Related Resources

Professor Dascal began his discussion by identifying several principles that he believes must serve as the basis of addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He claimed that in order to move forward and engage in productive dialogue, both parties should first decide what common ethical values are needed for sustainable peace, what their fundamental and joint interests are, and how to maintain an open and active dialogue even during periods of intense violence. If properly defined and agreed upon, these standards could serve as the common ground that is so desperately needed yet strikingly absent in negotiations.

Another obstacle to peace that can be addressed using philosophical models is the frustration and sense of inertia surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as many question whether lasting peace arrangements are possible given the prolonged and violent nature of the crisis. In response to this “mental weariness,” Professor Dascal stressed the importance of de-fixation, re-framing, and creativity in conflict resolution. Only through de-fixating, breaking down old forms of thought will people be able to move on from their negative past experiences and then reframe, or recreate their relationship with the other party. Once these difficult tasks are accomplished, both sides will be better able to brainstorm the innovative solutions needed to end enduring conflicts.

To demonstrate how these principles and models apply to real conflicts, Professor Dascal gave a few examples of problems solved by King Solomon, Ibn Rushd, and Gottfried Leibniz. Each example mentioned could be applied to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as they offer an innovative, ethical, and rational solution to a seemingly unsolvable disagreement. For instance, in the infamous incident where King Solomon was confronted by two mothers claiming possession of a single child, he acknowledged that while each may have had a legitimate right to the infant, the problem must be solved with a “fundamental aim” in mind, in this case the health and safety of the child. Since the child’s welfare was established as the joint or fundamental interest, then whichever woman pursued this goal and not her own personal “strategic interest” was the rightful mother. King Solomon thus awarded the baby to the mother who preferred to give it away rather than see it harmed by being cut in half. In this example, the truth is revealed through a simple test, allowing a just solution to be imposed.

Given the complexity of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, however, it is difficult if not impossible to test each side’s strategic aim. While neither this nor any other historical example can provide an absolute, clear-cut resolution, the story of King Solomon does provide an alternative conceptualization of the conflict that may lead to fresh and creative methods of problem-solving. Professor Dascal emphasized that since straightforward solutions are limited, a multi-model, inter-disciplinary approach is absolutely necessary. A problem as longstanding and bitter as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict requires an innovative approach, which Professor Dascal believes can be found in the works of some of the world’s greatest philosophers.