|
Other aspect of that problem touches the revision of doctrine-ideological bases of civil society and providing of mechanisms of maintenance of socio-cultural and political pluralism and socio-biological bio-diversity.
Conflict of two paradigms – genetic reductionalism and political equality of rights – becomes in the last decades of one of basic problems of theoretical political bio-science, and one of main factors of stabilizing (or destabilizations) of civil society.
Methodological foundation of decision of collision between principles of political equality and genetic variety of human individuals in modern interpretation is stopped up the «theory of justice» of Rouls.
The doctrine of «natural human rights» for the sake of maintenance of logical uncontradiction of the postulates and conclusions was forced to give up an empiric base – reference on «naturalness», i.e. natural conditionality of equality of rights of human individuals.
«Demarcation» of biological and socio-political realities generates the problem of practical concordance inevitably. In the legal conceptual field this problem is formulated as a task protecting of genetic information of citizens from a disclosure.
«Informative» interpretation right individual freedoms, including, related to biological and genetic heterogeneity of human population is the personal touch of not only modern ethics and political doctrines but also modern social practice and political mentality.
Genetic technologies allow to return problem of equality from an area humanitarian-ideal in the sphere of naturally-material. Human personality is perceived now as certain instruction, a text in a notebook. It is possible to copy or change the text on the tyranny. This feature of thought determines perception of social problems, descendant development genetic and reproductive technologies. Most essential from them there are such:
- Philosophical-methodological dilemma:
- appearance of child, arising up as a result of gene-reproductive technologies, as a rule, is the mean of achievement of purpose, unconnected directly with appearance of new personality and, consequently, must be examined as conflicting with the norms of humanism ethics;
- the use of gene-reproduction technologies does possible appearance of new valuable personality which otherwise in general would not born or its existence would not be valuable and deserving; thus, use of such technologies has ethics justified.
- Eco-genetic dilemma:
- removal by the gene engineering genes, reducing viability and adjusted of their transmitters, from the gene pool provides more high level of adjusted to the existing presently ecological (and in the case of Homo sapiens – and socio-cultural) environment and, consequently, ethics justified;
- removal of separate genes from the gene pool, conduces to diminishing of level of genetic variety, reduces adaptive potential in regard to the future changes of environment of dwelling and, consequently, impermissible.
- Eugenic dilemma:
- society has a right to influence on the reproductive choice of the members, so far as it provides a right for future members society on quality of life, deserving man and, consequently, ethics justified;
- every extraneous pressure, violates rights for future parents on individual freedom, and future children – on the «opened future» and, consequently, impermissible.
- Legal dilemma:
- use of cells of genetically modified or selected human embryos – unique from the ways of treatment of many inherited and uninherited pathologies known presently and, consequently, ethics justified;
- use of cells of genetically modified or selected human embryos in that case, when it is carried out after the beginning of forming of human personality, violates a fundamental right for every human creature – on life and, consequently, impermissible.
- First bio-political dilemma:
- genetic information about every concrete individual is substantial from point of safety and health, persons related to him and, consequently, ethics justified;
- genetic information about every concrete individual must be examined as confidential (“secret of personality”), as gives it a possessor instrument of manipulation stranger fates and can serve as the mean of limitation of de jure or de facto of political rights for the transmitters of certain genes; access to this information impermissible.
6. Second bio-political dilemma – anthropological:
— 229 —
|