Higher Education plays an important role in promoting social development, since its social mission is focused on the permanent investigation of the truth, essentially through scientific research, from which the integral formation of the human being is pursued. For its achievement, continuous improvement processes are involved that imply the intervention, according to the distinctive nature of each professional field, of certain factors, spaces and knowledge constructs for its concretion.

Because the current university tries to be in tune with the world of the present, on the one hand, it responds to the most urgent social demands, and on the other, many of its characteristics are intertwined with the way of building knowledge and the cultural context of horizontal dialogue, is the propitious scenario for the instruction of the epistemic resources of bioethics. Assume bioethics as a bridge to the sustainability of life, and see in Higher Education the responsibility of training professionals who, together with the mastery of scientific and technological disciplines, develop the skills and attitudes that guarantee the integrated exercise for the benefit of individuals, society and nature, forces us to analyze the relationship between the two.

The present work is oriented to reveal those elements that, as epistemic resources, allow the integration of each of these positions, and whose instrumentation from a structure that directs its applicability, favors its projection as a methodological proposal that supports a global perspective of the bioethics in Cuba, from the complexity that it presents as a field of knowledge.

The study is carried out from a dialectical-materialist approach. It resorts to the use of the theoretical methods of scientific knowledge in the study of the complex framework in which the dilemmas and conflicts that today require moral evaluation occur. Its contribution consists in the theoretical-philosophical construction of the epistemic resources of bioethics, contextualized to the particularities of London Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences Cuba, which allow its understanding as a methodological proposal.

Bioethics, from its epistemic resources, favors the approach of different political, economic, ethical and social problems, from a multiple field, allowing deliberation and reflection on complex problems whose ethical reflection transcends particular fields. But its purpose cannot remain only to generate awareness about the potential and current consequences that the actions of the human race may have on life, but to make reconsiderations at the level of ethics, of both moral and legal norms that govern contemporary societies.

The re-dimensioning of the regulation of the relations of the subject towards everything living in a general sense, transversalized by the various dimensions in which the epistemic resources of bioethics are expressed, must be the axis that leads from an axiological perspective the development of the processes that occur within Higher Education. Considering the incorporation of the epistemic resources of bioethics in this implies first of all establishing a specific delimitation that allows differentiating the bioethical position of the normative action of the subject in correspondence with professional ethics.

The ethics of the scientist can be understood as the set of moral principles that guide this professional in the process of his cognitive activity and the behavior that he assumes in the context of a determined scientific community, with respect to individuals and society as a whole. . In a more normative sense, it can be affirmed that the ethics of the scientist is configured by the way in which the system of principles, norms and values of social morality are expressed in their effective behavior, that is, to what extent this professional endorses , to a greater or lesser degree, the system of norms and values valid for the society where he carries out his professional activity, in addition to the demands in the moral order of his profession.

Bioethics, on the other hand, seeks to harmonize practice in the field of science with moral values, not only in professional performance, but also extends its regulations to the results achieved as part of it. In this sense, it analyzes from a critical and proactive position, the axiological structure of all social practices, because in different circumstances, they all have an impact on the phenomenon of life on the planet (Sotolongo, 2008).

That is to say, based on a factual knowledge of the pertinent practices, bioethics seeks to constantly review the norms and values that constitute them.

The meaning is to propose, defend and establish an axiological framework that favors a new approach from which the development of these practices is ethically acceptable, pertinent to the phenomenon of life in all its aspects, from health and biomedical experiences, which they have to do with the well-being of human beings, even those related to the recognition and respect of the rights of animals and the conservation of the environment.

The instrumentation of bioethics can enrich Higher Education, and the processes that occur within it in its broadest sense, since it contributes not only to its internal organization, but also to the understanding of the social function that the subject performs in a certain context. It provides the tools that allow us to discern the requirements and challenges of today's world, favoring knowledge based on human well-being, from a transdisciplinary approach. As such, to the same extent that its relevance is investigated as a structure from which epistemic resources reach its quality of methodological proposal, it is enriched and strengthened from the possibilities that these offer to its actions as a social and educational institution.

