Actuarial aspects of two important fields of insurance are considered: calculating personal injury damages for working age adults (liability insurance) and measuring the mortality in insurance based populations (e.g. life insurance and pensions). The contribution of the thesis is to demonstrate a wide array of modelling techniques and their practical implementation in these two key areas of actuarial science. The first part considers the modelling of the labour force dynamics from the perspective of the loss of earnings multipliers in England and Wales. It reviews the estimation methods of involuntary non{participation in the labour market in relation to future loss of earnings. In response, a robust multiple state modelling methodology is developed that allows conditioning on personal characteristics of working age individuals such as disability, educational attainment and the current employment state. Applied to UK longitudinal Labour Force Survey data, it quantifies the disadvantages that plaintiffs with post-injury earnings capacity face in the labour market. This practical modelling framework leads to a set of improved loss of earnings multipliers in subsequent editions of the Ogden Tables now used in the Courts in England and Wales. The second part focuses on the modelling and estimation of mortality rates using Poisson likelihood maximisation methods. In terms of graduation, it undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the frailty models and their implications. Then it puts forward suitable parametric modelling structures in order to measure the scale of individual heterogeneity and applies generalised linear modelling graduation techniques to a large array of insurance based mortality data. In terms of forecasting, it considers the generalised Lee-Carter type modelling structures of Renshaw and Haberman(2006) and demonstrates their suitability for practical applications. Furthermore, it develops a novel stratified Lee-Carter model for the measurement of the effects of explanatory factors (other than age and time). An efficient programming package in R is provided for this class of modelling framework. Finally, a detailed analysis of the mortality trends observed in private pension scheme data serves as a case study.

Boreale Wälder in Permafrostregionen sind ein wesentlicher Bestandteil regionaler und globaler Klimamuster und machen etwa ein Drittel der weltweiten Waldfläche aus. Die Entwicklung der Waldbedeckung hat einen wichtigen Einfluss auf den Permafrost, da dieser durch die Vegetation geschützt wird. Der direkte Einfluss des Klimawandels auf die Wälder und der indirekte Effekt durch eine Veränderung der Permafrostdynamik können zu weitreichenden Ökosystemverschiebungen führen, die wiederum die Persistenz des Permafrosts beeinträchtigen und wichtige Ökosystemfunktionen destabilisieren könnten. Ziel dieser Dissertation ist es zu verstehen, wie sich die komplexen Wechselwirkungen zwischen der Vegetation, dem Permafrost und der Atmosphäre auf die Wälder und den darunterliegenden Permafrost auswirken. Im Rahmen dieser Dissertation habe ich ein eindimensionales, numerisches Landoberflächenmodell (CryoGrid), das zur Simulation der physikalischen Prozesse in Permafrostgebieten verwendet werden kann, für die Anwendung in bewaldetem Gebieten angepasst. Dazu habe ich ein detailliertes, mehrschichtiges Kronendachmodell (CLM-ml v0) und ein dynamisches Lärchenbestandsmodell gekoppelt. Dies ermöglichte den Energietransfer und das Wärmeregime welche für die komplexe Wald-Permafrost-Dynamik verantwortlich sind an verschiedenen Untersuchungsstandorten in gemischten und lärchendominierten Wäldern in Ostsibirien zu reproduzieren. Die numerischen Simulationen ergaben, dass die Wälder den thermischen und hydrologischen Zustand des Permafrosts hauptsächlich durch die Veränderung der Strahlungsbilanz und der Phänologie der Schneedecke beeinflussen und so eine stabilisierende Wirkung haben. Die Untersuchung der unterschiedlichen isolierenden Wirkung verschiedener Waldtypen und Walddichten sowie die Rückkopplungsmechanismen nach Störungen zeigen Veränderungen der thermischen und hydrologischen Bedingungen und der Tiefe der Auftauschicht. Zusammenfassend legen die Ergebnisse nahe, dass lokale, detaillierte und spezifische Landoberflächenmodelle erforderlich sind, um die komplexe Dynamik in borealen Permafrostökosystemen vollständig zu erfassen. Veränderungen der Rückkopplungen zwischen Permafrost, Klima, Wald und Störungen werden die eng gekoppelten Ökosystemfunktionen destabilisieren. Die induzierten Bodenveränderungen werden sich auf wichtige Wald- und Permafrostfunktionen, wie beispielsweise die Isolation des Permafrostbodens oder die Kohlenstoffspeicherung, und Rückkopplungsmechanismen wie Überschwemmung, Dürren, Brände, und Waldverlust, auswirken. / Boreal forests in permafrost regions make up around one-third of the global forest cover and are an essential component of regional and global climate patterns. The forests efficiently protect the underlying permafrost but the exact processes are not well understood. The direct influence of climatic change on forests and the indirect effect through a change in permafrost dynamics can lead to extensive ecosystem shifts, which will, in turn, affect permafrost persistence and potentially destabilize various ecosystem functions. The aim of this dissertation is to understand how complex interactions between the vegetation, permafrost, and the atmosphere stabilize the forests and the underlying permafrost. Within this dissertation, I have adapted a one-dimensional, numerical land surface model (CryoGrid), which can be used to simulate the physical processes in permafrost regions, for the application in vegetated areas by coupling a detailed multilayer canopy model (CLM-ml v0), and a dynamic larch stand model. An intensive validation of the model setup has allowed for the precise quantification of the heat- and water transfer processes responsible for the complex permafrost dynamics under boreal forest covers. At a variety of study sites throughout eastern Siberia, the numerical simulations revealed that the forests exert a strong control on the thermal and hydrological state of permafrost through changing the radiation balance and snow cover phenology. The forest cover has a net stabilizing effect on the permafrost ground below. The detailed physical model has furthermore enabled me to study the variation in insulation effect between different forest types and densities as well as the feedback mechanisms occurring after disturbances. In summary, the results suggest that local, detailed, and specific land surface models are required to fully comprehend the complex dynamics in boreal permafrost ecosystems. The research revealed that the feedbacks between permafrost, climate, boreal forest, and disturbances will destabilize tightly coupled ecosystem functions. The induced changes will affect key forest and permafrost functions, such as the forest's insulation capacity or the carbon budget, as well as feedback mechanisms like swamping, droughts, fires, or forest loss.

