Studying Conformity in Contemporary Political Theory

The article outlines key approaches to studying conformity, analyzing their potential for conceptualizing conformity within contemporary political theory, along with limitations of each approach arising from the established tradition of their application. The demand for conceptualization of conformity in political theory results from various factors, most notably the necessity to revise its very notion. Conformity as a term was primarily formulated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries within social psychology, from which it subsequently migrated to other fields of humanities, accumulating new connotations along the way. This has led to a widespread perception of conformity as uncritical adherence to the views, opinions, and behaviors of the dominant majority, often in opposition to one's internal disagreements. However, considerable time has elapsed since general understanding of the term was firmly established; during this time philosophy itself underwent numerous turbulences. As a result, new conditions have emerged that warrant a fresh investigation of conformity that responds to contemporary challenges. In pursuit of revising the term, the article embarks on a historical exploration of conformity across various disciplines. This exploration reveals two fundamental traditions of its interpreting: the socio-psychological and the socio-philosophical. The latter tradition is further divided into two narratives: structural functionalism and social philosophy itself. Among the methods directly associated with political theory, the article primarily focuses on positivism and the normative approach, since the debates between these two perspectives have shaped the core of modern political science. The positivist approach contributes to the conceptualization of conformity by allowing participants in the political process to be viewed as abstract units, thus simplifying the investigation of behavior without considering their personal histories and social contexts. Research by Solomon Asch serves as an example, depicting “a conformist” as “a black box” that reacts to external impulses with rational motivations. Conversely, the normative approach highlights the limitations of positivism, claiming that the theory of rational choice and similar positivistic intellectual strategies may lead to an artificial equalization of the world, where individuals are perceived as the same everywhere and at all times. The normative approach can shift the study of conformity into the axiological dimension, where the relationships between goals, defined by values and culture, and the institutional means of achieving them come to the fore, alongside the contradictions between these goals and means. In addition to that, two non-classical perspectives complement traditional approaches: the conceptological and the discursive. Through these methodologies, conformity can become an integral element of political theory problem area, examined through the lenses of Carl Schmitt's concept of the political and Michel Foucault's discourse on power relations.

Keywords: intellectual virtue; relativism; responsibilism; philosophy of science; hybrid virtue epistemology