Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

This report deals with the phenomenon of iris scanning for money, which in recent years, led by companies such as Worldcoin, has gained popularity due to the promise of financial gains in exchange for biometric data. We will also discuss the legal framework in different parts of the world, its statistics, current measures and opportunities, trends and challenges

It is an honor to address you through our institutional magazine Perfiles de Ingeniería, a space that allows us to share the achievements of research and the commitment that each one of us has with the Faculty of Engineering, educational quality and publications.

It is a pleasure to welcome you to this edition of the Perfiles de Ingeniería magazine, a publication dedicated to exploring the development of engineering and its impact on today's society, so characterized by the relevance of technology and innovation.

Earth system scientists have shown that the Earth is a complex adaptive system and that some of its natural processes no longer operate in safe and stable conditions to preserve life. However, we still need to explore its implications in the legal arena. Maintaining safe planetary conditions requires better integrating Earth system scientific insights into legal reasoning and argumentation. We could only examine scientific knowledge as an effective alternative within the legal and political spheres in this way. In exploring scientific and legal literature, this article presents a first effort at how legal reasoning and argumentation can embrace an Earth system perspective, using different case studies, legal resolutions, and jurisprudence. In doing so, we expose the need to eradicate misconceptions underlying legal anthropocentrism and adjust the law’s interpretation and application to more scientifically accurate ecological realities.

This paper approaches the notion of sentient beings integrated into the legal system by the Constitutional Court without a clear philosophical or epistemic support. The general objective was: To analyze the ontological panorama of sentient being as a special categorization for animals within the legal regime of things in Colombia, which was developed through a qualitative methodology with hermeneutic emphasis. It is understood that the notion of being, from its different meanings, is not only a theoretical debate since the consolidation of this concept determines a course for legal thinking, which is decisive on recognizing the quality of subjects of rights for non-human animals, given their sentience capacity, since their protection is currently conditioned by human morality, in addition, it derives from considering animals part of the environment and not independent quasi-rational individuals, blocking further regulatory possibilities for their protection. From the analysis, it is concluded that the recognition as sentient beings is a first step in the guarantees for animals, the next one would be passing from the social rule of law to a socioenvironmental rule of law where the environment is recognized as the central axis to define the parameters of human and animal welfare, considering the equality between species and the responsibility of care that human rationality entails.

The legal theory proposals can be understood as a set of different solutions to legal and theoretical problems. While presenting the subject in this way may seem attractive, it is nevertheless not always transparent because it doesn’t precise what must be known to understand its problematic character. Hence, in this paper I analyze the concept of problem through the notion of relational predicate whereby I extract criteria to determine what should be considered a problem and by which standards its solutions should be evaluated. Afterwards, I employ the analysis results to discuss a well-known normative problem showing its analytical usefulness. The aim, indeed, is to contribute to a scarcely developed debate on the concept of problem.

Currently, the subject that has been studying the relationship between law and bioethics is known as biolaw, which tries to offer an answer to the most controversial problems of the ethics of life. This paper discusses some arguments of the Aristotelian-Thomistic natural law to provide elements to the subject matter of such discipline. It shows how legal positivism theory lacks compelling reasoning and, above all, vindicates the idea that dignity of human beings is based on their human nature. This ontological data is the key to understanding biolaw and, in general, the problems of bioethics.

This paper presents a legal-criminal philosophical analyses on the extreme necessity regarding the conjoined twins Jodie and Mary. Thus, to begin with, we will describe the content of the state of necessity in life-threatening situations. Secondly, we will offer a solution which we consider to be adequate to illustrate the axiological debates on the criteria of proportionality between the evil to be avoided and the evil caused. At last, we will look at the presumptions of the case of the conjoined twins as well as some lines of argument that justify or excuse their separation, arguing that there are good reasons to adopt the principle of double effect in these scenarios.  

The aim of this paper is to offer a broad characterization of the kind of account that I believe cannot plausibly face conclusively the problem of the ethics of immigration restrictions in a non-ideal world at the level of the constitutional essentials. I argue that justice-based accounts of immigration controls fail to normatively evaluate what immigration controls do to outsiders subjected to them in non-ideal conditions, so judgments of justice by themselves tend to be overall bad for the interest of immigrants. I explain this by insisting that a prior question about the legitimacy of immigration controls have been overlooked by familiar accounts. A full account of the ethics of immigration suitable for guiding constitutional essentials should be able to connect distinct kinds of justice-based evaluations in order to ask both, what legitimacy requires from territorial institutional control as well as what justice requires from immigration policy.

This paper displays a problem of scientific-legal investigation regarding methods, methodologies, and epistemologies. Therefore, I will analyze feminist epistemologies in contrasts with the hegemonic legal one. First, I describe the development of the epistemologies and methodologies of modernity —specifically traditional positivism— as well as the shift to logical positivism. Secondly, I point out the denunciation that gender studies have made to hegemonic epistemologies and, afterwards, I mention the epistemological and methodological counterproposals that feminism has made since about 1970. Then, I outline the conceptual state of legal positivism and, finally, I conclude by problematizing legal positivism from the epistemic and methodological counterproposals of feminism.