Functionality of words in unicist conflict management
To translate this post, click on the title to open it and then click on your flag in the right menu.
Being aware of the nature of a conflict is a key factor to learn to use the right kind of words in conflict management. And this means using those words that are functional to a situation at the right time. This is not a question of good or bad, it’s a question of functionalities.
The research on the unicist ontology of languages, among other aspects, explains the functionality that is implicit in the use of words. The results of this research helped individuals to diagnose reality based on the facts implicit in what is said.
The research on the unicist ontology of languages, among other aspects, explains the functionality that is implicit in the use of words. The results of this research helped individuals to diagnose reality based on the facts implicit in what is said.
In terms of the unicist ontology of language and based on the meaning of words, there are four different “types”: ambiguous words, hollow words, empty words and full words.
But we need to know that words are not hollow, empty, full or ambiguous in absolute terms. Their functionality is defined according to the context in which they are being used.

The selection and use of words implies an implicit functionality to the emitter of the communication. On this basis, there have been established four structural functionalities: Pastime, Rituals, Activity and Conflict Management.
Conflict management turns to be functional when words that are being used are functionally hollow, contents are clear and objective and there is an ambiguity management that allows for conflict solving.
The hollowness of words defines the context to manage conflicts.
But such hollowness must be functional to the conflict that is being managed. When hollowness is too universal, it adds no value. When it is too narrow, the parts involved do not fit in. In both cases the use of language stimulates “war”.
If ambiguity and hollowness elements are not proposed by one of the parts involved then, there is no place for the other part to fit in. And this works both ways.
There is no room for improvisation here. Knowing the ambiguous elements that are functional to the conflict to be solved, which functional hollowness to present, and which full words to be used requires a high level of knowledge and experience in the field the conflict is presented.
You can find more information on The Unicist Ontology of Language at:
http://www.unicist.org/d_uol.php
More information on the Ontology of the Use of Words in the Building of Minimum and Maximal Strategies:
http://www.unicist.org/d_wmms.php
Diana Belohlavek
If you would like to receive monthly information on new scientific developments, please register here.
If you would like to get acquainted with unicist technologies, you can participate in a module of Unicist Strategy.













































