UDC [342.721:616.9(100)]:340.12

V. S. BLIKHAR^1*, I. M. ZHAROVSKA^2*

^1*Lviv State University of Internal Affairs (Lviv, Ukraine),
e-mail blikharv@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0001-7545-9009
^2*Lviv Polytechnic National University (Lviv, Ukraine),
e-mail irazhar@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0003-3821-8120

ANTHROPOLOGICAL SPHERE OF HUMAN

EXISTENCE: RESTRICTIONS ON HUMAN

RIGHTS DURING PANDEMIC THREATS

Purpose. The article is aimed to study the anthropological, socio-philosophical and philosophical-legal dimensions of the ontological sphere of human life within the discourse of restricting human rights during pandemic threats. To do this, one should solve a number of tasks, among which are the following: 1) to explore the anthropological and praxeological understanding of fear as a primary component of human existence in a pandemic, which prevents people from changing their lives for the better and healthier, having fun and happiness; 2) to put a focus on the habituation of fear as a two-dimensional (short-term and long-term) adaptation to risks and threats from pandemics; 3) to reflect the anthropological features of changes in human life experience under the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic in the discourse of human rights and public health measures. Theoretical basis. Today, international guiding principles on human rights response to global natural threats have been updated. However, there are still no specific legal recommendations (both at the international and national levels) concerning measures on human rights protection during outbreaks of various infectious diseases. However, the influence of unexpected global challenges (especially COVID-19 and not just that) causes a change in the anthropological component of society and the state, so it requires immediate comprehensive research. Originality. It was substantiated a systematic approach to the implementation of modern healthcare policy towards the recognition of human life as the highest value, increasing the level of psychological preparedness for pandemic challenges and approximation of statutory provisions of human rights protection to modern challenges and threats to the health of the individual, society and state. The study of anthropological, socio-philosophical and philosophical-legal dimensions of human existence in the discourse of pandemic threats made it possible to reveal the profound influence of fear on human life, social justice and, consequently, identify the moral and legal dependence of the development level of society and the state on the level of axiological and anthropological concept of human dignity. Conclusions. Based on the study of statistical reports, international analysis and the use of personal authorial methods, the following can be stated: the methods of combating the modern pandemic have directly affected everyone on national and international level. Their influence is significant because it changes the rules of coexistence and life of people in all spheres. However, the influence on the consciousness and other intentions of the individual has mostly temporally insignificant limits.

Keywords: fear; death; pandemic; COVID-19; anthropological sphere; human existence; human rights; civil society; state; philosophy of law

Introduction

The essence of man is manifested in subjective intentions. Their formation is influenced by both anthropological and external factors that cause challenges for the anthropological sphere of human existence. One of the most striking and massive challenges of our time is the COVID-19 pandemic. A pandemic is the spread of a new disease worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines COVID-19 as an infectious disease caused by the last of the discovered viruses of the coronavirus family SARS-CoV-2, since before the outbreak of infection in Wuhan (China) back in December 2019 nobody knew about a new virus and the disease it causes. However, in general, the Covid-19 pandemic is not the world’s first threat to public or even world health. Throughout human history, diseases have killed more people than natural disasters, earthquakes, volcanoes, or even wars combined. Infectious diseases in historical content have caused and continue to cause chaos in society and the world at large. Today, existing infectious diseases are occurring at an unprecedented rate, as according to the WHO (2020a) the world has seen several outbreaks of diseases and epidemics caused by more than 20 infectious agents over the past decade.

In 2011, the World Health Organization (2011) warned, "the world is ill-prepared for a severe pandemic or for any similarly global, sustained and threatening public health emergency". However, we have to acknowledge that under the existing circumstances improvement in the public health system has not yet taken place. Despite the systemic nature of global threats in historical terms, the COVID-19 pandemic has become a challenge that the modern generation and the individual face for the first time. Current health systems are vulnerable to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The social (collective) and existential spheres of human existence did not have a proper preventive mechanism as well. Thus, it can be stated that the COVID-19 pandemic is the defining global health crisis of our time and the greatest problem facing humanity since World War II. That is why this social challenge transformed all spheres of human life in 2020.

The methodological basis was a set of philosophical, general and special scientific methods of various scientific fields, including jurisprudence, political science, sociology, psychology and others. The main methods are the method of free associations, which was used to establish the influence of individual experience on the stereotypical perception of human fears and questionnaire method. According to the developed author’s questionnaires, 180 citizens of Ukraine were interviewed in order to find out the public’s attitude to the measures taken by the authorities to counter the COVID-19 pandemic. Some materials were used from the authors’ previous methodological tools, including a survey on fear of death conducted in September 2018 and 2019 before the pandemic; they became the starting point for a comparative analysis of their change in the face of a global threat.

In the context of studying the negative effects of misinformation, confusion and public fears, as well as the government’s misconduct as a factor causing intolerance and discrimination, some researchers, including Alicia Ely Yamin and Roojin Habibi (2020), Jonathan Cohen (2020), Leonard Rubenstein and Matthew DeCamp (2020), and others emphasized the need for the state to respect and ensure human rights during pandemic threats. For example, Sebastian F. Winter and Stefan F. Winter (2020) in their study propose to focus exclusively on the concept of human dignity in overcoming the threats and challenges of a pandemic (p. 210). Audrey Lebret (2020, p. 1) notes that, in general, under international human rights law, states may restrict the realization of most human rights if necessary to protect the rights of others or collective interests. Instead, the exceptional circumstances caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic lead to greater human rights restrictions, both in scope and in duration, than usual.

