The Problem of Transhumanism in the Context of Individual Freedom and Dignity: A Lesson from Slavoj Žižek

The article discusses the issues of the relationship between human dignity and human rights as a subject of philosophical and legal discussion, examines the problems of relations between law and morality in comprehending the dig­nity of the human person and human rights, reveals various sources of dignity, their significance for the modern understanding of dignity in scientific jurispru­dence and philosophy of law, a critical look at theological and secular, philo­sophical and legal sources; the role of abolitionism and philosophy of natural law and natural human rights in the development of an egalitarian understanding of human dignity, the relationship of human dignity and abilities, the conditions for their development as human potential is evaluated. Human dignity is identi­fied as a matrix of human qualities, which has a unique public law, philosophi­cal, ethical and existential status. In the triad of principles – the principle of hope, the principle of responsibility and the principle of dignity, the leading humanistic and existential, as well as integrating role is played by the principle of human dignity. The author reveals the problem of integrity and heuristic value of human dignity, the philosophical and legal significance of human dignity in the context of the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The purpose of the article is to identify the content of the problem of unity and differentiation of human dignity and human rights in the context of ethical, exis­tential, and legal dialogue; the importance of the constituent function of the dig­nity of the individual for the human rights system; the problem of positive and negative interdependence of human rights. The methodological basis of the ar­ticle was the discursive approach and critical rationalism in legal research, methods of dialectics and legal engineering; they allow us to determine the metaphilosophi­cal and meta-legal nature of human dignity, its gravitational role in the construction and development of both human rights and his abilities.

This chapter explores the transformative potential of technologies like brain–computer interfaces (BCI) and virtual reality (VR), predicting their profound impact on human experience. It highlights BCI advancements, such as reconstructing music from brain signals and restoring movement in paralysed patients, emphasizing their medical and technological significance. The chapter also touches on commercial interest in BCI, particularly Elon Musk’s Neuralink, and discusses the concept of humans merging with machines, as envisioned by Ray Kurzweil. Regarding VR, the author predicts that future developments will lead people to spend more time in virtual worlds than the physical one, with richer sensory experiences and even interactions with AI representations of the deceased. The chapter concludes by addressing the ethical, privacy, and identity issues these technologies raise, encouraging openness to their potential while remaining mindful of the challenges.

Presents an editorial on the developing concept in artificial intelligence referred to as muliplicity. The term “Singularity” is used to describe a hypothetical punctuation point sometime in the future where Artificial Intelligence (AI) will surpass human intelligence. The concept has been popularized by science fiction author Vernor Vinge and Ray Kurzweil. “Superintelligence,” a 2014 book by Nick Bostrom, explores a similar theme. Recently, Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates publicly expressed fears about the dangers of post-Singularity AI and robotics. Here, it is suggested that Singularity is distracting attention from a far more realistic and important development that we might call “Multiplicity.” Multiplicity characterizes an emerging category of systems where diverse groups of humans work together with diverse groups of machines to solve difficult problems. Multiplicity combines the wisdom of crowds with the power of cloud computing.

The purpose of the article is to analyze existing research on the rights of convicts and highlight their anthropological direction, as well as emphasize their importance for the anthropology of law and philosophy of law in general, constitutional law, criminal law, improving mechanisms to protect the rights, freedoms and interests of convicts. The methodological basis of the article is a set of philosophical and philosophical methods, general and special scientific methods. Determinants, in our opinion, are dialectical and: logical, formal-legal and historical, comparative-legal and systemic methods, as well as anthropological, activity and other approaches. Scientific novelty. Ensuring the inalienable natural human rights, even when it has received the status of a convicted person, requires from the state, its specially authorized bodies and officials, additional measures and means of legal influence, the establishment and maintenance of penitentiaries, re-education of these persons. Scientists have an important mission, in particular, to reveal the features of human nature, including convicts in terms of various scientific schools, human dignity, its rights and freedoms, legal awareness, socialization and resocialization, in order, above all, to prevent illegal acts, disclosure the danger of harm to such acts for themselves and others, their associations, human civilization. Conclusions. The Ukrainian state, scientific elite and officials face a number of urgent tasks to create an effective legal system that would protect human rights and freedoms, regardless of the conditions in which they find themselves. The reform of Ukraine’s penitentiary system must be based on democratic principles, in line with the European penitentiary concept and Ukraine’s national interests. This is impossible to do without a thorough scientific base, constant attention of representatives of modern scientific schools, especially the philosophy of law, and it is important that we continue to outline the areas of study of legal anthropology, penology and other scientific areas. Keywords: human rights; rights of convicts; philosophy of law; anthropological approach; legal regulation; realization of rights and freedoms of convicts.

