The Mediator and their Self-Knowledge - The Importance for the Process and the Parties

Introduction

The present paper aims to consider about the self- knowledge of a mediator in the construction and performance of their professional activity, as well as its efficiency in the self-compositional process, and the importance of that self-knowledge to the process and the parties implicated in the mediation case. In the first moment, it presented the expansion and progress of conflict mediation in Brazil as an adequate method of conflict resolution for the most diverse types of demand, promoting dialogue and transforming the culture. In the second, it evidenced specificities, characteristics, skills and general competences of a mediator in the development of a qualified mediation work. In the third, it emphasizes the notion and definition of self-knowledge and its importance for the practice and professional performance of mediation.

At the end of this paper, it is expected to highlight the relevance of developing self-knowledge to everyone who works with people so they believe in the improving potential of an individual and can always invest on this permanent construction. To value being a subject of knowledge – epistemic subject – as much as a subject that establishes communicative relations with the world surrounding them. Those relations are deeply marked by the culture to which they belong, which means to say they are historic, cultural, and emotional subjects. From the exposed, it is understood that knowing oneself improves quality to the exercise of professional agenda. It is important to keep in mind that such subject is formed by the inter-game they set with familiar and professional environments, attaching, in their inner world, positive and negative referential objects related to reality, which interfere in their feeling, thinking, and acting.

Taking care of oneself is taking care of the other and of relations as well.

Self-Knowledge

In this sense, this work aims to highlight the importance of self-knowledge as a universal ethic pattern for efficiency and quality of procedure conduction, which depends exclusively on the mediator.

To retrace the origin of the studies on self-knowledge in humanist, social, and psychology authors is not a target of this paper. Nonetheless, it is worthy to remark that philosophers and psychologists like Plato, Skinner, and Freud are part of a tradition that assumes that self- knowledge is a conquest or an achievement that brings health and freedom. Moreover, it is stated that self- knowledge is an ethic project and has its roots in the quote of the Oracle of Delphi, which had deep influence on Socrates: “Know thyself.” Freud [13] warns that individuals can hardly take any advantage of their own intuition if they do not know the way their mind works. So they must try to observe and understand what happens inside, and then comprehend what happens around them. The absence of self- knowledge is often the source of the social diseases.

Most people say and do things without consciousness of how they can be affecting others. Not for egocentrism, but because we live in a world in which everyone must take care of him or herself, our society imposes such way of survival [14].

The definition of self-knowledge for Skinner [15] is a distinct tool in condition to break free from the control enacted by the society, so one can modify the environment and exchange the coercive controls for positive reinforcements, reaching a better quality life. “Certainly, the coercive control promotes self-knowledge as well, but it has its negative side for the collateral effects that come together, like elusive and scape behaviors that harm the development of the individual’s repertoire [16]”.

For Plato [17], the full human knowledge stays clearly divided, for a man is in permanent contact with two levels of reality: the sensitive ones (which are all things that affect our senses, one knows that things are like they are, but does not know why they are); and the intelligible ones (which are more concrete, permanent, immutable, equal to themselves, and the knowledge of things by their causes).

It is noticeable that since very long, the search for knowing oneself is liberation, independence process. According to this tradition, self-knowledge is an achievement, Instead of something given or readily available to the subject. To know him or herself, the subject has to reflect and interpret, look deeply inside.

In this dimension, self-knowledge can be even understood as the consciousness of the diverse elements that form the personality of an individual, enabling them to interact with their qualities and defects when facing life situations, as they keep a coherent, balanced attitude. This would avoid the implication of irremediable wounds that could interfere on their behavior.

The human being search for self-knowledge through lifetime, even because every day in life is a source of learning. Therefore, it must not be required a perfect self- understanding from the mediator, but an improved capacity of self-evaluation instead. One of the great conquests of self-knowledge is the ability to command a person’s own emotions, or express his or her own feelings.

It is known that in most cases, the emotional factor prevents reasonable reactions. There is also the understanding that we have two commands, a rational and an emotional, and that the first would react slower than the second does.

If the mediator is a human being who is not able to detect which situations can misbalance them, allowing the emotional issue to outdo the reason all times, they may easily get involved into the conflict between the parties, taking one or another’s behalf, which would definitely ruin the mediation. There lies the urgent necessity of a good training to assure the impartiality and understanding of the mediator.

When a mediator attempts and preserves his or her self-knowledge, such exercise maintains two important foundations in mediation: neutrality and impartiality.