Despite the fact that there is already a lot of scientific research on the scientific problem declared in the article, there are still gaps in the study of the anthropological sphere of human life during pandemic threats, as one has not studied the influence of existential factors on the transformed reality, has not focused on the types and levels of fears of people, and has not analyzed the aspects of human rights restrictions. This is what determined the originality and relevance of the proposed article.

Purpose

The article is aimed to study the anthropological, socio-philosophical and philosophical-legal dimensions of the ontological sphere of human life within the discourse of restricting human rights during pandemic threats. To do this, one should solve a number of tasks, among which are the following: 1) to explore the anthropological and praxeological understanding of fear as a primary component of human existence in a pandemic, which prevents people from changing their lives for the better and healthier, having fun and happiness; 2) to put a focus on the habituation of fear as a two-dimensional (short-term and long-term) adaptation to risks and threats from pandemics; 3) to reflect the anthropological features of changes in human life experience under the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic in the discourse of human rights and public health measures.

Statement of basic materials

The foundations of international human rights law oblige states to adhere to a two-dimensional attitude: first, to respect and protect human rights, and second, to ensure them. However, the texts of the European Court of Human Rights state that part of the principles of the Convention should guarantee rights that are not theoretical or illusory, but, on the contrary, practical and effective rights. Undoubtedly, human rights are basic and universal in their ontological and anthropological content, because in their praxeological projection they form basic social values and are an anthropological component of determining human dignity. The current global emergency challenges associated with COVID-19 have exacerbated groups of people who are socially vulnerable to this type of threats, and this applies to not only journalists, academic staff, teachers, health workers, etc. Moreover, the threatening situation with the pandemic of the XXI century not only testified to the scale of human rights violations, but also exacerbated the existing economic, moral, religious and social inequality in society, which affected people’s psychological unpreparedness for infectious pandemics of this kind and led to panic fears. And in this state a person is not able to develop.

Fear as a primary component of human existence in a pandemic

Fear is an important component of human existence. It affects a man, his behavior, internal determinants, consciousness and worldview. Fear acts as the antipode of the established attributes of human activity. Its role has a dual manifestation: as a destructive anthropological component, as it has an indefinite, illogical, even mythological nature, but on the other hand, is a manifestation of the existential measure, which protects a man from the turbulence of life, may be the representation of signs of wisdom, deliberateness and experience of man. According to M. Movchan’s (2018) successful definition, fear is rather a state of uncertainty in the reliability of one’s own life positions, caused by a fictional or real threat to human life and well-being, as if guaranteeing, for a short period of time, "protection" of an individual (p. 219).

Using the method of personal conversation, we managed to distinguish the species classification of fear caused by COVID-19, namely fear of negative human experiences, fear of infecting others, fear of declining living standards, fear of uncertainty, fear of disease and fear of death. Note that the main fears are the last three. Fear of death, according to the author’s questionnaire, is almost twice as high (85 %) than other types of fears (in particular, fear of uncertainty – 47 %; fear of disease – 54 %), caused by the threat of a modern pandemic.

We explain this primarily by two factors: first, the existential desire for immortality, which in connection with the inevitability of death, the public consciousness explains through the religious norms of soul immortality or through the continuation of genetics in future generations; secondly, the lack of absolute experience compared to other types of fear that a person has already experienced directly or indirectly in relation to other existential values, things and events. Death contains the meta-anthropological mystery of existence, so it is impossible to justify anthropological life, because not only personal but also mental life experience is absent, given that many people tend to get horrible realities out of their heads, rather than trying to solve them. "This is especially true when it comes to a terrible event from which no one can escape – death" (author’s transl.) (Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 2015). This fear, as Simon Critchley (2020) aptly describes this state, is at the primary level of the organization of all living things: "The thought of dying alone with a respiratory sickness is horrifying. The social structures, habits and ways of life we took for granted are dissolving. Other people are possible sources of contagion, and so are we. We advance masked and keep our distance".

Thanatic anxiety is inherent in all people; it is their inner intention that reaches the primary layers of human consciousness. However, this fear is actualized as a personally significant phenomenon in a direct casual situation or under indirect social influence. According to the results of the author’s survey, it is possible to indicate the following trend of intensity of fear of death. Older people have practical stability in fear of death, and the pandemic has exacerbated it at an insignificant level. Instead, the group of people aged 30 to 50, which we tentatively called the average, show a significant oscillation amplitude in time and space retrospect, where fear increased in June 2019 by 1.5 points from the maximum – 5, but in September 2020 reached almost primary indicators. In the younger group (20 – 29 years), the amplitude increased slightly and is practically at the pre-Covid level of stereotyping. This necessitates the analysis of such a phenomenon as habituation to fear.

