Samara Humanitarian Academy

This paper analyzes the 2018 Nuffield Council on Bioethics Report on genetic engineering and human genome editing. The direction of the formation of international legal principles for regulating these relations is presented. There are two fundamental principles presented in the report: welfare when using genetic engineering (and based on the rights and interests of a particular person, society and humanity as a whole) and the use of editing the human genome, which will not lead to exacerbation of inequality and marginalization in society. The author studies the possibilities of genetic engineering at the present stage of the development of science and technology, in particular, somatic editing and editing the germline of the human genome. The need for legal regulation is ascertained. The author presents substantiations for the formation of an international dialogue in the field of information exchange on scientific discoveries in this field, which will allow us to formulate the main direction of legal thought and the mechanisms of legal regulation.

Modern criminal law doctrine as one of the most important principles highlights the differentiation of criminal responsibility for the committed crime. The means of differentiation are quite diverse. These include the legislative distinction of crimes by degree of severity, the establishment of circumstances mitigating or aggravating punishment, grounds for exemption from criminal liability, privileging and qualifying essential elements of an offence, and other means. Unlike other means of differentiation, the assignment to them of qualifying elements of an offence is recognized by most researchers. However, the absence of a legal definition of qualifying elements of an offence, a lack of understanding of their nature at the legislative level by legislator, law enforcers and representatives of the scientific environment leads to errors in the design of legal norms containing qualifying elements and their ambiguous interpretation. In this article, the authors attempt to present the qualifying elements of an offence as a system, to determine its characteristic features and to establish a systematic approach in the use of elements qualifying an offence, with their legislative regulation. This allows to make a number of recommendations to ensure a high level of systematic use of elements qualifying an offence.

This article deals with a narrative on the revolutionary potential of critical thought, typical of left-wing intellectuals, as a kind of intracorporate myth, and presents an outline of the genealogy of the practice of radical (revolutionary) criticism of power. Genealogy is based on three historical episodes related to antiquity, medieval university and the Dreyfus case. The author also shows the problems of a radical way of critical thinking, which could be suspected of ressentiment and tends to become either terroristic or immanent to the system, losing its revolutionary potential.

We describe the construction of extension operators with minimal possible norm τm from the half-line to the entire real line for the spaces \(W_2^m \) and derive the asymptotic estimate \(\tau _m \approx K_0 m\;\;({\text{as }}m \to \infty )\), where $$K_0 : = \tfrac{4}{\pi }\int_0^{x/4} {\ln (\cot x)} \;dx = 1.166243... = \ln 3.209912....$$