Can There be a General Theory of Intractable Conflict?

Abstract

Although the bulk of Daniel Bar-Tal's empirical studies focus on the complex socio-psychological dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the impact of his work goes way beyond this particular context. Generations of scholars from very different conflict-torn world regions have found a source of inspiration in Bar-Tal's writings. This transfer of explanatory models from one context to another is not accidental, and is in accordance with Bar-Tal's willingness to identify similarities across sites that others would see as incommensurable. His scientific ambition to develop a transferable theory of intractable conflicts becomes apparent in his theoretical writing as well as in his active involvement in many international research collaborations and dialogues. Interestingly though, Bar-Tal's methodological thoughts and research practices lend a pre-eminent role to thick contextualization of the studied conflict dynamics. They highlight that the general(izable) meant something else to him than psychological processes studied in isolation from their social environment. As a consequence, Bar-Tal's contribution to the social psychology of conflicts is so multifaceted that colleagues or students face the risk of overlooking part of the different scientific sensibilities that feed into his work. In the present tribute, we will first highlight the complexity of his approach by showing some dialectic tensions that run throughout his monumental life work and discuss the heuristic import of his legacy to a science of conflict. We will then try to show how these dialectic tensions provide a creative impetus to refine our models regarding the interplay between universal human motives and the contingencies of particular social contexts, in the study of psychological reactions to violent conflict. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)