A sky with sun and moon symbolizes how conflict management allows opposing forces to coexist in harmony.

Conflict is Natural: How We Mistake Discomfort for Destruction

What is conflict? Conflict is not the same as contention. It is a neutral force that, when handled wisely, fosters growth and peace.
The third article in the Peacemaking Series, published in partnership with Public Square Magazine and Skyline Research Institute.

What is Conflict?

How would you define the word Conflict? What does conflict look like? What does conflict feel like? Taking only 1 minute to complete the following statements right now––before reading the rest of this article––will help avoid bias, creating a valuable opportunity for personal insight.

Conflict is . . .

Conflict looks like . . .

Conflict feels like . . .

Here, conflict is defined as when two or more opposing forces meet each other. But don’t toss out your definition yet. Understanding visual or verbal analogies used when describing the word can grant insight into an individual’s intrapersonal relationship with conflict. Positive and negative conflict associations equally have pros and cons. Adopting a “conflict is natural” perspective––which is neither positive nor negative––leads to highly productive conflict resolution. Understanding one’s current perspective of conflict and maturing it toward a “conflict is natural” perspective can help Christian disciples answer the call of “Peacemakers Needed.”

Positive and negative conflict associations equally have pros and cons.

This article explores basic principles for conflict resolution shared in this short and playful video, Conflict Is Natural––part of the 12-part Peacemaking video series produced by the Skyline Research Institute. The first three videos of the series explore the internal environment of an individual in conflict including motivation, emotional control, and now psychological associations. This reflects the importance of gaining internal clarity before moving on to the interpersonal and external factors of a conflict.

 

Conflict Associations

The video begins with a Rorschach-inspired inkblot. The seemingly random yet iconic inkblots of the Rorschach Test take root in Jung’s Word Association Test and Freud’s Free Association Technique. Each of the psychology practices endeavors to bridge the mystery of subconscious associations for conscious observation. For example, answers given to the statements at the beginning of the article can create the opportunity for the conscious self to observe subconscious associations with conflict. When exploring definitions, analogies, or sensations associated with conflict, consider the positive or negative nature of those associations. 

Negative associations typically characterize conflict as something repulsive or violent and to be avoided or discouraged. Examples from the video include rhinos charging each other, or the Earth covered and blown apart by explosions. One might picture two people verbally or physically fighting. Typically these scenarios have high or tense energy, but may also include feelings of isolation or fear motivating avoidance. If answers reveal a conflict perspective with negative associations this could be a good thing or a bad thing depending on the circumstance. These individuals are unlikely to engage in unnecessary conflict and make a significant effort to avoid negative outcomes when in a conflict. Sometimes, however, negative associations can lead people to shy away from necessary or productive conflicts, leading to hiding, isolation, or stagnation. For these people it’s important to remember not all conflicts end in pain, suffering, or destruction. Constructive conflict management can lead to peace, growth, and prosperity.

Conflict is commonly associated with contention. In many cases, they are treated as synonyms.

Positive associations typically characterize conflict as something intriguing, engaging, or maybe even exciting. The pros of positive conflict association can be obvious. These kinds of people are typically willing to “dive in and get their hands dirty” (an analogy associated with hard but worthwhile work). Yet some positive associations can represent overly optimistic perspectives of conflict like the example from the video of two dogs playfully tugging on two opposite ends of a rope. Others can represent more narcissistic intentions, like the image from the video of a person holding two people as if they were dolls. Overly optimistic perspectives can sometimes lead to dismissive behavior or denial and make relationships vulnerable to manipulation. Manipulation––whether consciously performed or not––introduces or escalates conflict to satisfy personal needs while causing harm to others in the relationship. But as President Nelson puts it, “Anger never persuades. Hostility builds no one. Contention never leads to inspired solutions.”

For Latter-day Saints, conflict is commonly associated with contention. In many cases, they are treated as synonyms. Having frequently facilitated discussions with Latter-day Saints regarding the theory of conflict management in educational and religious contexts, nearly every discussion includes the misquoted scripture “Contention is of the devil” (3 Nephi 11:29)––typifying a negative association. If any of them had a childhood like I did, they were probably repeatedly quoted that principle by a parent frustrated with their children’s bickering. And fair enough, the train of thought for this association is easy enough to follow:

The Devil is bad––Contention is of the Devil––Contention is bad––Contention comes from conflict––Conflict is bad.

This Transitive or Association Fallacy informs poor conflict management behavior typical of negative associations:

Shun the Devil––Contention is of the Devil––Shun Contention––Contention comes from conflict––Shun conflict. 

