On the Conformist Approach and the Normalization of Evil with Prof. Nevzat Tarhan
The pursuit of comfort has become one of the most fundamental tendencies of modern humans. The increasing availability of conveniences that make everyday life easier not only reduces physical limitations but also stretches mental and ethical boundaries. Over time, comfort evolves from a lifestyle standard into a value judgment that begins to shape our behaviors. However, this tendency can leave deep impacts across a wide spectrum, from psychological well-being to the moral balance of social structures. We spoke with Prof. Nevzat Tarhan about how the rise of conformist approaches affects human nature, moral decisions, and social structure, and how it lays the groundwork for the normalization of evil.
You argue that evil feeds off conformist tendencies. In this context, how would you define “evil”? What behaviors or tendencies fall under this concept?
In human nature, good and evil coexist; we all carry both benevolent and malevolent elements. According to the law of behavioral entropy, there is a dynamic balance between good and evil, that is, just like darkness is the absence of light, and cold is the absence of heat, evil is essentially the absence of good. When approached from this perspective, certain conditions must exist for evil to flourish. One such condition is conformism: choosing to live comfortably without effort, without fatigue, and becoming overly attached to convenience and ease.
The physical counterpart of this condition is obesity, which is a result of lacking discipline in eating and a lack of goal awareness. When a person loses their internal discipline related to eating, physical obesity occurs. Similarly, there is also psychological obesity, which manifests as greed, insatiability, irresponsibility, and lack of boundaries. A person in this state thinks only of their own interests and pleasures, lives solely for themselves, and perceives anything that threatens their comfort as a danger.
You have mentioned that we are currently facing psychological and physical problems that feed evil and can be described as “comfort disorders.” Could you elaborate on this concept?
Lack of purpose: If someone wakes up without a goal or a plan for the future, they fail to program their brain. Our brain is designed to plan the day and the future, and this programming is a function of consciousness. We apply psycho-SWOT analysis for this purpose.
In resource management, all managers are taught SWOT analysis, which is that knowing one’s strengths and weaknesses and understanding potential threats and opportunities. However, when applying this to life, we must also have goals, strategies, and a vision. Just as financial resources are managed with strategy and planning, our psychological resources should also be managed in a goal- and strategy-oriented manner through short-, medium-, and long-term planning, along with self-awareness and risk assessment. When someone fails to do this, they fall into one of the most critical traps of conformism.
The human brain, like that of all living beings, is primarily programmed for survival which is eating, drinking, reproducing, and shelter. However, unlike other creatures, humans have an additional brain network known as the Default Mode Network (DMN), which seeks meaning. It asks questions like: What is the purpose of what I’m doing? What is my role in this world? What kind of dream should I pursue? This ability is unique to humans. If you think of a dog’s imagination, it’s limited to chasing bones or food. The same goes for birds. But human imagination varies by individual, because we are meaning-seeking beings. Purpose is a necessity: Therefore, a person who lacks purpose falls into the disease of comfort—what I call conformism. Without a sense of meaning, we become prone to emotional and moral laziness. The result is an increasing vulnerability to habits and behaviors that are ethically harmful and ultimately feeding into the normalization of evil.
The second major symptom is meaninglessness. There are two types of meaning: secular, worldly meanings and transcendent, spiritual meanings—those related to life after death. When a person solely chases pleasure, it is enough to fall into the trap of comfort. What should be done in such cases? To avoid the illness of comfort, one must pursue not only material, hedonistic, and pleasure-driven goals but also meaning-oriented ones. Engaging with music, art, and science is certainly valuable, but these types of meaning do not resolve one’s existential anxiety. In order to overcome existential crises, individuals must address the uncertainty they hold about spiritual realities and the purpose of creation. Human beings are not well-equipped to tolerate uncertainty. Our brains naturally seek to fit everything into a logical framework within their network of meaning. When they fail to do so, people tend to choose the easier path and fall into traps of hedonism.
A third chracteristics of the comfort illness is the obsession with luxury. Those who are obsessed with luxury often fall into the disease of conformism. Because they believe they deserve only the best, they lack a sense of contentment and constantly desire more. As a result, they fall into patterns of seeking ease, luxury, and laziness. In fact, one of the most significant causes of laziness today is conformism. These individuals tend to live off others. They consume without producing. If someone else is starving, they would say, “It’s not my problem.” Those who live by the motto “Let the snake that doesn’t bite me live a thousand years” are typically people suffering from the illness of comfort, that is, those who want to gain without effort or hardship. Obsession with luxury is also one of the diseases of conformism. For this reason, simplicity should be chosen as a way of life.
Can the need for comfort at some point be considered a protective part of human nature? When does this need begin to weaken personal development, social responsibility, or ethical awareness? How can we preserve healthy boundaries in the pursuit of comfort?
There is a part of every person that wants things to happen immediately, that is greedy and never satisfied—a self-serving side that glorifies comfort. It is natural for human beings to want to achieve things without much effort or struggle. However, this must remain within ethical boundaries. No one has the right to harm others or live off their labor.
