THE CATEGORY OF “CONSCIOUSNESS” IN THE REGULATORY LEGAL ACTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: THE PROBLEM OF CONTENT

Abstract

The emergence of a new scientific worldview based on advances in quantum physics and other sciences has led to a reconsideration of the category of “consciousness”, including in law. Legislators have attempted to regulate the emergence of new digital entities solely within the normative legal paradigm, which has proven ineffective. Legislators have failed to utilize the newly opened prospects for regulating digital consciousness through the artificial transformation of human biological essence or the transfer of human consciousness to a quantum carrier, as well as preventing the threat of cyborgization of the population. Moreover, in Russian regulatory legal acts, the category of “consciousness” has been significantly narrowed and is considered exclusively through the prism of information security, the protection of citizens’ rights, and countering prohibited propaganda. Legislators often substitute the category of “consciousness” with the categories of “mental influence” and “mental impact,” which is methodologically unjustified. The study draws on the work of scholars in quantum physics, philosophy, psychology, and legal theory, as well as the author’s research on certain aspects of the scientific worldview and new legal challenges in this regard, as well as on the impact of the digital and quantum environment on legal entities and their legal consciousness. The study utilized general theoretical methods of analysis and synthesis, which enabled a transition from a categorical description of the subject of law - consciousness - to identifying some of its characteristics in regulatory legal acts. The use of scientific data interpretation, coupled with the highly formalized nature of the object under study, allowed for the identification of certain methodological shortcomings in the Russian Federation’s legislative system and the conclusion that Russian legislation concerning consciousness is unsystematic, substantively heterogeneous, and methodologically flawed.