|
Introduction:
Roy Lewicki, professor of management and human resources at Ohio State
University, suggests that more conservative groups sometimes approach conflict
in terms of advancing the justice of their cause rather than reaching resolution. However,
he suggests that referring to such groups as extremists or fundamentalists is itself
a framing issue. Language is a key part of working toward mutual understanding.
| |
This rough transcript provides a text alternative to audio. We apologize for occasional errors and unintelligible sections (which are marked with ???).
Language in Conflict
Roy Lewicki
Professor of Management and Human Resources at Ohio State University
| |
A: I just came from a discussion that I left
upstairs, in which we were talking about gaps in the field. One of the gaps was
that people who believe in conflict resolution generally have liberal values.
Basically they are committed to a principle that most conflicts are resolved.
When you look at a number of other groups in our society that are more
politically and religiously conservative, they don't share a commitment to
conflict resolution. They often share a commitment to domination, to winning, to
control.
Q:
in the name of justice?
A: In the name of their definition of what is right, what is fair or
whatever. Whether we call it religious extremism, political extremism, or
fundamentalism. Extremism is a word I am using from my value base to describe
their value base. That is a framing issue. I have immediately chosen polarizing
language to talk about that difference. Language is instrumental to all of this.
If we are going to change what people do, we first have to figure out how to talk
to each other in a way that we really do understand each other and believe that
there is a real commitment to try and understand.
|