Good, true, and beautiful things often disrupt comfort. However, if a person has goals, the sense of achievement and progress toward those goals will bring its own kind of comfort. Therefore, comfort and happiness are not the same. True peace is the kind of comfort that provides a sense of future security. When a person makes medium- and long-term plans and becomes part of a greater purpose, the pursuit of comfort becomes healthy. So, we cannot say that comfort-seeking is entirely bad or good.
Is the tendency to normalize evil explained solely by the desire for comfort? In your view, why have we become so accommodating toward evil? Does the desire to adapt to the prevailing social structure contribute to this process?
Certainly, conformism is just one of the many reasons behind adapting to evil. In addition, impatience, selfishness, and opportunism—all narcissistic tendencies—play a role. But the biggest driver of evil is hedonism, followed by self-centeredness, and then unhappiness. When these three occur together, a person tends to be distressed, unhappy, and drawn toward instant gratification.
Because of unhappiness, brain chemicals begin to deplete. The search for pleasure begins. The brain seeks to increase serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine. If the individual cannot find healthy ways to increase these, what do they do? They turn to sources of pleasure: some to entertainment, some to alcohol, others to substance use. In doing so, they try to satisfy the brain’s pleasure centers. However, this is like offering the brain a bribe, and the brain, once bribed, always asks for more and is never satisfied. This is why conformism is harmful; it encourages lying. People with this mindset can lie easily just to protect their comfort. In conformism, there's an attitude of doing whatever it takes to achieve one's goal. There's a tendency to ignore social norms and rules. For all these reasons, conformism feeds all forms of evil.
Could the question “How can we understand each other?” be a determining factor not only in interpersonal relationships but also in enabling social groups with different ideologies to coexist? How might such an approach help reduce discrimination, ease social polarization, and help individuals find their place in society? Could this question also serve as an intellectual resistance against conformist tendencies and the normalization of evil?
One of the most significant features of conformism is that it weakens social bonds. As a result, loneliness eventually emerges. And when people feel lonely, they begin to live only according to their own desires and interests. They begin to say, “What benefits me is good, what doesn’t is bad.” Their life philosophy shifts. Because such people are egocentric, they are unable to empathize with others. They cannot read others’ emotions and their emotional literacy is low. Therefore, they surround themselves with powerful people, but once that power is gone, they leave and are left alone. Many who become isolated after losing their authority or health can be described as conformists.
Awareness is key here. Individuals with a strong ego ideal can manage their comfort. We need to have an ego ideal. We must ask ourselves, “What kind of person do I want to be at the end of my life? What kind of legacy do I want to leave? How do I want to be remembered?” A person who can answer these questions prioritizes their goals, not their comfort. A student who is a conformist avoids studying, becomes lazy, and indulges in entertainment. And what happens then? They fail their exams, while those who work hard succeed. The result of conformism is laziness, and laziness leads to failure in the face of global competition and the demands of one's environment. This, in turn, diminishes self-confidence and increases loneliness. Additionally, such individuals may become aggressive in their pursuit of results.
Individuals often compromise their values over time in order not to lose their comfort. This can lead to deeper incompatibilities and even ‘silent evils’ on a societal level. How can we strengthen the motivation—on both personal and societal levels—for people of different characters to live harmoniously and unite around common goals?
People with different temperaments can cooperate and distribute tasks effectively when united around a shared goal, establishing healthy horizontal relationships. In such environments, the system they work within transforms into a “learning organization,” making society a dynamic and responsive mechanism. In this process, both leaders and team members learn together. But this only happens when there is a shared purpose. Those who think only of their own comfort are usually excluded in such scenarios.
The smallest learning organization is the family. Parents learn, children learn. If the family functions as a learning system, everyone grows together. No one tries to dominate the others. Horizontal relationships are formed. Mistakes become learning opportunities. People unite around shared goals and work collaboratively. In that case, the joy of producing something surpasses the pleasure derived from comfort. The joy of comfort is fleeting and short-term, while the joy of creating meaning in life and being useful to others brings deeper happiness.
At the top of the human psychosocial hierarchy of needs is not self-actualization, but self-transcendence—the need to go beyond oneself. To transcend oneself means not living only for yourself. This is actually the formula for happiness: being happy by making others happy, helping others, and pursuing dreams and actions that meet the need for self-transcendence. Conformism erodes and degrades values. To preserve values, individuals must focus not on short-term pleasures and desires, but on medium- and long-term goals. Short-term pleasure says, “Let me eat, drink, avoid work, live for the moment.” But a medium- or long-term goal says, “Let me endure this difficulty for a year, so I can invest, produce, and succeed.” The pleasure of anticipating medium- and long-term achievements outweighs the fleeting pleasure of comfort. Therefore, rather than condemning conformism outright, we should teach individuals to consider long-term fulfillment. Values must be managed in this way.