Firstly, it should be clarified that neutrality and impartiality must be considered differently, since they do not represent the same idea. According to Young [18], impartiality can be defined as the absence of tendentiousness or preference to one or more parties in the conflict, their interests or the solutions they are seeking. On the other hand, neutrality “refers to the relationship or behavior between the interceder and the disputants.” The neutrality principle is about a mediation performance free from ethnic, social, or emotional attachments to any parties, as well as to the matter of question. For its turn, impartiality refers to the mediator not taking sides in the course of the conflict solution process, so the procedure follows its natural path for resolution without suffering with aspects from the person who mediates it – the conductor of the process.

Moore [18] refers that the positive result of mediation and the active participation of the involved, with the subsequent reinforcement of autonomy and citizenship, are only possible in mediation when starting from a resignification of the role of a mediator, as of their characteristics, concerning especially their connection with the conflicting parties to find balance between them.

With a good knowledge of oneself and of his or her own emotional and professional backgrounds, the mediator will be in better conditions to build effective rooms for participation and contribution of the parties and the process itself, raising feelings of satisfaction and appreciation [19].

Self-knowledge is the knowledge of oneself. It has a quite empty practical application, for men are far from acknowledging themselves, it does not matter the scope or point of view. In brief, it is the acceptance and knowledge of someone’s own paradoxical feelings, because even it is about an essentially individual search, this knowledge can only be revealed within relationships, through the exchange with other people.

Sachnitman and Littlejohn [20] stress that the professional that carries out mediation is supposed to develop personal and interpersonal abilities and skills, aiming to offer all the neutrality and confidence with their own feelings and actions, so their personal contents will not find echo in the conflict or in the people. Knowing oneself becomes an ethical principle, mandatory for the right development of interests and attitudes of the mediator during the entire procedure.

Those mentioned abilities relate to the inside of the human being. They can be considered a capacity to form an accurate, truthful model of one self, intended to be used to act effectively in life. Yet, they can be understood as the key to self-knowledge, the access to one’s own feelings and the ability to distinguish and use them to guide behavior and thinking.

Branden [21] states about the choice of thinking: It is our most basic act of personal responsibility. This choice allows us to learn and identify reality and take the task of judging what is false or true, reasonable or unreasonable, right or wrong, good or bad for us.

It is impossible to deny that the way through one can get authority over him or she is self-understanding, because so the inner power that guides the being is recognized. Only through this confidence-giving understanding, one might realize that there is no need to seek for a higher authority than their own mind.

Thus, observing his or her own emotional context, the mediator will verify whether they can perform their role or not, which demands a high level of assurance, since no one can treat conflicts while having struggles for their turn [22].

Nevertheless, perfection is not necessary or expected as well.

Dias and Souza’s [23] work evidences the understandings of Cachapuz [24], clarifying that the mediator may not be considered a perfect person, for he or she is a human being, liable to various problems. To the performance of such duty, the mediator should be:

A balanced, assured person to be successful. Basically, there can be detected abilities such as self-knowledge, self-control, self-esteem, self-motivation, self-discipline, the ability to postpone satisfaction, the ability to weaken the tension, emotional control [24].

The description of the mediator and psychoanalyst below reveals that self-knowledge provides a unique possibility of internal access, so one can recognize his or her own conflicts and standoffs when conducting other people’s conflicts.

According to Muniz [25], my everyday experience in dealing with the soul pains brings me much helpful resources for mediation practice, even though these are distinct processes. One of them is feeling comfortable, in the mediation context, to identify my own emotions and try to manage them. With this, I come to be more conscious about my attitudes in mediation. Practice, and the seek for a better and wider self-knowledge – which comes from the psychotherapy for me –have taught me that the best way to be with people in a mediation case is, firstly, getting in contact with my own feelings, with proper respect and consideration (attention and care), so I can find myself available to be with someone else’s conflict.

Muszkat [26] advises, and it is important to highlight that we, professionals willing to work with questions that involve suffering, conflicts and standoffs, must face naturally the emotions and contents that affect us when we penetrate these diverse contexts.

Final Considerations

For the sake of the aims of this paper, I would like to stress that, given the inborn role of the human being on building discussion rooms and the importance of self- knowledge for a mediator, we can state that, in a certain way, we are all mediators. After all, at some point of our lives, we might have intervened in some argument between two work colleagues, relatives, or friends, helping them to find a solution. This way, we all have some intuitive experience in conflict resolution [27].

