Philosophy and the future of human rights: peculiarities of the relationship between recent science and technology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57125/FEL.2021.09.25.02Keywords:
transhumanism , posthumanism, philosophy of law , digital society, human rightsAbstract
Modern trends in the development of information society demonstrate the important role of scientific advances and technological innovations in affecting human society. Legal aspects of such influence remain a topical issue for research, since the dynamics of the emergence of new technological solutions is quite high, so lawyers have to respond to today's challenges promptly. The article aims to analyze the future of human rights in the digital day, to understand and outline the threats arising from the impact of technology on society from a philosophical point of view. The methods of knowledge used in the article are divided into general scientific (analysis and synthesis), specific scientific (historical, psychological), philosophical (prediction, synergetic method), and special legal (dogmatic). The results traced the peculiarities of transhumanist and posthumanist perception of the future development of human rights through the prism of legal aspect and analysis of the relevant most significant current legislative acts. It is proved that possible humanistic violations can have technological roots. At the core of humanistic principles are individuality, mutual respect and recognition of the dignity of others, and self-improvement. However, excessive attention to science and technology does not allow us to completely safeguard the future development of humanity and, consequently, human rights. Contemporary Russian aggression is an example of such an opportunity. The conclusions summarize that the need to regulate artificial intelligence is already overdue. In addition, the authoritarian regimes of today are also using high technology for their own purposes. To protect human rights, it is necessary to develop principles for punishing political leaders and entire regimes.
References
Balaban, O. (2020). Genera and species vs. laws of nature two epistemic frameworks and their respective ideal worlds. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 81, 6–15. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.01.007
Ben-Menahem, H., & Ben-Menahem, Y. (2020). The rule of law: Natural, human, and divine. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 81, 46–54. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2019.05.001
Bolinska, A., & Martin, J. D. (2021). The tragedy of the canon; or, path dependence in the history and philosophy of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 89, 63–73. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.07.008
Braidotti. (2017). Posthuman Critical Theory. Journal of Posthuman Studies, 1(1), 9–25. doi:10.5325/jpoststud.1.1.0009
Braidotti, R. (2013). Posthuman. Polity Press.
Cargas, S. (2019). Fortifying the future of human rights with human rights education. Journal of Human Rights, 18(3), 293–307. doi:10.1080/14754835.2019.1617117
de Grefte, J. (2020). Epistemic benefits of the material theory of induction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 84, 99–105. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.09.001
Dovhan, B., & Mikhailina, T. (2021). Fourth-generation digital human rights through the prism of transhumanism. Entrepreneurship, Economy and Law, (1), 171–175. doi:10.32849/2663-5313/2021.1.30
Fillard, J.-P. (2020). Transhumanism: A realistic future? World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd.
Fukuyama, F. (2004). Transhumanism. Foreign Policy, (144), 42. doi:10.2307/4152980
Kedar, Y., & Hon, G. (2020). Law and Order natural regularities before the scientific revolution. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 81, 1–5. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2020.02.002
Llamas Covarrubias, J. Z. (2020). Human rights, transhumanism and posthumanisim: A human technological enchancement. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3887926
Northcott, R. (2020). Big data and prediction: Four case studies. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 81, 96–104. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2019.09.002
Rodriguez, Q. (2021). Idealizations and analogies: Explaining critical phenomena. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 89, 235–247. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.08.007
Tamborini, M. (2020). Technoscientific approaches to deep time. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 79, 57–67. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2019.03.002
Tan, P. (2021). Inconsistent idealizations and inferentialism about scientific representation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 89, 11–18. doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.07.002
Torres, L. (2015). Semantic constructions and Law. In XXVI World Congress of Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy. Initia Via. doi:10.17931/ivr2013_wg135_03
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
