The main problem of the turn of the millennium in Russia
Sergey Datsyuk, Vladimir Granovsky
Dear reader! You can take part in the discussion by writing, which will be published on this page.
And I always wanted to ask you, what is trust as spelled out in your concept of strategies - after all, in fact, the main problem of the blah blah brink can be described as a crisis of trust. Based on Fukuyama, we can state that conventionalization is only possible in societies with high trust, since in order to enter into a dialogue you need to trust, and a convention is essentially a certain definition of the rules of communication in conditions of mistrust, then the convention was codified, and so on .
It is clear that it is possible to organize a dialogue with the help of humanitarian technologies, which is hum. technologists will come to an agreement, create their own convention, good and kind :), but how will they “sow” it to the masses?
Indeed, in essence, in conditions of distrust of the population in the state. structures, the police, the media can only be manipulated; dialogue between those who do not trust each other is hardly possible.
Or hum. technologists must act as arbiters of communication, then they either must gain the trust of both participants in a potential dialogue, but how? But then they will have to use manipulative strategies to influence both sides?
Going back won't help matters.
First, we need to improve the competencies of the participants in the dialogue, because without competence there is no understanding. It is impossible to organize a dialogue about the need for a banking system between an economist and a cook.
However, to increase competence we have only two tools - the media and mass education, tools of mass society, tools of manipulation.
In short... what are the stages of implementing/adopting conventional communication strategies, how and by what means.
I really want to, but I don’t know how :)))22.5.2001 3:5
Georgiy
Moscow.
I was there, but didn’t read it!
1.9.99 21:1
Jules Yuri