Habitation of fear

Adaptation (habituation) to fear is inherent in all species and groups, under any stimuli (in our case, the stimulus is a pandemic fear), which includes a gradual decrease in the response as a result of ongoing or repeated stimulation under normal conditions. Previous stimuli, namely, information about the course and spread of the disease, collective behavior and governmental means of influencing the behavior of society, are not personally acceptable with the continuation of temporal factors. A man understands that he is forced to continue living in a pandemic, and therefore accepts the social challenge and adapts it in his own mind.

Habituation is also caused by the development of knowledge in the field of biology and medicine. To better understand the virus, the WHO has coordinated research protocols used in more than 40 countries ("5 Reasons", 2020). Expanding knowledge about the virus, its nature, mode of transmission, regularity of medical services, availability of regulatory medical treatment protocols, extensive analysis of the course (according to official world data, most people infected with COVID-19 experience mild or moderate symptoms and are able to recover with maintenance therapy) – all this creates a habituation of pandemic fear.

Adaptation of the pandemic today cannot be sensory-adaptive, as there are no actual means of avoiding infection. However, pandemic fears as the center of personality behavior lose the sharpness of experience; the value-semantic core is gradually transformed by other conceptual programs. Most people distance themselves from the problem. It is also our human ontological substance. As William Breitbart rightly points out, death anxiety breaks through when our efforts to adapt to, minimize or deny death fail us, particularly at moments of loss, the death of those close to us, or when we are confronted with the limitations of life such as when we are diagnosed with a life threatening illness like cancer. Death is the ultimate limitation (Breitbart, 2017, p. 509). As a result, fear is transformed into avoidance and denial as a common form of psychological protection. In this way, the feeling of faith in one’s own inviolability, uniqueness, invulnerability or belief in one’s own destiny, meta-anthropological existence, protection of higher powers, etc. is activated.

Features of changes in life experience caused by COVID-19: human rights VS measures
to protect public health

Life experience has a variable-evolutionary characteristic, as it is transformed under the influence of intra-personal and external factors. Regarding the life experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, it can be stated that the key role was played by public authorities, which in accordance with international standards and norms implemented recommendations to combat the threat to public health. According to foreign researchers, despite the unknown threats of this virus, "we need to rely on classical public health measures to curb the epidemic of this respiratory disease" (Wilder-Smith & Freedman, 2020, p. 1). According to WHO (2020e) regulations, "case identification, isolation, testing and care, contact tracing and quarantine are important elements of a comprehensive strategy for anti-epidemic measures and localization of infection foci".

According to these national regulations for the quarantine period it is prohibited to be without appropriate protective means in public transport, buildings and structures, places of mass gathering; to be on the streets without identity documents; to leave self-isolation places arbitrarily; to travel in a group of more than two persons, except for the cases of business need and accompaniment of children; to visit parks, squares, recreation areas, parklands and coastal areas; to visit educational institutions; to hold mass events; to work for eating establishments; to carry out regular and irregular transportation of passengers, etc. Thus, almost all areas of social communication were subject to restrictions.

Let us focus on the basic human rights, which are recognized as a necessary element of the functioning of civilized peoples and which have been violated as a result of measures to counter the spread of the pandemic. The restriction of rights covered almost all functions of human life. In this scientific work, we will consider the main ones.

Restrictions on political and public life. Such measures included restrictions on the right to peaceful assembly, mass events, in accordance with Art. 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In the context of this pandemic, measures are considered mass, if accompanied by large crowds of people at the venue within a certain time, which may contribute to a more intense spread of COVID-19, as well as create an additional burden on the health care system. The outbreak found to date has been seen mainly in clusters of patients infected through close contact, in the family, or at individual events, characterized by crowd. Therefore, the restriction of this right is motivated and situationally justified.

Peaceful gatherings and other events can be cultural, religious, recreational, sports, political in nature. The restriction of the latter among them directly relates to the political sphere of community life, as it makes it impossible to carry out democratic forms of manifestation of human thought. Political activity is not only a political human right, but also a means of fighting for one’s own identity, personal values and reflects the freedom of thought of the individual. This restriction provides a wide opportunity for public authorities to prevent oppositional social movements, in a broad sense – to usurp state power, which destroys not only the foundations of a democratic state, but also the primary human right to self-expression, free and comprehensive development of personality (Delaneuville, 2020).

The implementation of various forms of democracy is also challenged. One of them, in fact the most vulnerable, is the holding of elections. The main purpose of the election process is to ensure reliable election results. Confidence is achieved through a technically well-conducted electoral process, broad participation and results that give legitimacy to the elected officials. However, depending on the extent of the disruption caused by COVID-19, the organization of elections can be very difficult or even impossible.

There is a threat to public health at all stages of the election process. Society is looking for the optimal alternative. In particular, the use of technical means of distancing is the optimal means of ensuring the right to vote. At some stages of the election process, they are life-saving. We consider positive the practice of Iceland, which recognized the possibility of electronic registration of the recommended list of referrals for the presidential election by applying to the National Register of Iceland (Dómsmálaráðuneytið, 2020). However, in general, suffrage has been violated in many states. From February to April 2020, elections and referendums were postponed in more than seventy countries (International IDEA, 2020), including Brazil, South Africa, Sri Lanka and the United Kingdom, Austria, Serbia, Romania and Chile. Global Overview of COVID-19 Impact on Elections shows that in Europe alone, 25 countries have postponed different types of elections.

