Work in Progress "A Dynamic Ontology of Social Groups" (Under Review) The study of social groups ontology confronts a fundamental challenge: balancing need for stability with the inherent dynamism of social life. Traditional ontologies, with their static assumptions and constraints, struggle to preserve the causal power of social groups while accommodating the fluidity that characterizes them. This paper argues that the prevailing ontological models, which emphasize synchronic and asymmetric dependencies within a part-whole relationship, inevitably lead to a dilemma: they either fail to maintain the necessary stability for causal efficacy or they negate the dynamicity intrinsic to social groups. Drawing from this tension, the paper advocates for a shift in perspective. It suggests that to authentically capture the change and complexity inherent in social groups, we must move beyond the existing constraints of our ontologies that enforce a static picture. Instead, recognizing social groups as complex and dynamic entities allows us to reconcile the need for stability with the reality of change. This reconceptualization points towards a dynamic ontology as not just a theoretical preference but a necessity for accurately reflecting the nature of social groups. "Strategic Fluidity: Gender, Inequality, and Social Change" (In Progress) In this paper, I use network models to explore mechanisms through which individuals might leverage the fluidity of gender to reduce gender-based oppression. The simulations suggest that the mere presence of individuals who introduce uncertainty about group membership or add "noise" to the social structure can destabilize entrenched patterns of group-based oppression. This outcome offers a potential explanation for why non-binary gender identities represent a "critical gender kind" and resonates with a constructivist view of gender as socially constructed and fluid. The primary insight is that gender fluidity can be strategically employed as a form of resistance to gender-based oppression. Additionally, these findings challenge and expand on previous evolutionary models, such as those proposed by O'Connor and Bright, which posit that the stability of group-based disadvantages relies on the stability of social groups.
"The Tension That Drives Change" (In Draft) This paper examines the tension between the destabilizing tactics often used by social movements to generate change and the democratic ideals of stability, trust, and open dialogue. Movements create “counterspaces” to amplify marginalized voices and impose moral pressure on entrenched power structures, but these methods can resemble the harmful dynamics of epistemic bubbles that erode democratic life. To illuminate this tension, I draw on examples from scientific progress, where breakthroughs often require defying norms and challenging consensus. Modeling insights reveal that while democratic norms are crucial for maintaining stability, transformative change often demands rethinking or replacing these norms. I argue that centering structural factors—such as the interdependence among democratic citizens—can guide the development of alternative norms that better address entrenched injustices. Rather than reconciling the tension between disruption and stability, this approach emphasizes how reimagining these dynamics can enable both moral progress and a more adaptive democratic order.
Peer Reviewed Publications
Heydari Fard, S. (2025) "Challenging the Consensus: The Strategic Value of Homogenous Groups in Collective Problem Solving," Philosophy of Science. Abstract As technology connects like-minded individuals, concerns about the impact of homogeneous clusters—such as ideological bubbles and echo chambers—on epistemic communities have intensified. While often deemed harmful to independent thought and progress, this paper challenges that notion by demonstrating how these clusters can actually drive significant scientific and societal advancements. By revising existing computational simulation models and examining historical examples, I show that homogeneous clusters, particularly among minority groups with superior ideas, can overcome dominant opposition and promote progress, though it may slow consensus-building. These findings compel us to rethink the blanket condemnation of such clusters and explore their strategic use in fostering collective problem-solving and social change.
Heydari Fard, S. (2024) “Diversity, Polarization, and Dynamic Structures: A Structural Turn in Social Contract Theory,” in an edited volume titledNew Approaches to Social Contract Theory: Liberty, Equality, Diversity, and the Open Society, Oxford University Press. Abstract In this paper, I argue in favor of a structural turn in social contract theory. More precisely, I argue that dealing with the complex and dynamic nature of the social world requires an emphasis on social structures greater than what contractarians often consider. I take structures to be the dynamic and non-random networks of interdependence among all active components that shape society. I also constrain my focus to a growing body of literature on diversity that explores plausible contractarian alternatives given the complexity of modern societies. I argue that shifting weight from diversity to structures in theorizing alternative contractarian frameworks would be an improvement.