This paragraph could continue into its own article, and a future article will discuss the pros and cons of avoiding conflict and why it isn’t a one-size-fits-all conflict style. For now, it’s probably enough to point out that contention and conflict are not the same thing in Latter-day Saint doctrine (see TG Conflict versus TG Contention). Conflict is when two or more opposing forces meet each other. Contention comes from trying to resolve a conflict while motivated by anger. While all contention comes from conflict, not all conflict leads to contention.

While all contention comes from conflict, not all conflict leads to contention.

Beyond positive and negative associations, there are myriad insights one can glean as one continues to explore conflict associations. Whether interpretations feel accurate will always be relative to the individual. Thoughtful, personal meditation is the only way to reveal the hidden subconscious messages encoded within each association.

The Farmer and His Horse

Indulge a Chinese fable first whispered to me in the backstage of a small theater several years ago by an older friend offering me perspective during a hard time. I was excited to hear the same story from Elder Garret W. Gong in his recent talk, All Things For Our Good. Just like all good fables, there may be differences in their telling and multitudes of meaningful interpretations. While trying to avoid forcing my take-away on you, I share the version as it was first told to me.

A farmer who lives on the frontier loses his horse to the wild.

His neighbors offer condolences.

While his father says, We’ll see.

The horse returns to the farmer, bringing with it a herd of horses.

The neighbors congratulate his fortune.

While his father says, We’ll see.

The farmer breaks his leg while riding a new horse.

His neighbors offer condolences.

While his father says, We’ll see.

War breaks out on the frontier.

The army does not recruit the farmer because his leg is broken.

The neighbors congratulate his fortune.

While his father says, We’ll see.

A Nature-al Perspective

A meditation of conflict associations may reveal a positive or negative subconscious bias. But there is a more productive conflict perspective. Conflict (just like rain, a natural phenomenon) can be thought of as either positive (like when a farmer needs more water) or negative (like when an outdoor dinner party gets rained on). However, consider how the management of the conflict can also be thought of as either negative (if the farmer drinks and gambles away his surplus profit) or positive (if the dinner guests dash inside and cozy up next to a fire). Consider these other analogies for conflicts observed in nature as used in the video;

  • The biological differences of Male and Female
  • Wood fueling a campfire
  • The earth’s relationship with both the sun and the moon
  • A wave washing up on a shore

Nature is full of conflict, yet it is neither positive nor negative. Conflict is just like nature; it is not the source of our positive or negative associations. “There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so” (Shakespeare in Hamlet 2.2).  Conflict is neither negative nor positive: conflict is natural. When adopting this perspective, instead of the conflict being positive or negative, it is our response to conflict––also known as conflict management––which becomes either poor (negative) or productive (positive). 

A Christian Application of the “Conflict Is Natural” Perspective

The Taijitu is a powerful symbol of the Eastern philosophy of Yin and Yang. It communicates at once both conflict and harmony and the reciprocal dependence of conflict upon harmony and harmony upon conflict; neither exists without the other. In a similar way, the Cross is a symbol of both suffering and exaltation and their mutual dependence; neither exists without the other. While both symbols have vastly more complex associations than these gross reductions, they may serve as effective visual analogies for the fundamental Latter-day Saint doctrine: “It must needs be that there is an opposition in all things” (2 Nephi 2:11). Individual agency is enabled through opposition (2 Nephi 2:16). As linked before, Conflict in the Topical Guide only refers to two other words: Opposition and Problem-Solving. “The Savior’s message is clear: His true disciples build, lift, encourage, persuade, and inspire—no matter how difficult the situation. True disciples of Jesus Christ are peacemakers” (President Russel M. Nelson). Letting go of negative or positive bias and embracing a ‘conflict is natural’ perspective enables peacemakers in productive conflict management by reinforcing individual agency.

Want more?

Check out and share all 12 videos from the Peacemaking Series, now available on YouTube, or read similar research, videos, and podcasts at thefamilyproclamation.org. Return to Public Square monthly for more articles expanding on the theories used to create each video.

About the author

Skyline

Skyline Research proudly hosts TheFamilyProclamation.org, a website dedicated to advancing the principles of The Family: A Proclamation to the World.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Donald Trump in Front of American Flag | Complicated Relationship: Latter-day Saints & Trump | Public Square Magazine | LDS Church and Trump Supporters | Trump & LDS Church

Latter-day Saints for Trump

Kim Coleman of Latter-day Saints for Trump explains why they have chosen to support Donald Trump’s candidacy for President. They argue his immigration, economic, and foreign policies make him the best choice for President.