Restrictions on religious life. Practical considerations and recommendations for religious leaders and denominations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, issued by WHO (2020d) on April 7, 2020, call for conducting ceremonies and rituals as needed and possible remotely/virtually instead of large-scale events; to hold cult, educational or public events with the personal presence of the participants, subject to a comprehensive risk assessment, as well as compliance with the requirements of the central and local health authorities (Kollár, 2020, p. 252). Such restrictions are explained by the nature of religious traditions, which provide for close contact of citizens: joint stay in temples, joint meals, and other similar actions. American scientists have presented a study in which using the example of religious practices in Arkansas found the potential for high rates of SARS-CoV-2 spread, ranging from 38 % to 78 % (James et al., 2020).

In 2020, Ramadan fell upon the period from the end of April to the end of May, i.e. the celebration took place in the context of the continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interim recommendations issued by the WHO (2020c) included physical distancing, closure of mosques, control of mass events, and other restrictions on travels. This greatly influenced holding of secular and religious events, which play an important role in this religious holiday. These restrictions also applied to Christians, as one of the brightest Christian holidays, The Resurrection of Christ, also fell upon the first wave of the virus spread. Religious gatherings were recognized as the main place of spread of the virus, and this led to a conflicting relationship between believers and secular authorities.

Judicial practice demonstrates the possibility of violation of human rights to freedom of religion. For example, representatives of the Kansas Baptist community challenged the Executive Order of Local Governor L. Kelly, which banned all mass gatherings of ten or more people in confined or enclosed spaces at the same time, including in churches, and other religious services, while providing exceptions for 26 types of social events. The court ordered to change the rules that allowed church communities to gather for personal worship, subject to a 6-foot distance (In the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, 2020). In the state of Tennessee, the rules were also changed only after the appeal to allow members of the religious community to gather in their own cars in the church parking lot (United States District Court Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 2020).

Restrictions on social life. The pandemic has stopped social communication in real life, practically implementing it in the online sphere, as modernized technologies help people in times of social backwardness. The governments of most countries have taken unprecedented measures due to the normative rule of "staying at home", i.e. self-isolation (except for Belarus, Sweden and Japan). In some places, the WHO and some countries (China) use the term "blocking" (Stawicki et al., 2020).

Such a measure deprives the right to be outside the place of stay (residence), except for personal needs, such as buying food and medicine, urgent needs, work, in some countries – sports. Self-isolation causes the inability to see loved ones, loss of rights,

Loss of usual routine, and reduced social and physical contact with others were frequently shown to cause boredom, frustration, and a sense of isolation from the rest of the world, which was distressing to participants. This frustration was exacerbated by not being able to take part in usual day-to-day activities, such as shopping for basic necessities, etc. (Brooks et al., 2020, p. 916)

Such a tool involves convergence with the activity form of human activity, i.e. his ability to be the cause of changes in life. The problem here is the reasonableness of the measures taken by the state and their compliance with real threats. Forced self-isolation should be distinguished from such a measure as quarantine. Quarantine, in essence, involves the isolation or restriction of mobility of people who came from other countries or suffered from this infectious disease. In this scenario, infected with COVID-19 are isolated from uninfected individuals, and this isolation usually occurs in a hospital. Using quarantine, we can prevent the disease from spreading from person to person to break the transmission chain. Researchers point to the benefits of quarantine: the isolation of individuals in the group of reported cases will avoid a significant number of uncontrollable diseases and deaths (Wilder-Smith & Freedman, 2020).

Restrictions on educational life. The right to education is a constitutional human right. The pandemic posed a real threat to the realization of this right by both school age and older people, as all educational institutions at different levels received severe quarantine restrictions on the actual educational process. The most important measures for preparation, readiness and response in connection with COVID-19 (interim recommendations) provide that decisions on closure, partial closure or reopening of educational institutions should be made based on the risk assessment and taking into account the need to continue the educational process and the health interests of students, teachers, staff and the local population and should help prevent a new outbreak of COVID-19 at the local level (WHO, 2020b).

Fernando M. Reimers and Andreas Schleicher published the Framework to Guide and Education Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic of 2020, stating that social distancing has also affected education at all levels and will continue to do so for a long time, given the impossibility of in-house communication between students and teachers within the educational institutions of the appropriate level of education. Therefore, such restrictive measures are likely to have a negative influence on the possibility of learning within social distancing. For example, studies of learning losses in the United States have shown that during the summer holidays, students lose at least one month of the school year, and the loss of skills and theoretical knowledge in mathematics is greater than the loss of the humanities. In addition, there are greater losses among students from low-income families (Reimers & Schleicher, 2020).

Originality

The article substantiates systematic approach to the implementation of modern health policy towards the recognition of human life as the highest value, increasing the level of psychological preparedness for pandemic challenges and approximation of legal provisions of human rights protection to modern challenges and threats to the health of the individual, society and states. The study of anthropological, socio-philosophical and philosophical-legal dimensions of human existence in the discourse of pandemic threats revealed the profound influence of fear on human life, social justice and, consequently, determined the moral and legal dependence of society and the state on the level of axiological-anthropological concept of human dignity.

