| Annotation |
The problem of interethnic conflicts is currently one of the topics attracting the attention of researchers of
various specialties – culturologists, anthropologists, historians, social psychologists and others. The purpose
and main task of this study is to analyze from a philosophical point of view the dialectics of the natural and the
social in ethnic relations and its manifestation in interethnic conflicts. Accordingly, the article uses dialectical and
comparative approaches. The theoretical basis of the study is the author’s concept of the relationship between
natural and social in society and a man, which made it possible to identify the structure of ethnic relations according
to this criterion, to determine the differences between social-group and natural-group relations. Intragroup
and intergroup relations, in which natural components prevail over social ones are designated by the concept of
“natural-group relations” (NGR) introduced in the author’s methodology. The specific results of the research and the novelty are the discovery of the specificity of the manifestation of the patterns of natural group relations and
the role of suggestion in interethnic conflicts. It is proved that the concept of “group centrism” is not enough for
the analysis of groups, since it describes mainly the assessment of one’s group and its values, and the concept
of “regularities of natural group relations” denotes the hierarchical structure of a group, mechanisms of forced
identification (including by methods of education) and self-identification, intragroup and intergroup relationships,
reasons for conformism, etc. The article proves that the symptoms of grouping thinking, which were identified by
I. L. Janis in small closed groups, and which are a kind of (NGR) patterns, are manifested with some variations
in large groups. It is concluded that authors studying group relations do not pay enough attention to the natural
prerequisites for the formation of groups and grouping of thinking, the fact that, due to the need for survival, the
desire to unite into groups, to form and protect the uniformity of thinking is inherent in our genetic programs and is
supported by suggestion. he further part of the article is devoted to the analysis of two interethnic conflicts based
on the developed methodology ‒ the Arab-Israeli and Uzbek-Kyrgyz and the forecast, as well as the possibility
of overcoming them. |
| References |
1. Subbotina, N. D. The problem of the relationship between the natural and the social in society and in
man: Dr. sci. diss. Ulan-Ude, 2002. (In Rus.)
2. Subbotina, N. D. Suggestions and counter-suggestions in society. М: KomKniga, 2006. (In Rus.)
3. Subbotina, N. D. The Concepts of “Social”, “Asocial” and “Anti-Social”. Philosophical Sciences, no. 11,
pp. 108–121, 2016. (In Rus.)
4. Sumner, W. G. What Social Classes Owe to Each Other. The CAXTON PRINTER. Ltd. Caldwell, Idaho.
1974. (In Engl.)
5. Kruglanski, A. W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., De Grada, E. Groups as Epistemic Providers: Need for Closure
and the Unfolding of Group-Centrism. Psychological Review Copyright 2006 by the American Psychological
Association, no. 1. pp. 84–100, 2006. (In Rus.)
6. Hopkins, W. G. Date: Annual 2007. From: Sportscience (Vol. 11). Publisher: Internet Society for Sport
Science. Web. 18.07.2021. https://sportsci.org/2007/index.html. (In Engl.)
7. Hart, P. Irving, L. Janis’ Victims of Groupthink. Political Psychology, no. 2 (Jun., 1991), pp. 247–278,
1991. (In Engl.)
8. Janis, I. L. Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1972. (In Engl.)
9. Caporael, L. R., Brewer, M. B. The quest for human nature: Social and scientific issues in evolutionary
psychology. Journal of Social Issues, no. 47, pр. 1–9, 1991. (In Engl.)
10. Caporael, L. R. Individual self, relational self, and collective self. Parts and wholes: The evolutionary
importance of groups / C. Sedikides & M. B. Brewer (Eds.). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press, 2002: 241–258.
(In Engl.)
11. Baldner, C., Jaume, L. C., Pierro, A, Kruglanski, A. W. The epistemic bases of prejudice: the role of
need for cognitive closure. TPM no. 3, pp. 447–461, September 2019. Special Issue. doi:10.4473/TPM26.3.9/
2019. (In Engl.)
12. Feldman, Hall, O., Shenha, A. Resolving uncertainty in a social world. Nature Human Behaviour, no. 3,
pp. 426–435, 2019. (In Engl.)
13. Hogg, M. A. Subjective uncertainty reduction through self-categorization: A motivational theory of social
identity processes. European Review of Social Psychology, no. 11, pp. 223–255, 2000. (In Engl.)
14. Festinger, L. Informal social communication. Psychological Review, no. 57, pp. 271–282, 1950.
Web. 18.07.2021. https://philpapers.org. (In Engl.)
15. Kent, D. P., Burnight, R. G. Group Centrism in Complex Societies. American Journal of Sociology, no. 3,
pp. 256–259, 1951. (In Engl.)
16. Bar-Tal, D. Israeli-Palestinian conflict: A cognitive analysis. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, vol. 14, pр. 7–29, 1990. Web. 18.07.2021. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223177098_
Israeli-Palestinian_conflict_A_cognitive_analysis. (In Engl.)
17. Nasie, M., Bar-Tal, D. Intractable Conflict, Delegitimization and Intercultural Training. Chapter in
Handbook of intercultural training / School of Education Tel Aviv University June 2020. Web. 18.07.2021. https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/263470620. (In Engl.)
18. Bar-Tal, D. Societal beliefs in times of intractable conflict: The Israeli case. International Journal of
Conflict Management, no. 9, pр. 22–50, 1998. (In Engl.)
19. Bar-Tal, D. Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations and dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 2013. (In Engl.)
20. Bar-Tal, D., Diamond, A. H., Nasie, M. Political socialization of young children in intractable
conflicts: Conception and evidence. International Journal of Behavioral Development, no. 41, 415–425, 2017.
Web. 18.07.2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416652508. (In Engl.)
21. Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, L. R. Meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, no. 90, pр. 751–783, 2006. (In Engl.) |
