A Soft Answer: Yielding for Conflict Resolution
Russ Mason, rmason@udel.edu
Our world often seems filled with turmoil, confusion, and struggle. Those at odds sometimes butt heads and endeavor to achieve ascendancy through brute force and main strength. This worldly spirit of unrest and in-your-face aggression sometimes spills over into our classrooms, our communities, and even our personal relationships. How is a Christian educator to deal with conflict in the classroom? How is one to respond in a constructive way to forceful opposition in any sphere of life? Through yielding and leading, one may gently and efficiently resolve conflict. A classroom management approach based on a “soft response” can help teachers build a peaceful atmosphere of rapport, mutual respect, and harmonious interaction.
A Philosophical Basis
The wisdom of Solomon, king of ancient Israel, echoes down 3,000 years of history. His words entreat us to follow after peace, and those words ring true today — as true as they were when first spoken by the man of peace: “A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger” (Prov 15:1, NKJV). Again, Solomon wrote: “With patience a ruler may be persuaded, and a soft tongue will break a bone” (Prov 25:15, RSV), and yet again his wise counsel entreats us: “Should the spirit of the ruler rise up against you, leave not your place, for yielding will pacify his rage” (Eccl 10:4, KJV).
Solomon had learned well the lessons of his father, David. David was a warrior, a mighty and valiant man who had declared that the Lord “teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight” but who also said in this same martial context, “Thy gentleness has made me great” (Ps 144:1 and 18:34-35, KJV). David, a man after God’s own heart, knew that the Lord abhors violence. When hunted and treated as an enemy by King Saul, faithful and wholehearted David refused to harm the Lord’s anointed king. When young David ministered peace to Saul by playing the harp and the troubled Saul tried to pin him to the wall with his javelin, more than once David eluded the thrust with a skillful turning movement and slipped away (1 Sam 18:11 and 19:10).
The wisdom of yielding and the concept of the soft overcoming the hard are truths that have been expounded in many times and places. In ancient China, the sage Lao Tzu wrote: “Softness triumphs over hardness, yielding over force; that which is most supple is always superior to that which is rigid. This is the principle of controlling things by going along with them, of mastery through adaptation” (Lao Tzu, trans. 2003, verse 43). And again, the old sage wrote:
Nothing in the world is as soft and yielding as water, yet, for attacking the hard and strong, it is unmatched. It is weak, yet none can equal it; it is soft, yet none can damage it. It is yielding; therefore, none can wear it away. Everyone knows that the soft overcomes the hard and the yielding triumphs over the rigid. Why, then, do we neglect to practice it? (Lao Tzu, trans. 2003, verse 78).
Lessons Learned From Physical Conflict
This idealistic philosophy, in the dangerous world of ancient Asia, gave rise to a number of very pragmatic “soft style” martial arts. Such styles as the Chinese art of T’ai Chi Ch’uan and Japanese Aikido share a similar approach to the resolution of physical conflict. Some of the guiding principles of these arts include the following:
• the soft overcomes the hard
• at the extreme limit, opposites will exchange positions
• relax and sink: maintain your center of balance
• never confront force with force
• rather than resist force, stick and join with the vector of an attack
• clearly distinguish what is substantial and what is insubstantial
• center, balance, and turn: relax — yield — blend — stick — follow — lead
• take advantage of over-extension and off-balance in an attacker
• neutralize aggression in a way that leads the attacker back into balance and harmony (Cheng, 1981; Ueshiba, 1992)
The idea of these arts is that, if faced with a physical attack, one should not attempt to block incoming force, pitting strength against strength. Rather, one should receive the energy of the attack and blend with it. Like a revolving door, one yields to the attack and neutralizes it into emptiness. Then, one can gently lead and redirect the attacking force, guiding the conflict into harmonious resolution.
This approach to conflict resolution is predicated upon certain radical assumptions. First, it presumes a respectful, caring, even nurturing attitude toward a person who seems to be in opposition to oneself. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., once said, “love is the only force capable of turning an enemy into a friend” (King, 1981, p. 54). So this approach to conflict resolution is motivated by agape love—not feelings of love but real love, true concern for the well-being of another. Second, it is not essentially competitive; it seeks not to win or to overcome an attacker but to cooperatively resolve the apparent disharmony between oneself and one’s “partner.” Morihei Ueshiba, the founder of Aikido, said, “Martial training is not training that has as its primary purpose the defeating of others. . . . Rather, it is the loving protection of all beings, with a spirit of reconciliation. It is the way of harmony with the universe . . . the practice of God’s love within ourselves” (Ueshiba, cited in Tohei, 1962, p. 102).
An Educational Context
How can we apply these martial and spiritual principles to situations requiring conflict resolution in an educational context? The first element in effective classroom management is the establishment of positive teacher-student relationships. Rapport between educators and learners is the cornerstone of an effective learning environment. Through our genuine concern for students and their needs, and through the exercise of empathy, respect, and patience, we develop authentic relationships. Within this context, our students can learn to trust us, not only as guides in the process of learning but also as fellow human beings.
Professionalism and natural gifts guide each of us in the development of a unique philosophy of teaching and a personal management style. In the application of this philosophy, we seek to minimize sources of conflict and to maximize productive communication and interaction in the classroom. We implement supportive discipline and, when necessary, corrective discipline (e.g., passive, assertive, and facilitative strategies) (Charles, 1996). In the category of facilitative conflict management strategies, the particular approach proposed here has been called a “confluent response” (i.e., to respond by flowing together with). Lee, Pulvino, and Perrone (1998) presented this approach in their book, Restoring Harmony: A Guide for Managing Conflicts in Schools.
