Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sushan]

This topic is about the December 2023 Philosophy Book of the Month, Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope by Dr. Randy Ross

The most intense conflicts, if overcome, leave behind a sense of security and calm that is not easily disturbed. (Location 148 - Kindle Version)

– Carl Jung

AI Prompt : Conflict's Aftermath: Tumultuous and Tranquil Paths
Conflict's Aftermath - Tumultuous and Tranquil Paths.png (1.66 MiB) Viewed 9228 times

Carl Jung's perspective that resolving deep conflicts results in lasting peace challenges us to question if this outcome is always true. Research in psychology and various philosophical theories suggest that the aftermath of intense conflicts may not always lead to peace.

For instance, research in trauma psychology indicates that intense conflicts can leave long-lasting psychological impacts, contradicting the notion of inevitable peace. A study by the American Psychological Association highlights that traumatic experiences can lead to chronic conditions like PTSD, challenging the idea that overcoming conflict invariably leads to calm [(Source: APA - Trauma(https://www.apa.org/topics/trauma)]

Additionally, existentialist philosophy, while acknowledging the growth that can come from conflict, does not guarantee peace as a universal outcome. Existentialists argue that conflict can lead to a deeper understanding of existence without necessarily resulting in tranquility. (We have a different topic to discuss about Existentialism - viewtopic.php?f=69&t=19182)

Given the evidence from trauma psychology, can we still hold Jung's view as a universal truth? How do the complexities of individual psychological responses challenge the idea that all resolved conflicts lead to a state of peace?

[Esther Deekor]

I do not think that true peace is always the outcome of conflict resolution because we've had conflicts resolved only for it to resurface again after a while, and the funniest part is, most times this conflict that resurfaces doesn't happen between the initial combatants .

[Sushan]

I do not think that true peace is always the outcome of conflict resolution because we've had conflicts resolved only for it to resurface again after a while, and the funniest part is, most times this conflict that resurfaces doesn't happen between the initial combatants .

Thank you for your insightful response, highlighting some key challenges in the notion that true peace is always the outcome of conflict resolution.

Your point about conflicts being resolved only to resurface later is particularly relevant. This pattern is often observed in international politics. For example, consider the numerous ceasefire agreements that have been made and broken in regions like the Middle East. These ceasefires may temporarily halt hostilities, but without addressing the underlying issues, the peace is often short-lived. This aligns with your observation that conflict resolution may not always lead to lasting peace, especially if the deeper causes remain unaddressed.

The fact that resurfaced conflicts often involve different parties than the original conflict is a crucial observation. It reflects a broader societal or systemic issue that transcends individual conflicts. A pertinent example is the Cold War era, where ideological conflicts between the USA and the USSR often manifested in different countries and among different parties, leading to a series of proxy wars. This phenomenon suggests that resolving a conflict between initial combatants doesn't guarantee broader peace if the underlying tensions remain unresolved in the wider community or society.

The psychological and societal implications of conflict resolution, as your response indicates, add another layer of complexity. This can be seen in post-conflict societies where, despite formal resolutions, the psychological scars and societal divisions persist, as was the case in Rwanda post-genocide. It raises questions about the effectiveness and depth of conflict resolution processes.

I'm curious about your experiences or examples from history or current events that reflect this pattern of unresolved conflicts resurfacing. Have you observed instances where conflict resolution led to a durable peace or, conversely, only to temporary calm before the resurgence of conflict?

To continue our discussion, I'd like to ask a philosophical question: In light of these challenges, how should we approach conflict resolution to ensure that it leads to true and lasting peace, rather than just a temporary cessation of hostilities?

[Wemby Jordan]

No, it is not always the outcome. However, the lack of conflict and the peace of mind that comes with it is the outcome.

[Adam Bryce Stern]

Logically the answer should be yes, but looking at how events around us turn out we can conclude that peace(or "true" peace) is only one out of numerous possible outcomes of conflict resolution. For instance a temporary cease fire, can be an outcome of conflict resolution (a cease fire shouldn't be considered "true" peace). Countless conflicts have supposedly been resolved only to resurface more brutal than the last time. So the answer is No. True peace isn't always the outcome of Conflict resolution.