Heydari Fard, S. (2023) “The Transformative Power of Social Movements,” Philosophy Compass. Abstract Social movements possess transformative and progressive power. In this paper, I argue that how this is so, or even if this is so, depends on one's explanatory framework. I consider three such explanatory frameworks for social movements: methodological individualism, collectivism, and complexity theory. In evaluating the various appeals and weaknesses of these frameworks, I show that complexity theory is uniquely poised to capture the complex and dynamic reality of the social world.
Heydari Fard, S. (2023) "Hoping With," inPeace and Hope in Dark Times, the Philosophy of Peace Series, BRILL. Abstract In this paper, I argue that the proper interpretation of a collectivist hope requires attention to the people we hope with. I follow Michelle Moody-Adams conviction that visionaries and intellectuals of constructive social movements ground political hope in collectives rather than individuals as Western political philosophy tends to do. However, I show that in addition to the content or subjective features, our theoretical and normative discussions of hope should constitute our relations of hope. I ground this discussion both in Western modern political thought and in non-violent movements and heir subsequent philosophy.
Heydari Fard, S. (2022) Strategic injustice, dynamic network formation, and social movements.Synthese200, 392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03576-3 Abstract What I call "strategic injustice" involves a set of formal and informal regulatory rules and conventions that often lead to grossly unfair outcomes for a class of individuals despite their resistance. My goal in this paper is to provide the necessary conditions for such injustices and for eliminating their instances from our social practices. To do so, I follow Peter Vanderschraaf's (2018) analysis of circumstances of justice with special attention to the "reciprocal restraining conditions" that are necessary for a rough equality in fair division problems. I expand his account by embedding iterated "asymmetric conflictual coordination games" that summarize fair division problems in a social network. I use the network effect on such coordination games to explain the emergence of stable exploitative behavior and conventions by a class of individuals even in the presence of restraining efforts by others. I conclude that such unfair conventions are resilient to uncoordinated individual actions and interventions. In fact, maintaining a rough equality itself turns into another coordination problem. Finally, I show that something similar to a social movement that restructures the network of social relations is necessary to solve such coordination problem.
Heydari Fard, S. (2018). Decision-Theoretic Consequentialism and The Desire-Luck Problem. Journal of Cognition and Neuroethics, 5 (1), 71. Abstract Frank Jackson (1991) proposes an interpretation of consequentialism, namely, the Decision Theoretic Consequentialism (DTC), which provides a middle ground between internal and external criteria of rightness inspired by decision theory. According to DTC, a right decision either leads to the best outcomes (external element) or springs from right motivations (internal element). He raises an objection to fully external interpretations, like objective consequentialism (OC), which he claims that DTC can resolve. He argues that those interpretations are either too objective, which prevents them from giving guidance for action, or their guidance leads to wrong and blameworthy actions or decisions. I discuss how the emphasis on blameworthiness in DTC constraints its domain to merely the justification of decisions that relies on rationality to provide a justification criterion for moral decisions. I provide examples that support the possibility of rational but immoral decisions that are at odds with DTC’s prescription for right decisions. Moreover, I argue what I call the desire-luck problem for the external element of justification criterion leads to the same objection for DTC that Jackson raised for OC. Therefore, DTC, although successful in response to some objections, fails to provide a prescription for the right decision.
Book Reviews Heydari Fard, S.(2022) Complexity Theory in the Lived Experience of a Seasoned Activist, Review of Shut It Down, by Lisa Fithian for The Acorn: Philosophical Studies in Pacifism and Nonviolence. Heydari Fard, S. (forthcoming), Violence in Non-Violent Protesting, Review of The Philosophy of Protest, by Jennifer Kling and Megan Mitchell for Philosophy in the Contemporary World.
Edited Volumes Co-editor with Andrew Fiala, (2023) Peace and Hope in Dark Times, the Philosophy of Peace Series, BRILL.
