Suchergebnisse

The article is devoted to the study of communication processes in the public administration system. The feasibility of the study is confirmed by the fact that the global transformation of an industrial society into an information and communicative society that occurs in the modern world is accompanied not only by the rapid quantitative and qualitative transformation of the information sphere and the emergence and development of a completely new type of communicative structures and processes in all spheres of society, but and a profound rethinking of the communicative nature of social reality, modern changes in the social-communicative sphere, the place and role of communication in the development of society. As the content and structure of society, social organizations and institutions become more complex, the number of information increases (scientific, artistic, political, household, etc.). This inevitably leads to an increase in the importance of social communication in management processes, which are accompanied by a fundamental transformation not only of the technology but also of the social, sociocultural basis of the post-industrial, information society. Communication has acquired signs of the most important function of any system, including in the sphere of government, which is directly a product of human interaction, based on the achievement of mutual understanding and agreement, primarily due to communicative interactions. Communication processes are considered in the article as a key integrated system of state management of social processes in the country, the main translator of information between citizens and state institutions. According to the results of the work, the author emphasized that competent communication is one of the necessary conditions for successful government management, the effectiveness of which is comparable to the possession of advanced means of production.

An archaeological culture is one of the base terms of archaeology. The content of this term was discussed from the time of its introduction into scientific discourse. During the investigations in Transbaikalia, researchers asserted about Stone Age archaeological cultures for the first time at the beginning of the 1930s. Till the beginning of the 1890s, A. P. Okladnikov's opinion has prevailed. According to him, Transbaikalia Paleolithic represented a monocultural phenomenon. This point of view is developed by some archaeologists in the present day. Additionally beginning from the 1960s the idea about existing of several archaeological cultures in the Transbaikalia Paleolithic has been generated. In the 1930s the distinguishing archaeological cultures in Transbaikalia Stone Age was based on morphology and typology of stone artifacts. In this sense, the technology of stone tools production was considered to a lesser degree. At the end of the 20th century, the main emphasis has been given to the tools' production technology as the key component of the stone industry. Therefore, while a theoretical base of Transbaikalia Paleolithic developed stone industry was in the base of identifying archaeological cultures with the shift of some accents from morphology and typology to the technology of production. Gradually together with stone industry data of cultural horizons spatial organization becomes involved as supporting elements in distinguishing archaeological cultures in Transbaikalia. At the same time often the only stone industry is accessible for the investigations, and it demonstrates the main trend of Paleolithic material culture development. Using the complex of different criteria for distinguishing archaeological culture corresponds to the system approach which is recently developed intensively. As a result of the assessment of the synchronous stone industries of Transbaikalia, we concluded that the archaeological culture is the tool of the interpretational level and reflects phenomena that really existed in the past. It is proposed to use as criteria not only typology, morphology, and technology, reconstructed on the base of the stone industry but also life subsistent strategies reconstructed with the taking into consideration all available data. Such strategies could be conditioned by the environment, but also are the reflection of the development of the technological traditions inherent to the given culture.