4,622
edits
Social Studies skills: Difference between revisions
m
→Other theories & conceptual tools: adding Graham and Grisl
m (→Other theories & conceptual tools: adding Graham and Grisl) |
|||
| Line 1,844: | Line 1,844: | ||
== Other theories & conceptual tools == | == Other theories & conceptual tools == | ||
[[File: | |||
=== Glasl's model of conflict escalation === | |||
[[File:Glasl's Model of Conflict Escalation.svg|thumb|Glasl's "Nine stages of conflict escalation"|385x385px]] | |||
* when analyzing conflict, diplomacy, events, etc. students may employ the conceptual framework of "conflict escalation" by Friedrich Glasl ([[wikipedia:Friedrich_Glasl's_model_of_conflict_escalation|here from wikipedia]]) | |||
* Glasl's model divides disagreement or conflict scenarios into "stages" based upon three core outcomes: | |||
** win-win | |||
*** both sides benefit | |||
** win-lose | |||
*** one side benefits, the other loses | |||
** lose-lose | |||
*** conflict w/ bad outcomes for one or both parties | |||
* conflicts escalate through and into: | |||
** tension and dispute | |||
** debate | |||
** communication loss | |||
** coalition building (seeking sympathy or help from others) | |||
** denunciation | |||
** loss of face (pride) | |||
** threats and feelings of threat | |||
** depersonalization (treating the other as not human) | |||
** attack, annihilation, defeat | |||
* deescalation includes: | |||
** mediation from third-party (intercession, intermediation) | |||
** process guidance | |||
** arbitration, legal actions | |||
** forcible intervention, especially from higher power | |||
* Glasl's model works at the individual (a family fight) or global level (international affairs) | |||
=== Graham's hierarchy of disagreement === | |||
[[File:Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement-en.svg|thumb|Graham's hierarchy of disagreement]] | |||
* tech entrepreneur Paul Graham in 2008 proposed a model for levels (hierarchies) of disagreement | |||
* the top of the hierarchy is refutation of the "central point" | |||
** i.e., that the opposing idea is fundamentally "refuted" | |||
*** via logic, demonstration, evidence, etc. | |||
* the bottom of the hierarchy is "Name-calling", which leads to no resolution and further anger or dispute | |||
* key points in the negative side of the hierarchy are essentially [[Logical fallacy|logical fallacies]]: | |||
** name-calling (ad hominem) and | |||
** criticism of tone or attitude rather than substance ("responding to tone") | |||
** contractions without evidence | |||
* on the constructive side are | |||
** strong argument via reason, logic, evidence | |||
** refutation: proof | |||
=== Overton Window === | === Overton Window === | ||
* Joseph Overton observed that along the spectrum of social or political thought, policy, or opinion | * [[File:Overton Window diagram.svg|thumb|An illustration of the Overton window, along with Treviño's degrees of acceptance]]Joseph Overton observed that along the spectrum of social or political thought, policy, or opinion | ||
** there exists a mainstream "middle" of consensus | ** there exists a mainstream "middle" of consensus | ||
*** that middle may have variances, but most people generally agree with it | *** that middle may have variances, but most people generally agree with it | ||