It is ‘circle time’ and the class has
to decide on a cooperative game for sports day. The emphasis is on
choosing a game or activity that allows
for the coming together of the group in
a safe and cooperative manner. Various
options are listed on the board and are
deliberated upon. One set of students
fervently argue for playing a particular
game which is unsafe. After much discussion,
the teacher asserts that it cannot
be considered as an option, though she is
open to continuing the conversation
about the propriety of the game.
Disappointment slowly spreads in the
class at the finality of the state-ment
made by the teacher, and the children
struggle to take the discussion forward.
We regularly experience such
situations of conflict, especially while
working with children between ten and
twelve years of age. There often seems
to be a wariness while getting into
conversations during such situations.
However, conversations have a vital role
in our work as educators. Situations of conflict present ample opportunities for
both, the educator and the student, to
examine their ways of thinking and
of relating to other people. In these
conversations there is an opportunity to
unravel the working of the mind of each
participant. Today, children are exposed
to a world that is ridden with violence,
disorder and unrest—both outside and
within oneself. It is, therefore, imperative
for us, as educators, to inquire into the
nature of conflict if we are to help them
make sense of all that they perceive and
experience in the world.
Going a little deeper into conflict,
we realized that it stemmed from some
basic mental constructs like identity,
choice, denial, resistance, authority, and
ownership. The manifestations of these
conflicts could be internal, external or
both. However, no situation can be
strictly compartmentalized, and depending
on the context and the people,
many of the constructs of the mind
listed above could be simultaneously at
work. Authority and power appear to be at the root of the conflict described in
the situation of the class trying to decide
their cooperative game. For the educator,
different images of herself that make up
her identity seem to be in conflict. While
she strives to be open-minded and willing
to engage in a serious enquiry over the
nature of games, she also seeks efficiency
as she works towards the outcome of
conducting a cooperative game.
Here is another situation: a student
is supposed to make a presentation before
a class and she appears very worried.
A conversation with the student reveals
that she feels unprepared, and therefore,
nervous of making mistakes and being
teased. The conflict here seems to stem
from a self-imposed need to live up to
the image that the student carries of
herself and others have about her. There
is an idea of how she must be seen by
others at all times, and any deviation
from it seems to trouble the student. “Is
it really possible to be the same, fixed
person at all times?” we ask her. Through
the conversation we explore the construct
of ‘images’ and how holding on to
them affects us.
Think about this scenario where a
child is alone at home for some time.
She has been asked by her parents not to
watch television. The child is anxious
about turning the television on but
chooses to do it anyway, because there is
no way the parents will find out. Here, what the child wants is in conflict with
what her parents want. From another
perspective, the child might struggle
with a choice to be made between giving
in or not giving in to her desire to watch
television. She may think of herself as a
trustworthy individual and giving in to
her desire would contradict this image
that she has created about herself. Here,
the child seems to have arrived at a quick
resolution of the conflict and avoided
the discomfort that comes with it. If
the adults in contact with the child
openly shared their own experiences
in similar situations, it could help her
understand the conflict better before
seeking a resolution.
It is clear that while in conflict, the
self takes over the mind, and that
prevents it from seeing the nature of the
conflict. When one is able to look at
situations from a distance, it is seen that
all conflicts reduce to a simple one
between ‘what should be’ and ‘what is’.
This discovery also makes us wonder if
all outward conflicts are mere manifestations
of inward conflicts. Is it possible
to be in conflict with others while being
free of all internal conflicts? In the
understanding of our notions of how
things ‘should be’ lies great insight into
the working of our mind and the
influences that act on it. This insight
can be arrived at by seriously enquiring
into our notions.
There seems to be an intimate
relationship between conflict and peace.
The dictionary defines peace as ‘freedom
of the mind from annoyance, anxiety,
distraction, and obsession’, which are
really all characteristics of a mind in
conflict. Acceptance is a term that is
often used in the context of peace and
conflict. What does this acceptance look
like? Does it mean being completely free
from ideas of how things should be? Or
can we be accepting of others’ ideas
while being fluid and amenable about
one’s own. Perhaps the recognition of
our own notions will lead us to answers.
This leads to the question of what is
peace. Is it the resolution of conflict? Or
is it the absence of conflict? While it is
difficult to accept the mere absence of
conflict as peace, it is also challenging to
articulate what that state of mind is
which we call peace. It might be futile to
project peace as an end. Our serious
pursuit of understanding conflict, and
thereby ourselves, should allow peace to
germinate in our being.