“Menschenwürde”, a widely used term in German philosophy, political science and ethics, is a term with no exact English equivalent. It correspondends in general to “Human Dignity”, sometimes “sanctity of life”, or “security of person”, or “personal security” to denote the inalienable autonomy of human beings. The use of “personal security” is frequently found in books on the Philosophy of Law, e.g. by Roscoe Pound ([15]; cf. also [7]), while the term “Human Dignity” is quite generally used in ethical discourse, especially in social and political ethics. Politicians use it as does the International Commission of Jurists and other groups and agencies affiliated to the United Nations. Here it is used as though it were an ethical technical term with a distinct meaning which, however, is not really the case. Still, the use of the term “Human Dignity” in these circles represents more or less the meaning of “Menschenwürde” in the German language. Finally, the term “sanctity of life” is — contrary to a wide-spread opinion — not of theological origin. Helga Kuhse has recently used it in the title of her book [11]. In the following we will use the term “Human Dignity”, although this translation denotes only a part of what the German term “Menschenwürde” means in post-war usage.

The relationship between moral philosophy and philosophy of law has always been one of the most challenging contemporary philosophical debates. One of the most controversial questions has always been the field of ethics and law in determining and narrowing the limits and scope of criminology, what considerations and moral requirements should be considered and given priority. In other words, philosophers of ethics and law have long sought to discover / construct a morally relevant criterion and basis for defining the boundaries and limitations of legislation and criminology, and to develop and narrow the scope of the legislature's influence and authority in prosecution and criminality. infact, they have designed and codified principles that, in addition to determining and explaining the basis and limitations of the field of punishment and criminology, explain and facilitate the procedures and procedures of legislation and determination and detection of criminal acts and procedures, and from another point of view, Provide justification for legal interference with privacy and individual freedoms. In this research, the most important principles and ethically relevant reasons in determining and delimiting the realm of criminology - with special emphasis on liberal principles and ideas - have been studied. It is worth mentioning that some philosophers in the field of moral philosophy and philosophy of law, while acknowledging the ineffectiveness of the old and classical basic and principles of criminology, have tried to reinterpret the previous principles and in this regard have presented new and revised interpretations. They are specific to paternalism, they also indicate a tendency towards moral legalism and the avoidance of classical utilitarian and liberal presuppositions. The relationship between moral philosophy and philosophy of law has always been one of the most challenging contemporary philosophical debates. One of the most controversial questions has always been the field of ethics and law in determining and narrowing the limits and scope of criminology, what considerations and moral requirements should be considered and given priority. In other words, philosophers of ethics and law have long sought to discover / construct a morally relevant criterion and basis for defining the boundaries and limitations of legislation and criminology, and to develop and narrow the scope of the legislature's influence and authority in prosecution and criminality. infact, they have designed and codified principles that, in addition to determining and explaining the basis and limitations of the field of punishment and criminology, explain and facilitate the procedures and procedures of legislation and determination and detection of criminal acts and procedures, and from another point of view, Provide justification for legal interference with privacy and individual freedoms. In this research, the most important principles and ethically relevant reasons in determining and delimiting the realm of criminology - with special emphasis on liberal principles and ideas - have been studied. It is worth mentioning that some philosophers in the field of moral philosophy and philosophy of law, while acknowledging the ineffectiveness of the old and classical basic and principles of criminology, have tried to reinterpret the previous principles and .

