opposition.
  • Dashing together, collision, or violent mutual impact of physical bodies.
  • An incompatibility between the concerns or aims of different parties.

The diversity of definitions illustrates one of the basic assumptions of conflict studies.  It presumes that conflict is inherent to every social setting.  Whenever two or more human beings get together, conflict exists.  It is largely a question of what form that conflict takes, its potential for escalation, and how intense it is or may become.  Conflict is a fundamental element to the human condition.  Considering the omnipresence of conflict, we should note just how few educated people have even the most basic understanding of what conflict is, not to mention any capacity for giving critical analysis of conflict processes.

The proposition that conflict is inherent to the human condition finds its origin in the enlightenment proposition that through the application of reason we can strive for, if not accomplish, the perfectibility of the human condition.  The goal of perfecting the human condition aims to reduce suffering caused by a lack of freedom caused by the general inequalities and inequities in social relationships.  Conflict analysis fits nicely within the progressive agenda of liberation, but ought not stand as an unexamined proposition.  While few would dispute that eliminating suffering caused by inequality and inequity are noble goals, some might object to the political agenda that comes with it.  Stanley Fish, for example, argues that institutions of higher education should only have the mission of teaching critical reasoning skills and not engage in projects aimed at transforming the world.   Fish takes the view that universities should not be engaged in service-learning projects, or social justice movements as part of the curriculum.  This view can be juxtaposed with the other extreme, as represented by the inscription on Karl Marx’s gravestone in London’s Highgate Cemetery, “Philosophers have interpreted the world in various ways, the point however is to change it.”  The question of how society goes about addressing inequality and inequity is fundamentally a political question, and one open to debate.  Is the objective of perfecting the human condition, for example, best accomplished through conservative, moderate, or radical approaches to change?  As an academic discipline conflict studies is not immune to these debates.  On one side, we can identify the pragmatic nature of conflict studies.  It is a practical proposition to develop approaches for understanding and handling conflict if it is inherent to all social relations.  Yet, understanding and handling conflict is far from an objective, politically neutral proposition. 

Some have taken a different path in critiquing the “progressive” agenda of Conflict Studies.  This view maintains that conflict resolution, while possibly solving substantive problems, ultimately serves as a mechanism for reproducing the system.  Conflict studies is part of the overall problem of inequality and injustice because the objective of conflict resolution most often obviates addressing the root causes of the conflict in order to accomplish a resolution. It smooths over the conflict, which allows the injustices to persist, often in more complicated and subtle ways that then become even harder to address in the future.  This perspective maintains that Conflict Studies is too liberal, and by this statement it is meant that it is too reformist.  The implications is that true conflict resolution needs to be much more radical in its approach.  For example, the radical perspective maintains an anti-capitalist critique of society, politics, and culture. 

Students also need to be aware of the distinction between conflict studies and peace studies.  While each are concerned about the types, causes, dynamics, and outcomes of conflict, the former tends to emphasize analysis of causes and dynamics, while the latter is mainly concerned with outcomes, especially mediation, resolution, and peace-making.  Often we are eager to get at the resolution part of conflict analysis.  Conflict studies invites us to think about the types, causes, and dynamics of conflict as substantial areas of social science inquiry.  Of course, conflict studies does not ignore or downplay the importance of outcomes.  The assumption is that successful handling of conflict outcomes requires careful attention to types, causes, and dynamics.   

A big chunk of the critical reasoning skills practiced in conflict studies is learning how to strike a balance between learning about different approaches toward understanding conflict and learning about our particular cases studies and how to engage their sets of data.  This balance often becomes a mutually reinforcing process, in which thinking about conflict theory helps us to think about our case studies in new ways, while our case studies guide us in how we think about the phenomena of conflict.  Indeed, conflict studies places high demands on our critical reasoning skills.  We are asked to learn theory, learn cases studies, think about the cases studies using the theory learned, and then develop analysis and interpretations about the cases studies and conflict theory.  

Stanley Fish, Save the World on Your Own Time.  New York:  Oxford University Press, 2008.