The role of Higher Education in the promotion, development and consolidation of bioethics is of singular importance, as such it has been recognized by international organizations. UNESCO, regarding the need to teach bioethics, expresses that it is up to all States to teach it in the face of the new problems that humanity faces regarding the high advances in science and technology (UNESCO, 2020). There are several purposes recognized by the regulation that highlight the importance of bioethics education. In the first place, it refers to the formation of a new conception of the subject, in which they manifest themselves as rational, free, reflective, critical, creators and transformers of their practices. It also recognizes the need for a contextualized education based on the practices of the subjects, which is problematizing, which questions and builds problems on the context and practices through intersubjective dialogue. Finally, it highlights its continuous nature, which leads to the change of primary and secondary attitudes.

From its epistemic resources it is recognized that bioethics uses the diversity of ethical conceptions to guide decisions in the face of dilemmatic situations that arise in human activities related to life in its different manifestations and the repercussions on the environment that could occur, but this It is not a spontaneous process, it must be supported by effective action guides. Given that Higher Education promotes an attitude towards reality and guides historical projects and has the capacity as a system to incorporate axiological aspects that allow the future professional a humanistic training that puts the social before techno-scientific knowledge and its applications, it becomes in a propitious space for the instrumentation of the epistemic resources of bioethics.

Bioethical reflections should not be seen as the exclusive heritage of those who practice certain professions: philosophers, doctors, jurists, applied science workers, among others, since this demands that the impact of technological applications in the lives of individuals be valued , in society and in nature, in which the necessary acceptance of the other as an expression of plural subject bearer of morality, stands as the center of these assessments. The words of Acosta (2009) support the previous criterion:

The global conception of bioethics and its interrelation with the sustainability of development inevitably leads to biopolitics, to citizen action to ensure that joint responsibility materializes in policies that necessarily include the leading participation of both civil society and states. and international organizations of a governmental nature or not. Achieving the structuring and coherence of these efforts goes through a substantial change in education in values, where morality ceases to be separated from knowledge and becomes a constituent part of it. Bioethics, thus interpreted, is a matter for the whole society and not a topic of academic discussion among an elite of initiates. (p.288)

Coinciding with this, it is considered that bioethical analyzes must objectify the interests of the different agents involved (people, companies, institutions, society) and the heterogeneity of situations that arise, it is worth highlighting: The dependence and vulnerability of people before many professional actions, the coincidence or diversity of ethical conceptions and of the different types of evaluations and sensitivities derived from them, the possibilities of professional action that is responsible and respectful of pluralism and the autonomy of people, within the limits imposed legality. Likewise, the different evaluation options of the set of consequences that derive from each of them and the questions of principles or vital assumptions that are strengthened or undermined with each decision must be considered. This leads to the consideration that Higher Education must transcend the limits of training in bioethics and achieve the insertion of the epistemic resources of bioethics in the general conception of the processes that occur within it. In such a way, it can lead to the formation of a system of values and attitudes in the subjects that interact in their frameworks, which configures the regulation of man's relationships with himself and The intellectual habit of a person to identify problems that have ethical or social implications, in the field of science and research, to provide solutions or answers to those problems, and make decisions about their application, in accordance with the laws that regulate these procedures and that give clear criteria on the legality of their use, so that they do not violate the dignity of the human person. It allows to rectify in case of error and reconsider other options before the study problem. It tends for the unity between thinking and moral action in the decisions of scientific activity, based on the fundamental principles and laws that regulate the conduct of the scientist and that inform the free action of each one. It is like a freely acquired conditioning to formulate ethical judgments and act with moral responsibility. (p.51)

For their part, Raquel Rodríguez and Yara Cárdenas (2011) argue that it is from bioethical education where the limits of teaching can be transcended, since it, in addition to training, has a general dimension that not only teaches how to think, but also how to to do and to be Corresponding to the above, bioethics education is aimed at structuring a set of moral values about life and health in their comprehensive understanding, which allows the implementation of morally valid decision procedures in situations that put the bioethical values. It is based on the development of a reflexive ethical conscience, interested not so much in conceiving a definitive regulation, as in constantly reviewing the validity and generality of the norms looking for new moral agreements.