The Ordinary Saint’s Guide to Under the Banner of Heaven

In an age that claims to value “own voices” media, it is sad that Under the Banner of Heaven is probably going to be the biggest story that the public sees about members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints this year or this decade. While the tale it tells is based on an actual occurrence and about some actual problems within the broader movement of people hearkening back to Joseph Smith, one thing that can’t be said for either the book or the show was that they were written by a member of our community. The producer may have “grown up” as a Latter-day Saint, but he left the faith before he was an adult. If you’ve never had the experience of holding a calling, making temple covenants, or negotiating the relationships that make up a ward (Latter-day Saint congregation), are you really the best person to interpret our community? So I’m stepping in to offer my perspective. I am not a historian or theologian. So, though I try to be informed about the difficult parts of our religion’s past, I can only give you the perspective of what an average member would know or believe about these situations. I undoubtedly will get some of the nuances wrong. This will not be the best place if you’re looking for information about the historical accuracy of the show. (Consider checking FAIR’s guide or Book of Mormon Central.) However, I am an active participant in the larger Latter-day Saint literary community. I’ve written essays about my own life as a woman in the Church and fictional stories about others. I studied Latter-day Saint literature in college and continue reading contemporary Latter-day Saint literature. I am on the board of the Association for Mormon Letters, an organization that promotes literature written by, for, or about those who tie back to the prophet Joseph (including members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but not exclusive to our denomination). So you might say I have some experience with portrayals of the Latter-day Saints and separate fundamentalist communities. The purpose of this series of recaps is two-fold. First, I want to summarize the series for ordinary Latter-day Saints who don’t intend to watch it so they won’t be surprised around the metaphorical watercooler this week. Second, I will catalog the series as it compares to Latter-day Saint literature more broadly. As a writer, reader, and advocate of Latter-day Saint literature, this is my home turf. I am interested to see where the show gets things right and wrong. Granted, my experience isn’t the experience of every member; like any community, Latter-day Saints are not a monolith. But I will compare the show to my personal knowledge of our community and talk about what sticks out. Without further ado, here are my impressions of the first two episodes of Under the Banner of Heaven. Episode 1, “When God Was Love”  Summary—The episode opens with Detective Pyre being called away from his family’s Pioneer Day celebrations to visit a crime scene. At an ordinary suburban house, he finds a scene of chaos with a mother (Brenda Lafferty) and her 15-month-old daughter (Erica) murdered in a gruesome way. (Luckily, we are only shown large quantities of blood on the floor and walls; the show shies away from showing the bodies, though we will get hints through dialogue about the exact method of killing.) Soon the husband (Allen Lafferty) is taken into custody, his clothes soaked in his wife’s blood. The killer claims that his wife was murdered by men with beards like “Mormon prophets” and continually ties his wife’s murder back to early church history stories, particularly Joseph and Emma marrying against her father’s will. We then get a flashback to a young Brenda. She is an energetic and ambitious young woman who transfers to BYU after being tired of “holding girl’s hair back while they puked” at her party school in Idaho. Allen introduces Brenda to his family at a large family dinner. His brothers seem both strangely attracted to her and judgmental of her for her ambition and less strict faith (caffeinated soda is mentioned). The Lafferty family band together to clear a neighbor’s land to prevent it from being seized by the federal government to build a highway. In the present, Detective Pyre’s partner Bill visits Allen’s brother Robin’s home and finds the house abandoned and papers burning. They arrest Robin after a chase through a motel. This episode depicts the First Vision. It shows Joseph going to the woods to pray and a light shining down on him. The script draws parallels between Joseph’s prayer and Robin’s prayer in the woods before he is caught by the police, which doesn’t really make much sense except that they are both kneeling in a natural setting. We also get a scene of Joseph and Emma discussing whether to marry against her father’s wishes. The show tries to make a big deal of them choosing between “God’s will” and her father’s authority, implying that the problem is that they can justify almost anything as God’s will. I found this assertion pretty strange, given that Joseph and Emma were hardly the first couple to marry against a parent’s wishes. It seems a thin justification on which to hang a condemnation of trusting God. Shibboleths—It’s apparent that the showrunners have made an effort to try to include jargon of Latter-day Saints in the dialogue. Sometimes this works: the Pyre family prayer scene feels exactly like the ones that take place in my family. Others make it apparent that the writers are not members of the community. While we do refer to God as Heavenly Father, particularly in prayer, we don’t use this term exclusively like the characters in the show. I regularly hear members refer to him as “God” or “the Lord,” and a brief search of the church’s 1980’s general conference talks shows that this isn’t a new innovation. While there is

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This