B a c k g r o u n d . The article explores how Rudolf von Jhering's philosophy of law, which asserts a teleological understanding of law as a morally oriented purpose, stands in opposition to the anti-legal eschatology of the "Russian world", where power is sacralized and law reduced to an ideological instrument of violence. The study highlights the civilizational dimension of Russia's current war against Ukraine as a clash between two systems of legal thought: the teleological, based on freedom and justice, and the mythological, which legitimizes imperial aggression. The relevance of the study lies in the need to comprehend the deep contradictions between European legal civilization – grounded in the principles of rationalism, dignity, and freedom – and the ideological doctrine of the "Russian world", which denies personal autonomy and the rational foundations of law. M e t h o d s . The methodological framework combines philosophical-legal, hermeneutic, and comparative approaches that integrate an analysis of Jhering's classical works (Der Zweck im Recht, Der Kampf ums Recht) with a critical interpretation of contemporary Russian ideological narratives. Methods of social phenomenology and analytical hermeneutics are applied to identify key semantic antinomies – law vs. power, purpose vs. mission, freedom vs. collectivism, dignity vs. subjugation. R e s u l t s . It is demonstrated that Jhering conceived law as an ethical form of social life harmonizing freedom and order. His teleological model views law as a struggle for dignity and justice, where power is subordinated to moral purpose. In contrast, the "Russian world" represents a form of anti-legal thinking that sacralizes authority, replaces morality with ideology, and transforms law into violence. This doctrine is revealed as an eschatological rather than teleological system, interpreting history as a repetition of a sacred myth while depriving the human being of the status of legal subject. Within the contemporary Ukrainian context, Jhering's philosophy of law emerges as a moral and intellectual counterweight to the ideology of the "Russian world", since its teleologism is grounded in the principles of freedom, dignity, and civic responsibility. C o n c l u s i o n s . The opposition between Jhering's legal rationalism and the imperial mythologism of the "Russian world" acquires a civilizational significance: the former defines law as a means of moral advancement, while the latter reduces it to a religious-ideological justification of force. The Ukrainian experience of defending freedom and independence demonstrates the enduring validity of Jhering's maxim that law lives only where people fight for it. Thus, Jhering's philosophy of law serves as a spiritual and intellectual antithesis to neo-imperial narratives and as a foundation for Ukraine's legal statehood, grounded in human dignity, moral responsibility, and the rule of law.

Immanuel Kant's philosophy of law represents one of the most consistent theoretical foundations for reflection on justice, particularly for its systematic articulation of freedom, morality, and practical reason. This paper aims to analyze the foundations of justice in Kantian Philosophy of Law, understanding how these elements relate to the structuring of a normative system guided by the autonomy of the will and rationality. The choice of this topic is justified by the permanence and relevance of Kantian thought, which provides conceptual tools for assessing the legitimacy of legal norms, the limits of state action, and the role of institutions in the social order. The relevance of this research lies in the opportunity to deepen the understanding of the principles that underpin the notion of justice and to highlight its contribution to the contemporary legal debate, marked by challenges surrounding the realization of rights and human dignity. The research will be conducted through a bibliographic review, using as central references the Doctrine of Right and the Critique of Practical Reason, as well as commentators who analyze Kant's work from a legal and philosophical perspective. The method will allow us to reconstruct and interpret the main concepts formulated by Kant, systematizing their relationships and implications. Among the study's potential contributions are the systematization of foundations that remain relevant to law, the strengthening of the debate on justice on rational grounds, and the provision of support for critical reflection on the legitimacy of legal norms and institutions today.

Against the backdrop of the question of whether the sovereign state is still the appropriate form for human social existence, Marco Haase addresses the basic questions posed by the philosophy of law and of the state. The study focuses on Hegels hermeneutic theory of law and the state, delimited on the one hand by Kelsens positivist theory of law, and on the other by Kants philosophy of natural law. In his analysis, Haase demonstrates the extent to which culture and law are mutually dependent.

The article studies the right to human dignity through the prism of German legal doctrine. During the research, a wide range of general scientific and special legal methods of scientific cognition has been used, in particular: methods of dialectical logic, comparative legal and system-structural methods. The paper analyses domestic and German legal resources on the right to human dignity, in particular the works of S. von Puffendorf, I. Kant and G. Durig. As a result of the study, the author states that the German legal opinion formed the fundamental doctrine of the right to human dignity. This doctrine began in Germany, back in the Renaissance. For the first time, it was systematized in the works of a German researcher S. von Puffendorf. The article illustrates that human dignity is revealed in the German doctrine of fundamental human rights through a number of characteristics. The right to human dignity is the foundation of social value and respect for human beings. It prohibits the conversion of a person to an object in state procedures. Human dignity is not only the individual dignity, but also the dignity of a person as a species. Everyone possesses it regardless of its characteristics, achievements and social status. It also belongs to someone who cannot act reasonably because of his or her physical or mental state. They do not lose their human dignity even through "unworthy" behaviour, for example, by committing any crime. No one can be deprived of human dignity. Attention is drawn to the fact that German law does not intentionally give a definitive definition of the right to human dignity. It merely defines a comprehensive list of requirements for the protection of this fundamental human right. The reason for this is that any definition cannot guarantee the absolute protection of this human right. In other words, such a normative definition of this human right will inevitably lead to such a situation where it cannot protect the human dignity of an individual or even be the legal basis for its restriction. In this part, the German approach to the definition of the right to human dignity differs significantly from the domestic approach, since for the national science and practice of lawmaking it is quite logical to take a different approach, in particular to formulate clear and comprehensive definitions of legally significant phenomena and categories. It has been established that, according to the German doctrine of fundamental human rights, human dignity must be protected in any way within any relationship. It was found that the German Nazis had a negative influence on the German doctrine of the human dignity. This is due to the fact that the protection of human dignity was not built around what was allowed to be done, but about what was forbidden under any circumstances. Keywords: human dignity, a fundamental human right, a human rights doctrine, a state, legislation.