The attention towards transdisciplinarity, and the ethical rigor of conduct, constitute today a claim to professional life; because although science is constituted as an important form of social activity, it includes all the subjective burden of human activity and requires an axiological resignification that ensures adequate social relevance. Hence, its consideration as an essential resource of Higher Education constitutes a key aspect. (Rodríguez, 2021; Vidal, 2010).

First of all, contemporary social problems are not strictly disciplinary, they require a complex approach that combines multiple disciplines.

Secondly, its solution demands the active participation of the subjects, and, consequently, of mutual learning communities in which specialists from each of the disciplines must dialogue and deal with participants who are not part of any discipline. But this dialogue must be established with a horizontal nature that fosters real communication, in which a common space is created, where the parties involved share needs, concerns, motivations and criteria, as a space for reflection, but based on respect for the various positions. In this way, the need for interactive dialogue to be conceived as an intrinsic element of Higher Education is understood.

The dialectical relationship of mutual conditioning of transdisciplinarity and interactive dialogue, contributes to bioethics going beyond academic walls and promoting the participation of all citizens in the actions and policies that the country develops based on social welfare. On the other hand, it favors balancing the scientific and social impact, with the cultural impact that is associated with these and that often presents contradictions in relation to them.

Higher Education is immersed in a social world from which it is not alien, so it is assisted by the responsibility of what type of professionals it trains and how they are going to face social changes in the performance of their profession. But they are not only influenced by the socio-environmental environment in which they subsist, but also by the international framework, which is inherent to it and from which they cannot escape. Given this, the processes that it develops must weigh, in fair value, the various epistemological and axiological elements of the phenomena, in order to configure in the professionals that it trains, a vision of the world based on the value of life in its broad meaning. , from the educational and social dynamics.

In this sense, it must point to the adequate relationship between the orientation of professional ethical practice and the intention of the ethical legitimacy of human action. In this relationship, the moral transition is presented as an essential factor from which to lead, in an axiological sense, the role of the professional who graduates by making use of the knowledge acquired in society, balancing professional qualification as a technical update, and human qualification as an expression culture of their professional practice (Rodríguez, Zamora, 2022).

Cuba has the necessary political, social and legal structures for the development of actions that contribute to the achievement of true sustainable development, taking into account the complexities that in contemporary frameworks the subject's relationship with human beings, society and nature. Therefore, it requires the strengthening of those indicators from which to increase the effectiveness of the real impact of the policies that support it. In the framework of Higher Education this translates into achieving the formation of a subject with the capacity and quality to carry out such purpose.

As logically argued constructs, epistemic resources provide the framework from which to assume an epistemological position that allows answers to what has been previously raised, tempered to the emerging quality that contemporary processes present, in which the complexity of dilemmas and conflicts is integrated morals.

In this sense, the epistemic resources of bioethics find in Higher Education the structure that favors its expression as a methodological proposal as they allow to specify the necessary relationship between the epistemological, the practical and the axiological in the formation of a critical, integrative and complex thought. . This is because they promote: knowledge, in the sense of understanding the basic concepts of science, its usefulness in the lives of human beings and the environment, from bioethical positions that allow identifying where the true benefit is that leads to a actual quality of life. The know-how, from the search for viable solutions that are based on transdisciplinary criteria and to the same extent that it considers values of respect, understanding and commitment to oneself and to the environment where the acceptance of the other as a morally valid subject is weighed. Knowing how to value, in terms of the moral evaluation of the attitudes that are associated with the previous positions. To the same extent, it implies assuming a determined position in the recognition of the contributions of science and technology in improving the quality of life, when they are well used.

All of the above allows us to affirm that the epistemic resources of bioethics, as a methodological proposal, favor the resolution of conflicts raised not only by experimentation and the use of biotechnologies, but also by all those technical resources that have a relevant impact on the conception of human life and the different lifestyles. They allow critical analysis of the problems that these techniques pose at different levels and in various fields, the forms of intervention and the specific practices of the different professionals involved, as well as their human and social implications for the present and the future.

Its relevant instrumentation from Higher Education as a structure that legitimizes its actions, will favor the strengthening of the training of human resources that can face bioethics from the complexity that life presents and its understanding at different levels of reality and provide adequate responses to the complex conflicts of values present in today's technological world.