Conclusions

Throughout the history of its development, humanity has developed a number of norms that are useful and acceptable in a given situation and that are appropriate to apply for the preservation of human civilization. In view of this, it is necessary to rely on generally accepted health measures to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. The main purpose of such measures is to prevent the spread of the disease from person to person by separating people to break the chain of infection. Isolation and quarantine, social distance and community containment are the tools that have proven its efficiency.

In general, the problem of social dissonance is not that states take measures to preserve public health, but the reasonableness and proportionality of their application in each case. However, if in the aspect of national legal reality the problem can be solved, then in the philosophical aspect the dispute passes to the dialectical category of absolute and relative, so it is difficult to find absolute truth here.

Based on the study of statistical reports, international analysis and the use of personal authoring methods, a number of conclusions can be drawn. The ways to combat the pandemic have directly affected everyone living on planet Earth. The influence of these methods is significant because it changes the rules of coexistence and life of people in all areas. However, the influence on consciousness and other intentions of the individual has a temporally insignificant limit. According to authoritative international experts,

Under normal circumstances, there is no reason to expect that personality would change over such a short period of time. Given the extraordinary nature of the coronavirus pandemic, and the drastic measures that have been taken to control its spread, however, personality may be reactive to these rapidly changing events. (Sutin et al, 2020)

In general, the emergence of psychological resilience and adaptability to this global challenge can be observed. The level of pandemic fears among respondents compared to April 2020 decreased by 31 %. Thus, society is able to change, man is endowed with the ability to overcome the dogmatism of views and transform consciousness and experience, but such a change is not significant and usually returns to the previous "coordinate point", sometimes slightly modernizing social reality.

References

Breitbart, W. (2017). Existential guilt and the fear of death. Palliative and Supportive Care, 15(5), 509-512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951517000797 (in English)

Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet, 395(10227), 912-920. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30460-8 (in English)

Cohen, J. (2020). Paradigm Under Threat: Health and Human Rights Today. Health and Human Rights Journal. Retrieved from https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/09/paradigm-under-threat-health-and-human-rights-today (in English)

Critchley, S. (2020). To Philosophize Is to Learn How to Die. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/opinion/covid-philosophy-anxiety-death.html (in English)

Delaneuville, F. (2020). Reconciling the Acquisition of Professional Skills and the Development of Critical Thinking through a Transdisciplinary and Cross-Disciplinary Approach to Teaching: The Strategy of the Slovak-French University Institute. Politické vedy, 23(2), 263-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/%0Bpolitickevedy.2020.23.2.263-269 (in English)

Dómsmálaráðuneytið. (2020). Rafræn skráning meðmælenda fyrir forsetakosningar opnuð. Retrieved from https://www.stjornarradid.is/efst-a-baugi/frettir/stok-frett/2020/04/17/Rafraen-skraning-medmaelenda-fyrir-forsetakosningar-opnud (in Icelandic)

In the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. (2020). Plaintiffs’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice. Retrieved from https://www.adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2020-05/First%20Baptist%20Church%20v.%20Kelly%20-%20Notice%20of%20voluntary%20dismissal.pdf (in English)

International IDEA. (2020). Panorama global del impacto del COVID-19 en las elecciones. Retrieved from https://www.idea.int/es/news-media/multimedia-reports/panorama-global-del-impacto-del-covid-19-en-las-elecciones (in English)

James, A., Eagle, L., Phillips, C., Hedges, D. S., Bodenhamer, C., Brown, R. … Kirking, H. (2020). High COVID-19 Attack Rate Among Attendees at Events at a Church – Arkansas, March 2020. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(20), 632-635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6920e2 (in English)

Kollár, D. (2020). Medzinárodná vedecká konferencia: "Bezpečnostné fórum 2020". Politické Vedy, 23(1), 252-255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/politickevedy.2020.23.1.252-255 (in Polish)

Lebret, A. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and derogation to human rights. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 7(1), 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa015 (in English)

Movchan, M. N. (2018). The problem of fear and fear of death in the Indian philosophy of the twentieth century and in the religious and philosophical teachings of Buddhism. Hileya, 129, 218-222. (in Ukrainian)

Reimers, F. M., & Schleicher, A. (2020). Ramkovi nastanovy shchodo vidpovidi osvity na pandemiiu COVID-19 2020 roku. Herald of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://visnyk.naps.gov.ua/index.php/journal/publications/4 (in Ukrainian)

Rubenstein, L., & DeCamp, M. (2020). Revisiting Restrictions of Rights After COVID-19. Health and Human Rights Journal. Retrieved from https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/06/revisiting-restrictions-of-rights-after-covid-19 (in English)

Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & Pyszczynski, T. (2015). The Worm at the Core: On the Role of Death in Life. Random House. (in English)

Stawicki, S., Jeanmonod, R., Miller, A., Paladino, L., Gaieski, D., Yaffee, A. … Garg, M. (2020). The 2019-2020 novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic: A joint american college of academic international medicine-world academic council of emergency medicine multidisciplinary COVID-19 working group consensus paper. Journal of Global Infectious Diseases, 12(2), 47-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jgid.jgid_86_20 (in English)

Sutin, A. R., Luchetti, M., Aschwanden, D., Lee, J. H., Sesker, A. A., Strickhouser, J. E. … Terracciano, A. (2020). Change in five-factor model personality traits during the acute phase of the coronavirus pandemic. PLOS ONE, 15(8). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237056 (in English)

