Problems of Understanding in Conflicts and a Semiotic Solution

Abstract:     
This paper argues that one of the biggest problems for resolving conflicts by negotiation are epistemological problems, or more precisely: the problem to understand one another. In conflict research, it has been discussed under the heading of "framing." I apply Charles Peirce's theory of signs to clarify this epistemological problem. According to a certain interpretation of Peirce's semiotic approach, understanding is a reaction to a sign that is codetermined by what can be called "collateral knowledge": belief systems, interests, experiences, character, and skills as tacit preconditions of understanding. My thesis is that a semiotic reconstruction of understanding is not only useful to analyze conflicts, but also to resolve them. The idea is that by challenging negotiators to create a joint model of their conflict situation collateral knowledge can become visible. Making visible step-by-step what lies at the root of a conflict - in a process called "model-based reasoning" - permits reflection on and communication about the negotiators' habits of thinking and acting. And experimenting with those models opens up possibilities to change them.

Keywords: Framing, negotiation, semiotics

Working Paper Series