No, most of conflict comes from competition for resources, territory and sex. Nothing to do with communication - an over-rated human expression, best left for white-collar office environments.
I disagree, unresolved trauma creates unmet needs that people carry into their adulthood leads to patterns of communication based on warped views of themselves, others, and the world which cause a lot of conflict. On the surface, a couple may be fighting over responsibilities and resources, but the reason they're communication takes forms of verbal abuse rather than communication about their needs and discussing solutions is because they learned to deny responsibility and win through expressing the most anger. The way material conditions are negotiated depends not just on those conditions but the beliefs and psychological health of the negotiators. Any point of view is essentially an expression of faith on the part of the person saying it, even if it is denying they have any
@@MrRellic Your argument can be reduced to this: A, will function healthily or not, depending on B happening or not, which will result in C, the desired behaviour or not. But you are saying that because A and C are most likely is not happening, you know B is the cause on both. But you can never prove one way or another B is the cause. You are going round in circles trying to prove what you see in life and in people's behaviour, hoping one day, to see the desired behaviour. Except it never comes. It is the old 'If only...' plea to people, used by Marxists, Christians, and Social Reformers to keep arguing for the validity of their beliefs in their 'ism' rather than accepting defeat. Psychoanalysis has been around for over a century now and their disciples have failed to get your hopeful (delusional, I believe) outcome.
No, most of conflict comes from competition for resources, territory and sex. Nothing to do with communication - an over-rated human expression, best left for white-collar office environments.
I disagree, unresolved trauma creates unmet needs that people carry into their adulthood leads to patterns of communication based on warped views of themselves, others, and the world which cause a lot of conflict. On the surface, a couple may be fighting over responsibilities and resources, but the reason they're communication takes forms of verbal abuse rather than communication about their needs and discussing solutions is because they learned to deny responsibility and win through expressing the most anger. The way material conditions are negotiated depends not just on those conditions but the beliefs and psychological health of the negotiators. Any point of view is essentially an expression of faith on the part of the person saying it, even if it is denying they have any
@@MrRellic Your argument can be reduced to this: A, will function healthily or not, depending on B happening or not, which will result in C, the desired behaviour or not. But you are saying that because A and C are most likely is not happening, you know B is the cause on both. But you can never prove one way or another B is the cause. You are going round in circles trying to prove what you see in life and in people's behaviour, hoping one day, to see the desired behaviour. Except it never comes. It is the old 'If only...' plea to people, used by Marxists, Christians, and Social Reformers to keep arguing for the validity of their beliefs in their 'ism' rather than accepting defeat. Psychoanalysis has been around for over a century now and their disciples have failed to get your hopeful (delusional, I believe) outcome.