I disagree that these are character traits.

They are acquired skills that are taught in areas such as law enforcement, counseling, human resources, (supposedly) medicine, business managers (including sports), education, sales, lion taming, apartment rentals, web site development, ice cream scoopers, architects, romance novelists, dentists, movie directors, potters, mechanics, bartenders, custodians, and, yes, even hookers...

Get the point?

Anyone who rises to the top of their field/profession/art has acquired these skills and they are feral about them...

I don't think this necessarily indicates "good character" (with the implicit corrolary that more combative folks lack "good character) It may well indicate timidity, cowardice or a willingness to appease at any price, none of which would indicate "good character" to me.

I have a lot of respect for the art of compromise (it is, after all what practical politics is about, and I had the privilege of working for a few master practitioners), but I do not think that resolving and preventing means appeasement. The historical example of Neville Chamberlain comes to mind, willing to appease Hitler to achieve a "lasting peace" that any intelligent man knew wouldn't last 18 months. Chamberlain was, by most accounts an intelligent and generally competent statesman, but this single act has forever tarnished his place in history, and suggests to me a fundamental character flaw.

Looking at the other side, there are those who have had to face adversity, have had to stand in the fire of debate or principle, and who have taken and given hurt because of it. Sometimes the conflict could not be resolved gently (and like it or not, a good many conflicts cannot be resolved without a bit of pain) and sometimes the principle involved was such that it should not be resolved gently. Would one look back into history and have the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto refuse to take up arms in a knowingly futile resistance against their exterminators, or ask the Civil Rights marchers in Alabama of the sixties to meekly comply with orders to disperse. I hope not. And I would also hope that neither of those groups would be considered "lacking in character" for their actions.

On the other hand, there are those who seek combat at every opportunity, who never seem happy unless in conflict, and create artificial circumstances for it, if necessary. In those cases, I suggest that it doesn't indicate "good or bad character" but borderline mental illness.

Not sure about this one. When I think of good character, I think of someone who's seen some tough times and survived. Someone with some scars -- literal or figurative.

If they had prevented those tough times, that often just shows they're risk-averse, and maybe even boring.

Let's face it, there is no way to really prevent conflicts from happening, either with circumstances or people. Such is life, but there are always ways to work things out. It's easier said than done at the time one is in the middle of an awkward or trying situation, but it can be done.

Prevention is key here. About 50 percent of the problems we have in life we don't look for. We get sick, have accidents, have loved ones die. Those are the things that we just have to deal with in our own way. However, many times people look for problems in their lives, just to shake up the pot or whatever other sick reason. At the end of the day, people who do this end up unsatisfied with their lives because they overwhelmed themselves with problems they didn't need to have in the first place. People who look for problems do so because they need to fill their lives with something, even if its something negative: it could be a bad relationships, sketchy business ventures, unnecessary arguments with loved ones.


Resolving conflicts is indeed a trickier matter, because many times we have a lot invested in our positions and are therefore not willing to make the concessions necessary to come to a solution. What we fear the most is coming to a deal that might not be a good one. The feeling of being humiliated is one which motivates such behavior. Indeed, it is easier said than done to resolve conflicts, but I find that ultimately, it's much more effective to put your side and the other sides interests on the table and negotiate from there. Positional negotiation, going by numbers alone, places too much emphasis on you lose this, and I gain this. Thats something you have to move away from if you expect to come to a good deal. Understanding the other side usually helps in coming to an agreement. But first the parties have to be willing to talk--that's the difficult proposal.

The way easier to say then to do. In a conflict, every person feels like he is right, go deal with it. Not easy, trust me, somehow I am always in the middle of one.

if you are capable of doing this then sure its a great quality. the world is always in need of those with this quality. personally i suck at it. i seem to make matters worse. im almost always better if i just kept my mouth shut