Social and Philosophical Problems of Relations between Society and Biological Science

Authors

  • Tamara S. Sedelnikova Sukachev Institute of Forest, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 50/28, Akademgorodok str., Krasnoyarsk, 660036, Russian Federation.
  • Mikhail V. Sedelnikov Humanitarian Institute, Siberian Federal University, 82a, Svobodny av., Krasnoyarsk, 660041, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2025-8-58-68

Keywords:

ethical and philosophical problems of genetic diagnostics, eugenic concepts, genetics, biotechnology, regulation of genetic engineering

Abstract

The review analyzes the socio-philosophical aspects of the interaction between society and biological science. The tendency of ruling social groups to use
eugenic and vulgar Darwinian theories as the basis for the ideology of superio­rity and methods of political governance is substantiated. The social and humani­tarian consequences of supporting pseudoscientific trends and implementing practical eugenic projects as instruments of pressure on society under the mo­nopolization of state funding for biological science are shown. Ethical, legal and social issues of applying modern achievements in molecular and synthetic bio­logy, genetics and genome editing technologies in a market economy are dis­cussed. The risks of interventions in the human genome, which make possible the neoeugenic direction of its biological evolution, are assessed from the stand­point of the “liberal” and “conservative” approaches. The article examines the areas of commercialization and criminalization in the field of biology and ge­netic technologies that pose a danger to science and society. The advantages and potential threats to humans and nature in connection with the spread of genetic engineering products are characterized.

Published

2025-08-11

Issue

Section

Philosophy and Science

How to Cite

[1]
2025. Social and Philosophical Problems of Relations between Society and Biological Science. Voprosy Filosofii. 8 (Aug. 2025), 58–68. DOI:https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2025-8-58-68.