Suchergebnisse

Modern geopolitical realities are determined by two key factors – the geopolitical crisis and the exponential nature of technological progress. At this historical stage, both of these factors together determine the division of the global world into techno-economic blocks. The inevitability of some form of block confrontation in the medium term does not negate the possibility of future legal development based on the principle of formal equality between States. The theoretical model of such development in Russian political science is represented by the essentially legal concept of the multilateralism of the world order, which is fundamentally different from the power model of multipolarity. The possibilities of Russia's legal development as a sovereign state so far depend on success in finding allies in the bloc and on what scientific, technological, economic and spiritual baggage the country will enter into such a union of states. The competitive potential of each block will be determined both by its technological might and by the special value-normative complex that has developed within it, which will reflect the spiritual unity of the peoples united in such a union. At the same time, the civilizational values that form the basis of such a "soft power" should not only be expressed at the level of theories, but also presented in the practice of building new models of socio-economic and political-legal structure capable of introducing technological development into the legal mainstream.

The article analyzes the content of the monograph by I.V. Kolosov, which shows the history of the emergence and development of legal consequentialism as a complex of legal theories that evaluate the correctness of the actions of the legislator and the law enforcer depending on the result. The author's contribution to the study of historical and theoretical ideas about consequentialism in law is emphasized, starting from the use of the principle of utility in ancient Indian and ancient Chinese monuments of legal thought, in ancient philosophy, etc., including the legal thought of the early modern period, classical utilitarianism, near-conventional ideas of Russian Philosophy of Law of the late 18th - early 20th century, as well as various versions of modern Western consequentialism. Directions for further study of this issue are outlined, related to the comprehension of the utilitarian orientation of the Bolshevik ideology and the understanding of Soviet law conditioned by it as a means of achieving goals external to the legal system; with the substantiation of the position on the debatable issues of legal theory, referred to as "economic analysis of law" (Law and Economics); with an assessment of the possibility and limits of using the ideas of consequentialism in Russian judicial practice; with the disclosure of the heuristic potential, significant for law, of the interpretation of utilitarianism developed in modern Russian philosophy as an ideological factor in Russian modernization.

Technological progress and law development until recently were different facets of one common process of mankind progressive advancement towards asserting greater independence from the natural elements and expanding the scope of human freedom. At the same time, law, on the one hand, was the most important incentive for the development of the creative potential of mankind as a source of scientific and technical innovations, and on the other hand, it was an effective way to correct deformations within the system of techno-humanitarian balance, guaranteeing against the most dangerous manifestations of technological power. However, with the advent of the 21st century convergent NBIC-technologies, the law increasingly demonstrates its inability to reduce the technological development risks to an acceptable level. The novelty of the situation is that social risks come to the fore. This trend is most clearly manifested in the field of legal regulation of the processes of creating and applying technologies for editing the human genome. A whole series of breakthroughs in the field of studying the human genome, carried out in recent decades, has opened up huge prospects not only for the development of medicine, but also for changing the natural qualities of a person, up to the possibility (so far theoretical) to control the mankind biological evolution. These new opportunities lead to entail proportionate social risks, connected primarily with the danger of an irreconcilable split of humanity into different socio-biological groups. In the current conditions law is not able to cope with the threat of humanity losing its biosocial unity. The hopes expressed in the public space for moral and religious factors to counteract the dangers of technological dehumanization, fraught with a surge of social injustice, seem to be greatly overestimated. There is even less reason to count on the so-called "moral bioimprovement" of mankind. In the current situation, apparently, there is no other way than a difficult creative search, focused on improving social, economic and political relations in line with an equitable legal approach. Successes along this path would provide the conditions under which the human community would be able to preserve the law vector of biotechnological development and, at the same time, avoid its catastrophic consequences.

The article provides a general description and classification of bioethical committees from the point of view of the subject and goals of their activities, the nature of their authority, legal status, organizational and legal foundations of their activity. The bioethical committee is interpreted as a special institutional form of organizing scientific (interdisciplinary) and public understanding of moral and legal problems in the field of medicine, generated by technological innovations. In the system of social control the bioethical committee is a social institution that is either integrated into the system of public administration, or creates its own channels of influence on the position of the professional medical community and public opinion. From this point of view the article analyzes foreign and Russian history of bioethics committees institutionalization. The author interprets bioethics as a field of scientific and practical activity, the social purpose of which is to translate actual bioethical dilemmas, unsolvable on the basis of abstract principles, into the communicative space, where a consensus can be based on common moral intuitions. The article substantiates the thesis that the main intention of bioethics and bioethics committees, as an expression of its practical function, is to find a legal solution to problems. The author made proposals for improving the legal support for the creation and operation of bioethical committees in Russia.