Anton Pavlov

Introduction. Mastering managerial communication technologies by engineering students is one of the important conditions for building a career. At the same time, not all graduates of engineering faculties have such practical skills. To a large extent, this circumstance is due to the lack of diagnostic methods for the success of mastering such methods.Methodology and sources. The theoretical framework of the empirical research methodology is based on the ideas of interactionist concepts of communication, including the works of I. Hoffman, D. Mead and G. Garfinkel, as well as the theories of ritual interaction by R. Collins and emotional intelligence by D. Turner. The V.J. Reddy questionnaire, which is adapted to the interests of the study, was used as a basic diagnostic technology toolkit.Results and discussion. The results obtained can be represented by three main conclusions: firstly, the greatest unity of perception of managerial communication methods characterizes the desire to ensure emotional comfort of communication; secondly, the next level of unity in the perception of communication technologies is focused on rational leadership; thirdly, the lowest level of unity includes controversial communication techniques that are understood differently by respondents.Conclusion. The formation of a methodology for diagnosing managerial communication technologies has a good prospect in terms of diagnosing the communication characteristics of students of various training profiles, as well as the perception of managerial communication by students from different countries studying at Russian universities.

As the new types of economy (digital, gigonomics, sharing economy, etc.) are more and more frequently discussed in the scientific literature, while novel concepts of new capitalism regularly emerge, the author of the article investigates the origins of these constant changes and turns to contemporary social theory for answers. As a starting point, the author takes the books of two Marxists, Douglas Kellner and David Harvey; both were published in 1989, in the symbolic year of the Fall of the Berlin Wall. To construct a narrative, the author employs the idea of the periodization of the American culture of the long nineties (1989-2001) by the American cultural critic Philip Wagner and the concept of external and internal globalization by the social theorist Robert Hassan, who in his turn grounds his reflections on the idea of flexible accumulation by Harvey. Using the example of the film "Fight Club", the author shows how the colonization of the internal human experience by capital took place after 1989. Thus, in the 1990s, capital, by depriving people of sleep, began to profit not only from the economy built on knowledge, but also from emotions, as reflected in social theory at the turn of the millennium. Further, briefly describing several recent concepts of capitalism (data capitalism, computational capitalism, semiocapitalism, biocognitive capitalism), the author notes that the creators of the theories, focusing on the digital economy, do not take into account the factor of external globalization, and most importantly forget about financial capitalism, on which, ultimately, the economy depends. The article concludes that the dynamics of capital development were predicted by David Harvey back in 1989, and that his concept still has a high heuristic potential.

The article discusses an actual problem of the contemporary social theory – a problem of post-postmodernism that is the answer to the question: what comes to replace the supposedly outdated postmodernism. Post-postmodernism in an umbrella term that brings together various concepts like digimodernism, automodernism, metamodernism, hypermodernism, supermodernism, etc. One of the replacing postmodernism theories is the French curator and art theorist Nicolas Bourriaud’s concept that was called “altermodern” or “other modernism.” In his previous books Bourriaud proposed to rewrite modernism and, as the result, developed a new theory. The concept appeared in 2009 when Bourriaud presented the exhibition in London, timed to the publication of his manifesto Altermodern, and edited and published the book of collected papers of the same title. Globalization, which opened borders for art, is a central concept of the altermodernism theory. The main terms of altermodern are heterochrony (time diversity) and viatorisation (nomadism). The main social subject of the alternodern era is a free travelling artist, who interprets the meanings of “rewritten” art for the public. They are “rewritten” because Bourriaud proposes to use phenomena and products of past ages to make them work in a new way. However Bourriaud’s concept should be considered critically, as it was formerly done by several researchers. The article proposes a critical review that answers to the question: to what extent the idea of altermodern is heuristic and therefore it could compete with other concepts that abolish postmodern. The author gives a negative answer to this question first of all because altermodern just borrows a lot of elements of the language and apparatus of postmodernism and actually does not offer anything new.

In the past twenty years, all the key authors who wrote about the state of postmodernity either began to be engaged in other research areas (Fredric Jameson) or declared that the postmodernism is dead (Linda Hutcheon). Since 2000, when the fatigue from the postmodernism became evident to everyone, various researchers, critics and theorists began to offer their concepts of our era. However, all these theories, emphasizing the change of cultural paradigms, interpret culture traditionally not paying attention to total digitalization and the introduction of new technologies into our lives. However, in two concepts of our time these processes become central. These are the concepts of the digimodern and automodern. The focus of this article is the idea of automodernism, proposed by the American social theorist Robert Samuels in 2007/2009. He believes that our world is characterized by two contradictory tendencies – automation and the desire for autonomy (personal freedom). From his point of view, the former often does not allow to reach the latter due to certain circumstances. Samuels, using the example of a car, a personal computer, the Internet, etc., shows what exactly our culture is in the broadest sense. Analyzing the concept of “digital youth,” he also pays attention to the formation of a new subjectivity of the era of automodernity. Finally, the most interesting part of the concept of automodernism, which is most relevant today, is the criticism of leftwing social and philosophical concepts (Slavoj Žižek, Jameson) and cultural theories (Henry Jenkins). At the end of the article, the author mentions Adam Greenfield’s latest book Radical Technologies: The Design of Everyday Life. Thanks to this book, Samuels’ theory can be verified.