Understanding conflict resolution philosophically in a school setting: three different kinds of violence and dialogue

Abstract

According to Galtung, violence can be divided into two kinds: (i) direct violence, which is always physical in a wider sense (e.g. bodily harm or verbal abuse) or (ii) indirect violence that is either structural (i.e. the institution is structurally violent because it is organised so to privilege a group over others; e.g. a strict pyramidal organisational structure) or cultural (i.e. the institution is culturally violent because it encourages or fails to deal with cultural aspects that either privileges or is demeaning towards certain groups; e.g. institutionalised racism or misogyny). Galtung’s theory provides us with three levels of violence, leading us to three different potential forms of conflict. In response to this, I propose a philosophical discussion centred on three distinct kinds of dialogue, each of which explaining forms of conflict resolution dealing with these three kinds of violence identified by Galtung. That is, Buber’s, Levinas’ and Arendt’s conceptions of dialogue, dealing, respectively, with physical, cultural and structural violence. Given that violence has become a growing problem within the education context and that various strategies of conflict resolution have been tried and are being pursued, my discussion will enable those involved in these ventures to gain a better understanding of the problem and of its possible solutions.