United States District Court Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga. (2020). Plaintiffs’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice. Retrieved from https://www.adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/Metropolitan%20Tabernacle%20Church%20v.%20City%20of%20Chattanooga%20-%20Notice%20of%20voluntary%20dismissal.pdf (in English)

Wilder-Smith, A., & Freedman, D. O. (2020). Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. Journal of Travel Medicine, 27(2), 1-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taaa020 (in English)

Winter, Sebastian F., & Winter, Stefan F. (2018). Human Dignity as Leading Principle in Public Health Ethics: A Multi-Case Analysis of 21st Century German Health Policy Decisions. International Journal of Health Policy and Management, 7(3), 210-224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15171/IJHPM.2017.67 (in English)

World Health Organization. (2011). Implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005). Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA64/A64_10-en.pdf?ua=1 (in English)

World Health Organization. (2020a). Disease outbreaks by year. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/csr/don/archive/year/en/ (in English)

World Health Organization. (2020b). Critical preparedness, readiness and response actions for COVID-19: Interim Guidance. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications-detail/critical-preparedness-readiness-and-response-actions-for-covid-19 (in English)

World Health Organization. (2020c). Obespechenie bezopasnosti pri provedenii mesyatsa Ramadan v usloviyakh rasprostraneniya koronavirusnoy infektsii COVID-19: Vremennye rekomendatsii: 2020, April 15. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331767/WHO-2019-nCoV-Ramadan-2020.1-rus.pdf (in Russian)

World Health Organization. (2020d). Prakticheskie soobrazheniya i rekomendatsii dlya religioznykh liderov i konfessionalnykh obshchin v kontekste COVID-19: Vremennye rekomendatsii: 2020, April 7. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331707/WHO-2019-nCoV-Religious_Leaders-2020.1-rus.pdf?ua=1 (in Russian)

World Health Organization. (2020e). Vazhneyshie mery po podgotovke, obespecheniyu gotovnosti i reagirovaniyu v svyazi s COVID-19: Vremennye rekomendatsii: 2020, March 22. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331826/WHO-2019-nCoV-Community_actions-2020.3-rus.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (in Russian)

Yamin, A. E., & Habibi, R. (2020). Human Rights and Coronavirus: What’s at Stake for Truth, Trust, and Democracy? Health and Human Rights Journal. Retrieved from https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/03/human-rights-and-coronavirus-whats-at-stake-for-truth-trust-and-democracy (in English)

5 Reasons the world needs WHO, to fight the COVID-19 pandemic (2020). UN News. Retrieved from https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1061412 (in English)

LIST OF REFERENCE LINKS

Breitbart W. Existential guilt and the fear of death. Palliative and Supportive Care. 2017. Vol. 15. Iss. 5. P. 509–512. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951517000797

Brooks S. K., Webster R. K., Smith L. E., Woodland L., Wessely S., Greenberg N., Rubin G. J. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet. 2020. Vol. 395. Iss. 10227. Р. 912–920. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30460-8

Cohen J. Paradigm Under Threat: Health and Human Rights Today. Health and Human Rights Journal. 2020. URL: https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/09/paradigm-under-threat-health-and-human-rights-today

Critchley S. To Philosophize Is to Learn How to Die. The New York Times. 2020. URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/opinion/covid-philosophy-anxiety-death.html

Delaneuville F. Reconciling the Acquisition of Professional Skills and the Development of Critical Thinking through a Transdisciplinary and Cross-Disciplinary Approach to Teaching: The Strategy of the Slovak-French University Institute. Politické vedy. 2020. Vol. 23. No. 2. P. 263–269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/politickevedy.2020.23.2.263-269

Rafræn skráning meðmælenda fyrir forsetakosningar opnuð / Dómsmálaráðuneytið. 2020. URL: https://www.stjornarradid.is/efst-a-baugi/frettir/stok-frett/2020/04/17/Rafraen-skraning-medmaelenda-fyrir-forsetakosningar-opnud

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice / In the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. 2020. 3 p. URL: https://www.adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2020-05/First%20Baptist%
20Church%20v.%20Kelly%20-%20Notice%20of%20voluntary%20dismissal.pdf

Panorama global del impacto del COVID-19 en las elecciones / International IDEA. 2020. URL: https://www.idea.int/es/news-media/multimedia-reports/panorama-global-del-impacto-del-covid-19-en-las-elecciones

James A., Eagle L., Phillips C., Hedges D. S., Bodenhamer C., Brown R., Wheeler J. G., Kirking H. High COVID-19 Attack Rate Among Attendees at Events at a Church – Arkansas, March 2020. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2020. Vol. 69. Iss. 20. P. 632–635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6920e2

Kollár D. Medzinárodná vedecká konferencia: "Bezpečnostné fórum 2020". Politické Vedy. 2020. Vol. 23. No. 1. P. 252-255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24040/politickevedy.2020.23.1.252-255

Lebret A. COVID-19 pandemic and derogation to human rights. Journal of Law and the Biosciences. 2020. Vol. 7. Iss. 1. P. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa015

Мовчан М. М. Проблема страху і страху смерті в індійській філософії XX століття та в релігійно-філософському вченні буддизму. Гілея. 2018. Вип. 129. С. 218–222.

