Институализация «социального конфликта» в контексте вербального отражения действительности

Abstract

This article is devoted to a conceptual reconsideration of the meaning of the concepts conflict and social con-flict. In conflict studies, a peculiar naturalization of this social phenomenon has occurred. As a result, by dis-regarding the distinction between the terms “social conflict” and “conflict,” various types of “disputes” cameto be regarded as conflicts, understood as “clashes” between virtually anything: subjects, parties, states,needs, ideas, interests, goals, and so on. The article emphasizes that, since antiquity, considerable efforts havebeen made in scholarship to understand the semantic content of words. A word is understood as a reflectionof sensory-cognitive images expressed «about a conceived object» and embodied in the verbal and phoneticform of language. It is noted that, in this context, language is the house of the being of thought. This approachis employed as a methodological basis for the study of the sociology of conflict. A retrospective analysis ofideas concerning the role of justice in the social regulation of states reveals that the logic of law — rights —freedom has constituted an enduring foundation for the organization of all types of legal relations from thetime of the Roman Empire to the present day. In contrast, the ancient Greeks conceptualized this relationshipthrough the sequence freedom — duties — rights. The study establishes that the emergence in American soci-ology of a vital «passion for improving society» was largely driven by the search for an alternative to Marxistideas, particularly in the context of their potential practical implementation. The article also examines the rea-sons underlying the necessity of institutionalizing mediation within the functioning of legal states governedby the principles of Roman law. This process, like the institutionalization of conflict studies as a whole, is be-coming increasingly characteristic of the countries of the «Central Asian Five» as well.