Various theories are trying to explain how consensus and conflict define a society. The theory of Consensus stated that for social change to occur there must be an agreement among members of the community on a particular issue. On the other hand, conflict wields that social change can only arise in the event of a conflict. By this, nothing comes simple in society. Conflicts include disagreements that can steer to war in some instances. The two theories have significance bound to them. However, one theory has more importance as seen in society as correlated to the other. The importance of consensus is to ensure that the opinions of each person count before a ruling is made. The decision attained is one that makes everyone happy and more frequently than not is deemed as a win-win situation. The importance of conflict, on the other handholds that at not everyone can be happy in the community at the same time Mostly when conflicts occur in the community, it is through consensus that people get back together and concentrate on those things that heighten them as a whole rather than the things that break them. By a detailed look at consensus, it is evident that society is best appreciated by its effect. Following, by examining the shared criteria, values, and morality of the community it becomes obvious that the result of consensus is what best describes the society.
The Decision-making process so much depends on conflict theory than it is on agreement or consensus. Formal consensus, works best in an environment that conflict is facilitated.
In as much as an agreement is wanted in decision-making, it is detailed to comprehend that conflict will always be there and can never be prevented. For instance, the unequal distribution of economic resources in a state as correlated to other states results in conflict. The conflict bases its argument on wanting to see the inequality in resources division rectified by an equal distribution of the resources. In such a situation, a consensus is a way ahead as it will bring both parties together and clarify the differences in the allocation of economic resources. Thet The agreement is reached in which every party gets back home satisfied that things will work out shortly.
Shared norms, values, and ethics are evaluative beliefs that help people live together in harmony. They are also beliefs of authorization or disapproval and tend to prevail over time hence creating faster continuity in society and the personality of human beings. With these features, the values, norms, and morality are subject to change. Conflicts, on the other hand, changes with time in that the issuance of economic resources depends on time. Financial resources are mostly distributed to a community at specific times as such, and there are moments when there is no conflict as things are instability. Nevertheless, as soon as resources are given out to facilitate different projects, conflicts arise that need to be settled.
The concept of value talks about the desirability of a method means as well as an end to the action. The value indicates to what degree something is regarded as being good or bad. Value is thus widespread rather than being specific. Its nature of being general makes it reasonable to assess specific behaviors in specific situations. The understandings of morality are what guide the examination criteria given by values. Being considerate of other people's needs and beliefs are viewed positively. Neatness may be valued positively for moral reasons whereas intelligence may be valued positively for reasonable reasons. The concept of value must also be distinguished from other concepts, which appear to be having resemblances to it. Value and tendency must be put apart as they do not mean the exact although they seem to be similar.
The value may be believed as being an intention, but not all preferences are values. The the disparity lies in the fact that value is founded on a belief about what should be done as rejected to preference, which is based on mere liking.
On the other hand, the concept of the norm is an assumption in the desirability of behavior. It is thus a belief about the acceptability of behavior. Norm indicates the degree to which behavior is true or false hence, what behavior can be allowed versus the behavior that cannot be withstood.
Norm, therefore, is an evaluation criterion that tries to show what behaviors should or should not be imitated. A norm being a behavioral rule gives the feeling of obligation. One is counseled to do what is right at all times. It is a duty to do that which is right and despise the wrong behavior in society. The disparity between a norm and value is in the degree of generality. A norm is usually less widespread as compared to value since it distinguishes what should or should not be done.
However, norms derive from values things to do with morality, aesthetics, as well as achievements. The basis of a norm will more frequently than not affect its strength or its importance.
For instance, a norm that relates to morality hence guiding on what is right or wrong is viewed as being more important as compared to the norm that is based on aesthetics dealing with matters to do with dressing code.
As well, the various dimensions used to define the significance accorded to a particular value or norm act as evidence of the fact that society is an outcome of consensus based on norms and values. Among such dimensions is the strength which is a reminder of the impact that the special norm or value has on the group of people that are confined to live by the norm's or values' principle.
Therefore, almost everybody involved commonly follows strong norms and values precisely. As a result, such strength makes it simple for a group of individuals to approve of the decision-making process. Hence, the agreements made by a group of individuals bring out society. Therefore, the stronger the norm or value, then the more impact it has on defining a society since people have a responsibility to living by it. On the other hand, norms, and values that are not strong enough to affect the consensus carried by a group of individuals who do not have a great influence on the definition of society since it's generally not followed by many people. On the other hand, of conflicts resulting in society, solving such conflicts is greatly influenced by the morals, values, and norms surrounding that particular group of individuals. Therefore, the two have a resemblance to the fact that strong norms, morals, and values will result in individuals making valid decisions regarding any conflict arising because of the unreasonable funding of resources. Nonetheless, the two dimensions conflict in the fact that the results of the interchange of different groups of people result in many conflicts that are not certainly caused by unequal resource allocation. Thus, people engage in the solving of various conflicts to be identified as a society.
Another dimension is centrality, which has a direct influence on defining society as an outcome of consensus based on norms. The main reason for this is the fact that centricity gives more circumstances about the concerns that value or a norm shows to different groups of people. Therefore, a central norm or value is known to provide more to the behaviors of given groups as compared to peripheral norms and values. As a result, of this centricity of norms and values, the affected group of individuals can make valid decisions.
therefore making it easy to identify it as a society. The strong connection brought about by the centricity is hence a key factor of study in an endeavor to identify a society as an outcome of consensus-based on norms, morals, and values. However, when it comes to identifying a society regarding conflicts resulting from the unequal issuance of resources, then the issue of applying the range with which such conflicts have encompassed the particular group of individuals becomes a dimension used to measure the same. The difference between the two definitions on the outcome of society is the truth that on one side the dimension measures the range of norms and values' effect while on the other side is used to measure the degree of conflicts.
Also, the range of a norm or value is a significant extent that proves that society is an outcome of consensus established on norms and values because it shows the span within which a particular norm or value affects different groups of individuals in the society. Different norms and values are made to fit different groups of individuals and, therefore, it is this range that infers the decision-making process of a group of people, which would, in turn, lead to society. Hence, the larger the range of a given norm of value, then the more the influence it will have on consensus. However, on the other hand, the unequal diffusion of resources can also result in conflicts, which in turn define a society as the individuals try to solve the conflicts,
Hence, it establishes a reflection of the fact that society is an impact of consensus as groups of individuals try to solve the conflicts. The disparity between the two effects of society is that the norms, values, and morality have nothing to do with the allocation of resources.
As well, the solving of conflicts of coming up with agreements is a continuous process that plays a tremendous role in engaging people which in turn directs to society. Therefore, the respect that individuals accord to the various norms and values in society plays a significant role in ensuring that the relationship of individuals is retained at close attention hence making up society. On the other hand, the unfair issuance of resources is only known to separate people more due to the resulting conflicts. However, a group of individuals that believes in unraveling issues result in a strong unity, which then is defined as a society.
Therefore, morals, values, and norms are a key factor in assuring that a group of individuals stays unified, therefore, resulting in sound decision-making in matters dealing with any conflicts. In the contrast, a group of someones that lack the proposal brought about by following the right norms, values, and acting morally is not able to make sound decisions when solving conflicts, which drive them apart with each conflict. Therefore, it is almost difficult to define the resulting separated individuals as a society.
he Decision-making process so much depends on conflict theory than it is on agreement or consensus