Supporting human dignity is the essence of delivery of care. Dignity is one's sense of self-value that is influenced by the perceived value attributed to the individual from others. Individuals with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) are at risk of violations of their dignity, due to their diminished autonomy, the alteration in their sense of self, the loss of meaningful social roles, and their limited interactions with peers and confirmation of identity. A scoping review was conducted to explore the state of art regarding the dignity of individuals with ADRD. Methods: A search was conducted using CINAHL, PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Relevant articles were analyzed and organized based on the themes they addressed, and a narrative description of findings was presented. Twenty-six articles were included in the review. Findings highlighted characteristics of care that affected the dignity of these individuals. Researchers found that care was task-centered, depersonalized, and lacked a genuine connection. Individuals with ADRD experienced embarrassment, lack of freedom, and powerlessness, which contributed to feelings of being devalued, and threatened their dignity. Studies testing interventions to enhance dignity were either inconclusive, lacked rigor, or had no lasting effect. Conclusion: The dignity of individuals with ADRD may be violated during healthcare interactions. More research is needed to objectively measure the dignity of these individuals and examine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at promoting dignity.

The philosophy of law constitutes a fundamental branch of legal science that provides a conceptual framework for understanding the essence, purpose, and legitimacy of law. This study is grounded in the need for a philosophical perspective that views law not merely as a collection of written norms, but as a reflective human construct closely connected to justice, morality, and social values. Using a normative-juridical method, this research is based on a systematic literature review of classical and contemporary legal philosophies, focusing on the relationship between law, morality, and justice. The analysis demonstrates that legal understanding is shaped by diverse philosophical approaches, ranging from legal positivism, which emphasizes the separation between law and morality, to natural law theories that prioritize universal moral principles as the foundation of legal validity. The findings indicate that the philosophy of law functions as an intellectual gateway that enables a critical and reflective understanding of law, allowing legal norms to be evaluated beyond formal legality. This study concludes that an introductory engagement with the philosophy of law is essential for developing analytical reasoning and ethical awareness in legal scholarship. Accordingly, the study recommends that the philosophy of law be positioned as a mandatory and contextually oriented subject within faculties of law in Indonesia, in order to strengthen students’ conceptual, normative, and moral understanding of law in both theory and practice.

Human dignity can be a protected interest in criminal law. This paper starts with some reflections about the meaning of human dignity and then examines offense descriptions in the German Penal Code and the Israeli Penal Code. These codes are used as sources for identifying possibly relevant prohibitions. One can indeed find numerous examples of offense descriptions that can be justified by pointing to human dignity, either as a main protected interest or as a protected interest in addition to other interests. The protected interest can be either the individual victim's right to human dignity or human dignity as an objective value. Offense descriptions that can be connected to “protection of human dignity” should, for analytical purposes, be divided into three groups: violations of the dignity of individual human beings through acts other than speech; violations of the human dignity of individuals through speech; and media content that does not contain statements about individuals but shows scenes of severe humiliation (e.g., fictional child pornography). Questions that need further discussion primarily concern the second group (what role should free speech play in cases of human dignity violations?) and the third group (does the acknowledgement of human dignity as an objective value mean to endorse a re-moralization of the criminal law?).

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are revolutionizing the way humans interact with machines by translating brain signals into actionable commands. While traditional BCIs use non-invasive methods like electroencephalography (EEG), Neuralink, founded by Elon Musk in 2016, has developed an invasive system aimed at achieving high-resolution, single-neuron recordings through an implant containing 1024 electrodes. Neuralink's technology holds promise for restoring mobility in patients with neurological disorders. However, the ethical implications of such invasive experiments, particularly those involving animal trials, have raised significant concerns. This paper explores the ethical issues surrounding Neuralink’s research, particularly the use of monkeys in its trials, and the associated risks to animal rights. Reports of animal suffering and deaths, including the case of a monkey known as 'Animal 15', underscore the need for greater transparency in animal experimentation and stricter ethical oversight. The paper discusses the balance between scientific innovation and the moral responsibility to minimize harm to animal subjects, advocating for improved transparency, humane treatment, and regulatory frameworks in the development of neurotechnologies. Ultimately, it calls for a responsible approach to ensure that the potential benefits of BCI technology are not achieved at the cost of animal welfare or human dignity.

Chimeras and "Human Dignity"