Could neuroscience hold the key to breaking down psychological barriers between groups in conflict? In this month's issue of Scientific American, contributor Gareth Cook interviews Rebecca Saxe, an associate professor of cognitive neuroscience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, about her work applying "theory of mind" to the discord between Palestinians and Israelis as well as conflicts between Arizonans who are Mexican immigrants and those who are U.S. citizens.

Theory of mind is a concept used to describe the capacity to deduce what someone else is thinking or feeling. Humans typically have this ability to empathize, a trait that helps us resolve our differences, Saxe says. Some groups' inability to trust or forgive another group as well as expectations of malice, however, can serve to perpetuate unrest.

The problem with many conflict intervention programs is that they are often based on preconceptions about what should work for standard groups of people who are at odds, according to Saxe. Unfortunately, these notions typically fall flat because mediators are unaware of the specific strategies that will work for particular individual groups, she adds.

Saxe sees neuroscience as a largely unexplored path to conflict resolution, one that would help researchers discover how and why thoughts and behaviors that propagate conflict are created. The neuroscientist also speaks at length about her work in this article and video posted by the nonprofit Edge Foundation in August.

Editor's Note (11/16/12): The headline for this story was edited after posting. The term "neuroscientist" was substituted for "neurologist."

2 Comments

1. 1. Y V Chawla 11:45 PM 11/14/12

   We are apt to feel comfortable by labeling any discomforting situation as 'wrong'. If this comfort is kept at bay-one can take relaxed action in any situation.But this can not be imposed upon others. The issue is over when you yourself see this.
   If we feel satisfied in deprecating evil, we bind ourselves to evil. If we do not feel superior while dealing with evil in any manner, we establish no relationship with evil. Evil evaporates. Then simple operation of facts do not trouble us.
   http://www.fundamentalexpressions.com

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. jayjacobus 09:53 AM 12/13/12

   Conflict resolution is a function of perspective, circumstances, technique and power.
   
   As a simple example, a worker will be less receptive to his employer's demands if he is in a union. This has nothing to do with neurology.
   
   Also, lawyers are known to have exceptional negotiating skills and can accept either opponent as a client. The neurolgy of a lawyer does not determine his successfulness.
   
   Some mediators are in favor of resolution, not fairness. I can offer to pay half of what I owe somebody. Any resolution that the mediator obtains is a win for me unless he gets me to pay the total amount.
   
   In this case, the negotiation is good for me and bad for my opponent and to some degree the mediator is my agent.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this