Man is a social, relational being, born and living in society, with rare and inexpressive exceptions. Occurs that where there is social life, there will be conflict. Renato de Toledo Guimarães Vaz, one of the greatest crisis managers Brazil ever had, used to affirm that the divergence of opinions, the disagreement, the opposition between people are not necessarily bad, but they carry a potentially noxious power that can turn into violence, this is why the State administration is imperative.

Since the discovery times, Brazilian tradition has always attached to the jurisdiction to overcome differences. The shapes of current society, however, with quickness and requests peculiar to a world that becomes less and less limited to borders, demand improved, fast, and efficient tools to compose any type of conflict. It

explains the large success that the assisted self- composition has achieved.

Therefore, it is fundamental and a goal of this work to mark that part of the success and efficiency of mediation stands in the preparation of the mediator who conducts the procedure.

In this sense, a mediation process implicates in the mediator developing efforts to create internal and external conditions to themselves of encouraging negotiation. Such efforts consist mainly on giving to the parties and mediator the necessary competences for the existence of dialogue, as well as improving the environment and atmosphere as proper to negotiate and settle the agreement. Consequently, parties and mediator might feel free and confident to manage the results.

It is important to explain that the figure of the mediator must not be understood as a perfect creature, without any problems. That would extinct the duty definitely, since such human being is far from being part of our context. The important here is to be a balanced, assured person, who prioritizes the self-knowledge process, reaching, in the end, efficiency and success in the parties relations. Such success is not expressed sole and exclusively by the agreement.

It is also relevant the statement that a mediator must not let their personal experience lead their performances, transporting their subjectivity to the conflict solution that the parties seek in a given time.

A mediator must search for ways that make possible to re-evaluate their performance constantly and to analyze their exercise critically, to prevent a prejudiced, tendentious, tainted action towards the final decision of the mediated parties for the conflict in which they are involved.

Negotiating desires, facing limitations, hits and misses, rethinking forms and paths, changing every time it shows necessary, following the stories, the problems, the difficulties, the anxieties; the emotions of everyday life are pieces of a collective and individual construction process, which can transform each one of us. It is common to hear that many times, mediation benefits the mediator more than the parties involved.

It is indispensable to reflect upon the performance of mediators in rooms proposed to dialogue and to a path of knowledge and self-knowledge, offering to all people a process of transformation, restoration of autonomy, freedom, and construction of peace.

Mediation is a procedure that aims to interfere in reality. In conflict mediation, we can state that the interference is centered in the dimension of knowing- how-to-do (communication and negotiation competences of all) and, for all this (or for so little), in the dimension of knowing-how-to-be (attitudes and behaviors).

In literature, it is not specified which one is privileged in the procedure: knowing-how-to-do or knowing-how- to-be. The factors inclined to a good result in processes like these are multiple. We can advance that the questions of communication, of negotiation competences, of the ability developed by each one of the participants, including the mediator, certainly form the necessary support to any changing process, especially when instituting self-regulation mechanisms for future interaction is in sight.

Reflections and discussions about the figure of the mediator and the professional performance for the progress of mediation in Brazil and other countries are inevitable, considering their goals, procedures, actors, and interactional contexts involved.

The author of this paper calls attention to an alert: mediation must keep unchained and autonomic, offering people freedom and confidence. It must not be framed in any classificatory or reducing institution. It must not become part of any mechanism or jurisdiction that might restraint it and subtract its authenticity, volunteerism, and its freedom. No one and nothing must overpower it, as well as no monopoly for small groups. Classifications of uses and interests must not fall on it. Mediation must not be limited by boundaries.

Bourdieu [28] insistently remarked the social powers underlying any classification. Against the most common concepts, this author says the following: placing limits and boundaries, the classification systems are tools of power, more than of knowledge. Stressing the Social Game surrounding classifications, this author states about classifiers, classified by their own classifications.

It is always more pertinent to grow strategies, reflections, and discussions than to ensure the sedimentation and/or monopoly as alternatives to solve conflicts. Mediation has been producing a deepening in related knowledges, just like the reflection, in this paper, on the importance of the great care a mediator must take in the conduction of the procedure, so mediation becomes part of people’s lives and of the construction of social peace, as a guarantee of confidence, ethics, autonomy, freedom, and justice.

“When a given word becomes fashionable, it is because the reality it expresses is very ill.” -Jean-François Six [29]