A Transhumanist Legal Worldview: Responding to the Challenges of Time (Requirement, or Necessity?)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.57125/FEL.2021.03.25.5Keywords:
transhumanism, philosophy, law, legislation, challengesAbstract
The latest advances in science and technology demonstrate the need for transformation in social life, particularly in jurisprudence. Given this, the study of the impact of the transhumanist concept on modern law is an important topic for analysis. The aim of the article is to analyze the transhumanistic legal worldview through the prism of modern challenges, a worldview that most fully reflects the problems of the modern integration of technological solutions in social life. Among the methods used is comparative analysis, which traces the challenges and prospects of implementing a transhumanist understanding of the law. The dogmatic principle of treating the transformation of the new law was also applied. Of great importance was the use of content analysis of the literature. Search engines found more than 50 articles from 2013 to 2021. The screening process resulted in the selection of 20 related to transhumanist legal regulation. The results of the study examined the formation of philosophy and the main provisions of transhumanism as a scientific movement. It is established that the adherents of this doctrine consider the adoption of new laws as inevitable against the background of the improvement of mankind as a biological species (including the use of modern technologies). The manifestations of the modern vision of transhumanist society in the elements of the current legislation are also demonstrated. In conclusion, it is fixed that such new elements will need a certain legal regulation, which will be carried out within the framework of renewed systems of legal relations, where artificial intellect, cyborgs, etc. will become equal participants in social life. At the same time, through the prism of the transformation of modern technologies, the main prospects of legal regulation based on the transhumanistic concept are highlighted.
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
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
Buben, A. (2019). Personal Immortality in Transhumanism and Ancient Indian Philosophy. Philosophy East and West, 69(1), 71–85. doi:10.1353/pew.2019.0026
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
Cruz, E. R. (2021). The Human and Beyond: Transhumanism, Historicity, Humanness. Theology and Science, 19(4), 363–378. doi:10.1080/14746700.2021.1982249
Ewuoso, C., & Fayemi, A. K. (2021). Transhumanism and African humanism: How to pursue the transhumanist vision without jeopardizing humanity. Bioethics, 35(7), 634–645. doi:10.1111/bioe.12902
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
Frensch, R., Horvath, R., & Huber, S. (2021). Openness effects on the rule of law: Size and patterns of trade. International Review of Law and Economics, 68, 106027. doi:10.1016/j.irle.2021.106027
Goodley, D. (2020). Challenging transhumanism. Balkan Journal of Philosophy, 12(1), 5–16. doi:10.5840/bjp20201212
Guerreiro, J., Loureiro, S. M. C., Romero, J., Itani, O., & Eloy, S. (2021). Transhumanism and Engagement-Facilitating Technologies in Society. Journal of Promotion Management, 1–22. doi:10.1080/10496491.2021.2009615
Huxley, J. (2015). Transhumanism. Ethics in Progress, 6(1), 12–16. doi:10.14746/eip.2015.1.2
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
Krupiy, T. (2020). A vulnerability analysis: Theorising the impact of artificial intelligence decision-making processes on individuals, society, and human diversity from a social justice perspective. Computer Law & Security Review, 38, 105429. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105429
Lerner, J. Y., McCubbins, M. D., & Renberg, K. M. (2021). The efficacy of measuring judicial ideal points: The mis-analogy of IRTs. International Review of Law and Economics, 68, 106020. doi:10.1016/j.irle.2021.106020
Llamas Covarrubias, J. Z. (2020). Human rights, transhumanism and posthumanisim: A human technological enchancement. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3887926
Malapi Nelson, A. (2019). Transhumanism, Posthumanism, and the Catholic Church. Forum Philosophicum, 24(2), 369–396. doi:10.35765/forphil.2019.2402.16
Miceli, T. J., & Mungan, M. C. (2021). An economic theory of optimal enactment and enforcement of laws. International Review of Law and Economics, 68, 106029. doi:10.1016/j.irle.2021.106029
Osiński, G. (2021). Theological and Ethical Aspects of Mind Transfer in Transhumanism. Scientia et Fides, 9(1), 149. doi:10.12775/setf.2021.005
Tatar, U., Gokce, Y., & Nussbaum, B. (2020). Law versus technology: Blockchain, GDPR, and tough tradeoffs. Computer Law & Security Review, 38, 105454. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105454
Vandenberg, P. (2019). The fourth industrial revolution. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 25(1), 194–196. doi:10.1080/13547860.2019.1686320
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.