Реймерз Ф. M., Шляйхер А. Рамкові настанови щодо відповіді освіти на пандемію COVID-19 2020 року. Вісник Національної академії педагогічних наук України. 2020. URL: https://visnyk.naps.gov.ua/index.php/journal/publications/4

Rubenstein L., DeCamp M. Revisiting Restrictions of Rights After COVID-19. Health and Human Rights Journal. 2020. URL: https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/06/revisiting-restrictions-of-rights-after-covid-19

Solomon S., Greenberg J., Pyszczynski T. The Worm at the Core: On the Role of Death in Life. Random House, 2015. 274 р.

Stawicki S., Jeanmonod R., Miller A., Paladino L., Gaieski D., Yaffee A., … Garg M. The 2019–2020 novel coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic: A joint american college of academic international medicine-world academic council of emergency medicine multidisciplinary COVID-19 working group consensus paper. Journal of Global Infectious Diseases. 2020. Vol. 12. Iss. 2. P. 47–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jgid.jgid_86_20

Sutin A. R., Luchetti M., Aschwanden D., Lee J. H., Sesker A. A., Strickhouser J. E., Stephan Y., Terracciano A. Change in five-factor model personality traits during the acute phase of the coronavirus pandemic. PLOS ONE. 2020. Vol. 15. Iss. 8. 13 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237056

Plaintiffs’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice / United States District Court Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga. 2020. 2 p. URL: https://www.adflegal.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/Metropolitan%20Tabernacle%20Church%20v.%20City%20of%20Chattanooga%20-%20Notice%20of%
20voluntary%20dismissal.pdf

Wilder-Smith A., Freedman D. O. Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. Journal of Travel Medicine. 2020. Vol. 27. Iss. 2. P. 1–4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jtm/taaa020

Winter Sebastian F., Winter Stefan F. Human Dignity as Leading Principle in Public Health Ethics: A Multi-Case Analysis of 21st Century German Health Policy Decisions. International Journal of Health Policy and Management. 2018. Vol. 7. Iss. 3. P. 210–224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15171/IJHPM.2017.67

Implementation of the International Health Regulations (2005) / World Health Organization. 2011. URL: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA64/A64_10-en.pdf?ua=1

Disease outbreaks by year / World Health Organization. 2020. URL: https://www.who.int/csr/don/archive/year/en/

Critical preparedness, readiness and response actions for COVID-19 : Interim Guidance / World Health Organization. 2020. URL: https://www.who.int/publications-detail/critical-preparedness-readiness-and-response-actions-for-covid-19

Обеспечение безопасности при проведении месяца Рамадан в условиях распространения коронавирусной инфекции COVID-19 : временные рекомендации : 15 апреля 2020 г. / Всемирная организация здравоохранения. 2020. 3 с. URL: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331767/WHO-2019-nCoV-Ramadan-2020.1-rus.pdf

Практические соображения и рекомендации для религиозных лидеров и конфессиональных общин в контексте COVID-19 : временные рекомендации : 7 апреля 2020 г. / Всемирная организация здравоохранения. 2020. 7 с. URL: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331707/WHO-2019-nCoV-Religious_Leaders-2020.1-rus.pdf?ua=1

Важнейшие меры по подготовке, обеспечению готовности и реагированию в связи с COVID-19 : временные рекомендации : 22 марта 2020 г. / Всемирная организация здравоохранения. 2020. 7 с. URL: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331826/WHO-2019-nCoV-Community_actions-2020.3-rus.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Yamin A. E., Habibi R. Human Rights and Coronavirus: What’s at Stake for Truth, Trust, and Democracy? Health and Human Rights Journal. 2020. URL: https://www.hhrjournal.org/2020/03/human-rights-and-coronavirus-whats-at-stake-for-truth-trust-and-democracy

5 Reasons the world needs WHO, to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. UN News. 2020. URL: https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1061412

В. С. БЛІХАР^1*, І. М. ЖАРОВСЬКА^2*

^1*Львівський державний університет внутрішніх справ (Львів, Україна),
ел. пошта blikharv@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0001-7545-9009
^2*Національний університет "Львівська політехніка" (Львів, Україна),
ел. пошта irazhar@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0003-3821-8120

