American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences ISSN (E): 2832-8019 Volume 11, | April, 2023 P a g e | 63 www.americanjournal.org THEORETICAL VIEWS AND THE ESSENCE OF SOCIAL CONFLICTS Rakhmatov Otabek Odilovich Head of the Department for Youth Work and Spirituality Education. In the branch of the A.I.Herzen RSPU in Tashkent. E-mail:mosi_94.ru@mail.ru Phone: 99 020 88 70 A B S T R A C T K E Y W O R D S Social conflict is the highest stage of the development of contradictions in relations between people, social groups, and society as a whole, which is characterized by a clash of oppositely directed interests, goals, and positions of the subjects of interaction. Conflicts can be hidden or explicit, but they are always based on the lack of agreement between two or more parties. In the field of scientific knowledge, there is a separate science dedicated to conflicts — conflictology Introduction A conflict is a clash of opposing goals, positions, and subjects of interaction. At the same time, conflict is the most important aspect of human interaction in society, a kind of cell of social existence. This is a form of relations between potential or actual subjects of social action, whose motivation is determined by opposing values and norms, interests and needs. The essential side of the social conflict is that these subjects act within the framework of some broader system of connections, which is modified (strengthened or destroyed) under the influence of the conflict. If the interests are multidirectional and opposite, then their opposition will be found in a mass of very different assessments; they will find for themselves a "collision field", while the degree of rationality of the claims put forward will be very conditional and limited. Every conflict is always an interaction of social objects. However, not every interaction is a conflict. Where there is no confrontation, there are no sharp contradictions accompanied by negative emotions, there is no conflict.1 The clarification of the essence of the conflict also allows us to say that the conflict is a social phenomenon, it involves subjects gifted with consciousness, pursuing their goals and interests. And the simple interaction of any parties for the existence of a conflict, of course, is still not enough. In this regard, one should be critical of the excessively broad interpretation of the conflict that is found in the literature. So, K. Boulding believes that numerous conflicts exist not only in society and in wildlife, 1 Ansupov A. Ya., Shipilov A.I. conflictology. - M.:Unity, 1999. American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 11, April, 2023 P a g e | 64 www.americanjournal.org but even in the inorganic world, like the "endless war of the sea against the land and some forms of the earth's rock against others." In fact, with such an interpretation of the conflict, its very specificity is lost, because it is identified with any interaction, including in inanimate nature. Every conflict is a certain quality of interaction between people, which is expressed in the confrontation between its various sides. Such parties of interaction can be individuals, social groups, communities and states. In any conflict, people pursue certain goals and struggle to assert their interests, and this struggle is usually accompanied by negative emotions. Revealing the essence of the conflict, it is necessary to consider its relationship with such close phenomena as competition (sports games, contests for the best song, mathematical Olympiads). Are competitions a kind of conflict? Some of the sports games are designed for conflict (for example, boxing, karate, etc.). However, it is obvious that, in essence, we are talking about simulating conflict. The game ends – the “conflict” relationship ends. Every competition initially presupposes certain conditions for its conduct and a strict time frame. It is regulated by different kinds of rules, pre- established rules. This is the essential difference between competition and conflict. The basis of all conflicts are contradictions that arise between people. It is the contradictions that the confrontation between the parties to the conflict develops. At the same time, objective contradictions that do not depend on people's consciousness, rooted in significant differences in the socio-economic conditions of their lives, play a key role in the emergence of conflicts in society. The socio-economic position of an individual in society largely determines not only the line of his behavior and actions, but also his very consciousness, interests and goals. According to Kozer, there is always a reason for a conflict situation in any type of social structure, since from time to time competition between individuals or subgroups breaks out in it over scarce resources, prestige positions or power relations.2 Currently, conflict is the subject of many scientific disciplines, including conflictology, which studies a huge group of various social conflicts, which are the object of research in the sociology of conflict. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish the sphere of conflictogenicity in the socio-political, socio-economic, managerial spheres, where the processes of occurrence, flow and resolution of conflicts have their own specifics, and are studied mainly by political and sociological sciences, for example, such as "Sociology of conflict", "Sociology of Management" and "Management Theory", "Sociology of organizations" and "Theory of organizations", "Management", "Sociology of the city", etc. Today, science does not provide complete, necessary answers to questions related to social conflicts due to their multifactorial nature, the constant increase in the social spectrum of their manifestation at the present stage of development of societies, the complication of the structure of the conflict itself and the limited management capabilities. One can agree with Professor V.A. Svetlov, whose main motive for the development of a unified theory of conflict was the fact that modern conflictology does not meet any of the requirements imposed on scientific theories. In his opinion, it is divided into a multitude of nothing but a common name, unrelated private conflictologies (political, economic, legal, etc.), has no universal laws, a precisely delineated range of solved problems and specialized methods of solving them. She uses the concept of conflict based on common sense; her conclusions are 2 Social conflicts: expertise, forecasting, resolution technology. Issue 1.-M., 1991 American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Volume 11, April, 2023 P a g e | 65 www.americanjournal.org speculative and for the most part not universally valid. It is closed exclusively on negotiations and mediation, without having a serious theoretical justification for this type of activity.3 It ignores the existence of socio - psychological concepts that analyze conflicts in their own special terms – Fritz Haider's theory of cognitive balance, Leon Festinger's cognitive dissonance, Frank Harari's structural imbalance and their numerous modifications and modernizations, which are now united in one general direction "Social Network Analysis". Finally, she neglects not only the mathematical justification of her conclusions, but also methods and computer programs adapted for mass use for modeling and analyzing conflicts – classical game theory and its modifications, the theory of conflict analysis by K. Hypel and his group, the theory of drama by N. Howard and his associates.4 According to the concept of R.The essence of social conflicts lies in the fact that some groups have power in society, while others do not, and the power of some is exercised in relation to others. There are two ways out of this situation: aggravation of the struggle or overcoming the conflict. Modern theories (L. Kozer, K. Boulding) argue that the essence of the conflict lies in ideological phenomena reflecting the feelings of people dissatisfied with the distribution of power, income, comfort, dissatisfied with their status, their role in society, and this feeling of dissatisfaction forces them to formulate arguments, theories explaining that the world is arranged unfairly. The main conclusions can contribute to further theoretical understanding and development of sociological knowledge about social conflicts, overcoming the imbalance of theoretical and practical levels of the formation of the sociology of conflict as a special sociological theory. Although it should be borne in mind that the contradictions causing the conflict are not necessarily objective in nature. They may also be subjective, conditioned by subjective personal factors, moreover, they may even be different. However, if they are of significant importance to a person, they can generate a conflict situation. We can agree with the definition of social conflict by T.V. Novikova. “A social conflict is a situation when the parties (subjects) of interaction pursue some goals of their own that contradict or mutually exclude each other”5 Thus, a social conflict can be considered as an explicit or hidden state of confrontation between objectively divergent interests, goals and trends in the development of social actors, a direct and indirect clash of social forces on the basis of opposition to the existing social order, a special form of historical movement towards a new social unity. A social conflict always requires at least two opposing sides. Their actions are usually aimed at achieving mutually exclusive interests and therefore collide. All conflicts are characterized by strong tension, which encourages people to change their behavior in one way or another, adapt or protect themselves from this situation. 3 Svetlov, V. A. Conflict Analysis. St. Petersburg: Rostock, 2001. 511 p. 4 Vyatr E. Sociology of Political Relations. M., 1979 4 Novikova T.V. Conflict ethnicity and ethnic conflicts. M.: 1994. - 177 p.