All conflicts fit into one of two categories: (1) Perception from the conflicted that the conflicter has malicious intentions towards the conflicted or others. (2) Perception from the conflicted that the conflicter is looking down on the conflicted or others (judging them to have lesser value). — Samuel Lacrampe
Everything you said above fits into the outcome (ii) in my original post, that is, real malicious intentions from the conflicter. You are correct that there is no full-proof solution to solve the problem. My method only gets you to the point where you can have a confident judgement about the conflicter and the situation. After that, it will not prevent you from getting murdered if that is the conflicter's true intention.The conflicter may be a bad person and have false perceptions, but also occupy a position from which the conflicted can not reach them. For instance, the CEO of the company might dislike homosexuals and harbor all sorts of false views about them, and might frustrate their desires to advance. The conflicted homosexuals in the company may not be able to arrange any sort of significant face-to-face confrontation. [...]
The conflicter may not care what the conflicted thinks, and be in a position to ignore the conflicted's objections.
The social structure of organizations can wrongfully disadvantage some people (conflicted) without any one worker (conflicter) being responsible. If organizations intend to disadvantage some individuals, they will have no redress.
Sometimes the conflicted need to combine their individual strengths and address conflicter(s) as a group. — Bitter Crank
Not 'negotiation', but 'conversation', which is a means to the end of removing any possible misunderstandings. The point is that perceptions are not always accurate, and so it is necessary to validate them before deciding what to do next to resolve the conflict.The conflicted and conflicter may have both true and false impressions of the other, which more than a little negotiation will be required to sort out. — Bitter Crank
If you want to avoid being the conflicted: It is valuable to determine if your conflicter fits into (1) or (2), as it may change the approach you take to bring the perception to light. If you suspect (2) and not (1), then the conflicter has no motive to lie, and so you can be more forward about it. If you suspect (1), then the conflicter may lie, and so further investigation would be needed to get to the bottom of the conflict (while still assuming innocence until proven guilty ... not an easy thing to do). — Samuel Lacrampe
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.