АНТРОПОЛОГІЧНА СФЕРА ЛЮДСЬКОГО

БУТТЯ: ОБМЕЖЕННЯ ПРАВ ЛЮДИНИ

ПІД ЧАС ПАНДЕМІЧНИХ ЗАГРОЗ

Мета статті полягає у дослідженні антропологічного, соціально-філософського та філософсько-правового вимірів онтологічної сфери людського життя у межах дискурсу обмеження прав людини під час пандемічних загроз. Для цього передбачено розв’язати низку завдань, з-поміж яких необхідно виокремити такі: 1) дослідити антрополого-праксеологічне розуміння страху як первинного компонента людського буття в умовах пандемії, що заважає людині змінювати життя на краще та оздоровлюватися, отримуючи насолоду й щастя; 2) акцентувати на ґабітуації страху як двовимірного (короткотривалого та довготривалого) звикання до ризиків і загроз з боку пандемій; 3) відобразити антропологічні особливості змін життєвого досвіду людини під впливом пандемії COVID-19 в дискурсі прав людини та заходів захисту здоров’я населення. Теоретичний базис. Сьогодні актуалізовано міжнародні керівні принципи, що стосуються правозахисної реакції на глобальні природні загрози. Проте все ще відсутні конкретні правові рекомендації (як на міжнародному, так і на національному рівнях) щодо заходів захисту прав людини під час спалаху різних видів інфекційної хвороби. Усе-таки вплив несподіваних глобальних викликів (передусім COVID-19 і не лише) зумовлює зміну антропологічної складової суспільства та держави, тому потребує негайного комплексного наукового дослідження. Наукова новизна. Обґрунтовано систематичний підхід до імплементації сучасної політики охорони здоров’я у бік визнання життя людини найвищою цінністю, підвищення рівня психологічної готовності до пандемічних викликів і наближення нормативно-законодавчих положень захисту прав людини до сучасних викликів та загроз, що стосуються здоров’я окремої особи, суспільства й держави. Дослідження антропологічного, соціально-філософського та філософсько-правового вимірів людського буття у дискурсі загроз пандемій дозволило виявити глибинний вплив страху на життєдіяльність людини, соціальну справедливість і, як наслідок, з’ясувати морально-правову залежність рівня розвитку суспільства та держави від рівня визнання аксіологічно-антропологічної концепції людської гідності. Висновки. На підставі вивчення статистичних звітів, міжнародного аналізу та застосування особистих авторських методів можна стверджувати таке: способи боротьби із сучасною пандемією зачепили безпосередньо кожну людину в національному та міжнародному масштабах. Їхній вплив має суттєвий характер, оскільки змінює правила співжиття і життєдіяльність людей у всіх сферах. Проте вплив на свідомість та інші інтенції особистості має здебільшого темпорально незначні межі.

Ключові слова: страх; смерть; пандемія; COVID-19; антропологічна сфера; людське буття; права людини; громадянське суспільство; держава; філософія права

В. С. БЛИХАР^1*, И. М. ЖАРОВСКАЯ^2*

^1*Львовский государственный университет внутренних дел (Львов, Украина),
эл. почта blikharv@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0001-7545-9009
^2*Национальный университет "Львовская политехника" (Львов, Украина),
эл. почта irazhar@ukr.net, ORCID 0000-0003-3821-8120

АНТРОПОЛОГИЧЕСКАЯ СФЕРА ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОГО

БЫТИЯ: ОГРАНИЧЕНИЕ ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА

ПРИ ПАНДЕМИЧЕСКИХ УГРОЗАХ

Цель статьи заключается в исследовании антропологического, социально-философского и философско-правового измерений онтологической сферы человеческой жизни в рамках дискурса ограничения прав человека во время пандемических угроз. Для этого предлагается решить несколько задач, среди которых необходимо выделить следующие: 1) исследовать антрополого-праксиологическое понимание страха как первичного компонента человеческого бытия в условиях пандемии, что мешает человеку менять жизнь к лучшему и излечиваться, принимать наслаждение и счастье; 2) акцентировать на ґабитуации страха как двумерного (кратковременного и длительного) привыкания к рискам и угрозам со стороны пандемий; 3) отразить антропологические особенности изменений жизненного опыта человека под влиянием пандемии COVID-19 в дискурсе прав человека и мер защиты здоровья населения. Теоретический базис. Сегодня актуализированы международные руководящие принципы, касающиеся правозащитной реакции на глобальные природные угрозы. Однако все еще отсутствуют конкретные правовые рекомендации (как на международном, так и на национальном уровнях) о мерах защиты прав человека во время вспышки различных видов инфекционной болезни. Все-таки влияние неожиданных глобальных вызовов (прежде всего COVID-19 и не только) обусловливает изменение антропологической составляющей общества и государства, поэтому требует немедленного комплексного научного исследования. Научная новизна. Обоснован систематический подход к имплементации современной политики здравоохранения в сторону признания жизни человека высшей ценностью, повышение уровня психологической готовности к пандемическим вызовам и приближения нормативно-законодательных положений защиты прав человека к современным вызовам и угрозам, касающихся здоровья отдельной личности, общества и государства. Исследование антропологического, социально-философского и философско-правового измерений человеческого бытия в дискурсе угроз пандемий позволило выявить глубинное влияние страха на жизнедеятельность человека, социальной справедливости и, как следствие, выяснить морально-правовую зависимость уровня развития общества и государства от уровня признания аксиологическо-антропологической концепции человеческого достоинства. Выводы. На основании изучения статистических отчетов, международного анализа и применения личных авторских методов можно утверждать следующее: способы борьбы с современной пандемией затронули непосредственно каждого человека в национальном и международном масштабах. Их влияние имеет существенный характер, поскольку меняет правила общежития и жизнедеятельность людей во всех сферах. Однако влияние на сознание и другие интенции личности имеет преимущественно темпорально незначительные черты.

Ключевые слова: страх; смерть; пандемия; COVID-19; антропологическая сфера; человеческое бытие; права человека; гражданское общество; государство; философия права

Received: 17.06.2020

Accepted: 19.11.2020