According to the authors, the confluent response process consists of five stages. The first step is “awareness.” In the martial context of T’ai Chi Ch’uan, this relates to what is called “listening energy” (Cheng, 1981), the ability to be aware of the nature, direction, and force of an attack. In the context of a verbal confrontation, at this first stage of the process, one must be aware of (i.e., accurately perceive and understand) the problem presented by an aggressive attitude, behavior, or verbal attack.
Second, one must “blend” with the attack by joining the other person’s world long enough to see the situation from his or her perspective. In martial application this involves yielding or turning physically, like a revolving door, to literally face the same direction as the attacker, seeing what he or she sees. In a nonphysical confrontation, this means that one must empathize with the aggressor, and one must communicate genuine understanding of that person’s perspective.
Third, one must “connect.” In T’ai Chi Ch’uan, this is expressed as “sticking” (Cheng, 1981) to the attacker, neither resisting nor disconnecting. In a confluent response, one must understand, respect, and engage with the other person to seek harmony from within that person’s experience or view of the world.
Following the first three steps produces the fourth stage, which is to “unbalance” the attacker by flowing together with him or her, at least initially. In a physical attack, an aggressor expects to be met with resistance and, in fact, depends on that resistant response to retain his or her own balance. When the expected resistance fails to materialize (e.g., the punch lands on empty air because the other person has yielded), the force of the attack draws the aggressor off-balance. In applying this principle to nonphysical situations, we similarly must not resist head-on but, rather, must yield in a surprising and unexpected way. Declining to be defensive, using humor, showing a sincere desire to understand, reframing the issue, or jumping to a new perspective can mentally unbalance a verbal opponent, diffusing the other’s mode of action and neutralizing the attack.
The fifth and final stage of the confluent process involves gently leading the partner out of conflict and back into a place of harmonious resolution. The first four steps — awareness, blending, connecting, and unbalancing — prepare or establish an opening in an aggressor’s mindset that allows the consideration and acceptance of a new perspective or a new and unexpected way of responding to the original situation. By following the five-step process of a confluent response, one may be able to softly respond to aggression, resolving a situation of apparent conflict by leading one’s partner back into a state of harmonious balance.
An Example of Confluent Response in an Educational Context
A Middle Eastern female student approached her teacher after class, holding a quiz paper with a score of 45 percent written in red at the top of the page. Her face flushed with anger and her voice trembling with frustration, she shouted, “You have failed me! It is not fair for you to fail me! I am a good student! You are a terrible teacher and this quiz is unfair!”
The teacher, with an expression of genuine concern, responded, “Oh! I’m sorry! Did I make a mistake in checking your answers or did I miscalculate your grade? Let’s take a look at your paper. I’ll be happy to look over your answers with you and correct any grading mistakes that I may have made.”
At this, the student burst into tears. “Oh, no,” she cried, “I don’t think you marked my paper incorrectly, but I can’t fail this quiz! I have to pass this class!”
Teacher (T): “You seem to be very upset about this. How can I help you?”
Student (S): “It’s just that I had no time to prepare for the test. I have all the responsibility to take care of our apartment, and my husband works late in the evening, so I must look after the children. And this week my youngest child has been sick with the flu. I had to stay up all night last night with him. I got little sleep and had no time to study.”
T: “I’m so sorry to hear that your son has been sick. Is he feeling any better today?”
S: “Yes, thank you. My husband got some medicine for him, and my son was sleeping when I left the apartment this morning.”
T: “Good! It must be very difficult for you to care for your family in a strange country and to be a full-time student at the same time.”
S: “Yes, but I have a scholarship from my government, and I must begin graduate school in the fall. If I fail this class, my husband may have to continue here without me, and the children and I may have to return to our country alone.”
T: “What do you think you might do about this situation?”
S: “I think I need help understanding the grammar concepts.”
T: “Would you like for me to go over the quiz with you? I could schedule some extra tutoring for you, also. Under the circumstances of your son’s illness, I think it would be appropriate for me to allow you to take a retest, after you have had time to review the material.”
S: “Thank you. Yes, I would like that very much. Thank you for giving me another chance.”
A Soft Answer
In the previous example (a consolidation of actual experiences of the author), the teacher succeeded in not assuming a defensive position and turning the initial outburst into a contest of wills. By applying the principles of a confluent response, the teacher was able to neutralize the personal attack, see the world from the student’s perspective, discover the true nature of the problem, and guide the student into a jointly negotiated solution that restored balance and harmony to the relationship. Only in a supportive and mutually respectful environment can rapport be maintained. Yielding can, indeed, turn aside wrath, restore communication, and preserve an atmosphere that is conducive to learning and cooperation. When trouble comes calling, a soft answer can promote peace, in the classroom and in your world.
Russ Mason is an assistant professor at the University of Delaware’s English Language Institute, where he teaches language and culture. He also studies and teaches the art of T’ai Chi Ch’uan.
References
Charles, C.M. (1996). Building classroom discipline (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
Cheng, M. (1981). T’ai chi ch’uan: A simplified method of calisthenics for health and self defense. Berkeley, CA: North Atlantic Books.
King, M. (1981). Strength to love. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Press.
Lao Tzu. (2003). Tao te ching: The definitive edition (J. Star, Trans.). New York: Penguin Books. (Original work fifth century B.C.)
Lee, J. L., Pulvino, C. J., & Perrone, P. A. (1998). Restoring harmony: A guide for managing conflicts in schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Tohei, K. (1962). What is aikido? Tokyo: Rikugei.
Ueshiba, M. (1992). The art of peace (J. Stevens, Trans.). Boston: Shambala Publications. (Original oral teachings 1942-1969)