[Sushan]

No, it is not always the outcome. However, the lack of conflict and the peace of mind that comes with it is the outcome.

I acknowledge and appreciate your perspective on how the absence of conflict might lead to peace of mind on a personal level, highlighting an important aspect of conflict resolution. This view rightly points out that the immediate aftermath of resolving a conflict can bring about a certain tranquility. However, as we delve deeper into the broader implications and psychological aspects of conflict resolution, the picture becomes more complex.

From a psychological standpoint, the impact of conflict and its resolution on individuals can vary widely. Psychological research, including studies on trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), suggests that the mere resolution of external conflict does not automatically translate into internal peace. Individuals may continue to experience anxiety, depression, and PTSD symptoms long after a conflict has been resolved externally. This underscores the importance of addressing not only the superficial aspects of conflicts but also their deep psychological impacts.

On a broader level, when we consider societal or communal conflicts, the psychological effects are compounded. Collective trauma, a phenomenon where a community experiences psychological harm resulting from events like war, genocide, or natural disasters, can persist across generations. The reconciliation processes, therefore, must incorporate psychological healing, acknowledging the trauma experienced by communities, and providing avenues for healing and restitution.

The sustainability of peace, then, hinges on the depth at which conflict resolution processes engage with these psychological dimensions. It's not merely about reaching an agreement or cessation of hostilities but about fostering understanding, empathy, and healing among individuals and communities. For instance, truth and reconciliation commissions, like the one established in South Africa after apartheid, aim to address these psychological wounds through public testimonies, acknowledgment of suffering, and steps towards reparation and healing.

Reflecting on the complexities of individual psychological responses and societal trauma, how do you think these psychological aspects influence the long-term sustainability of peace? Considering that overcoming conflict might leave behind a sense of security, as Carl Jung suggests, could the integration of psychological healing into conflict resolution strategies be the key to achieving not just peace but a deeper, more enduring tranquility?

[Sushan]

Logically the answer should be yes, but looking at how events around us turn out we can conclude that peace(or "true" peace) is only one out of numerous possible outcomes of conflict resolution. For instance a temporary cease fire, can be an outcome of conflict resolution (a cease fire shouldn't be considered "true" peace). Countless conflicts have supposedly been resolved only to resurface more brutal than the last time. So the answer is No. True peace isn't always the outcome of Conflict resolution.

I find your perspective both insightful and grounded in the harsh realities of contemporary global conflicts. Agreeing with your assessment, it's crucial to examine the current situations in Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine to further our understanding of the complexities surrounding the concept of "true peace" as an outcome of conflict resolution.

In the context of Israel-Palestine, despite numerous attempts at conflict resolution, peace remains elusive. Ceasefires and negotiations have frequently been implemented, only to be followed by renewed violence. This cycle suggests that while temporary measures can provide brief periods of calm, they fall short of addressing the underlying issues—historical grievances, territorial disputes, and mutual recognition—necessary for lasting peace.

Similarly, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine highlights how resolutions, such as ceasefires or peace talks, often do not lead to a sustainable peace. The annexation of Crimea by Russia in 2014 and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine demonstrate the complexities of achieving true peace when national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and international law are at stake. Despite various international efforts to mediate the conflict, a lasting resolution that satisfies all parties involved has yet to be reached.

These examples underscore the multifaceted nature of conflict resolution, where true peace is not merely the absence of active conflict but also involves addressing deep-rooted issues, ensuring justice, and rebuilding trust among communities. The psychological impact on the populations involved, including trauma and a pervasive sense of insecurity, further complicates the path to peace.

Given these considerations, how do you perceive the role of international mediation, humanitarian aid, and peacekeeping efforts in moving beyond temporary solutions to foster a more durable peace? Moreover, in light of the ongoing conflicts, what strategies could be more effective in addressing the root causes and ensuring that any resolution leads not just to a cessation of hostilities but to a genuine reconciliation and healing of the societies involved?