**2. Conflicts**

Conflict research has a long tradition and was mostly incorporated into a model of more general concepts, which has also significantly marked its definition and exploration. Lewin's [6–8] understanding of the conflict is derived from the concept of field dynamics, or the living space of a person, in which forces of varying valency and level continually operate. When studying conflicts, Dollard and Miller [9] rely on the definition and specification of the approach tendencies and the avoidance tendencies. These tendencies increase with the approach to a positive goal, or to a negative stimulus. The interdisciplinary approach to the conflict investigation was pointed out by Keller [10], who specifies the view of the conflict in terms of ethological, psychological, historical, philosophical, mathematical, and sociological contexts and we could continue in the calculation of the scientific disciplines.

There are a large number of definitions of conflict, mostly influenced by the theoretical and methodological conceptual focus of the authors [4]. In general, they describe two approaches, or viewing angles of this issue. The first of these approaches is related to understanding the notion of conflict in terms of an apparent manifestation in the form of physical or symbolic confrontation, words, or activities between the opposing parties. The second meaning is related to the understanding of this concept in the sense of a conflict of interest and is situated within ourselves. It is represented by situations in which an individual experiences frustration when, for example, mutually exclusive targets cannot be achieved at the same time.

It should be noted that the aforementioned definitions of conflict are relative, as conflict of interest often produces a manifested conflict. In addition, conflicts of interest may produce additional responses, such as reluctance, reconciliation, and inactivity. On the other hand, the manifested conflict may also have other causes than conflicts of interest, e.g., perception of value diversity, anger, and so on. Both concepts of conflict occur at all levels of society—from individuals, through small social groups, to large social groups [4].

In [2], authors argue with definitions of conflict that are based on awareness of the incompatibility of goals, or activities, or competitiveness. These definitions do not sufficiently take into account what is essential to human relationships, and these are the rules that define how people behave. The authors point to the fact that not all inconsistencies of goals, opinions, and interests are in conflict, especially in a situation where people have the opportunity to meet their needs differently, or if the importance of these factors is not a priority. People may have different opinions and without a significant influence on their relationships. However, these ideas do not exclude the fact that incompatibility of goals, activities, and interests may be the cause of conflicts. These conclusions are confirmed by [11], who argue that a conflict is more than a mismatch of interests or a difference of opinion.