This thesis focuses on the position of the Czech Republic towards the proposal of the revision of the Posting of Workers Directive, which was introduced by the European Commission in March 2016. Although the Czech Republic's statement was negative in March 2016, the Czech position supported the proposal during final voting in the Council in June 2018. The thesis aims at identifying causes of the position change using the Advocacy Coalition Framework and at confirming the main proposition, that change of the position may be explained by an existence of advocacy coalitions which tried to enforce their beliefs. The thesis concludes that the main proposition may be confirmed only partially. Although the existence of two advocacy coalitions with opposing beliefs was identified, it is not possible to claim absolutely that this is the true reason of the change. Two hypothesis were defined. First one is based on existence of the external sources whose presesnce was confirmed, as well as their dominant influence on the change. Therefore, this hypothesis was confirmed. The second hypothesis was disproved. The second coalition was much weaker and rather passive than the first one, so there was no need to overcome the "hurting stalemate" situation at the national level. The change was not absolute. It should...

O que é e como é a σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? Esta é a questão que Sócrates propõe a seus interlocutores, Carmides e Critias, examinarem juntos no diálogo de juventude de Platão, o Carmides, diálogo tentativo ou de exame (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη é fazer todas as coisas ordenada e calmamente (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? É um sentimento como pudor ou reserva (άἰδως)? É cuidar de suas próprias coisas (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη seria fazer coisas boas (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Ou, ainda, conhecer-se a si mesmo (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Seria ciência das outras ciências e ciência de si mesma (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Ou seria, finalmente, o conhecimento do bem e do mal (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Como em outros propriamente chamados diálogos socráticos de Platão (no Laques é a coragem, no Eutífron é a piedade) nos quais se examina se uma virtude particular é conhecimento, no Carmides trata-se de examinar se a σωφροσύνη é conhecimento. Se é, é conhecimento de quê? E qual é, para nós, o benefício desta virtude, concebida como conhecimento? Estas são algumas das questões examinadas por Sócrates neste diálogo. Este trabalho pretende acompanhar passo a passo esta que é a primeira investigação (ἐξέτασις) socrática acerca da σωφροσύνη nos diálogos de Platão. Ou, dito de outro modo, este trabalho pretende acompanhar o passo a passo do filosofar socrático no diálogo Carmides. / What is it and how is σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? This is the question that Socrates proposes to his interlocutors, Critias and Charmides, examine together in the dialogue of youth of Plato, the Charmides, tentative dialogue or examination (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη is make all things orderly and quietly (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? Its a feeling like modesty or reserve (άἰδως)? You take care of your own things (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη would do good things (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Or even know himself (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Would be science of other sciences and science of herself (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Or would it be finally the knowledge of good and evil (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Like in others properly called Socratic dialogues of Plato (in the Laches is the courage, in the Euthyphro is the piety) in which examines whether a particular virtue is knowledge, in the Charmides it is examining whether σωφροσύνη is knowledge. If it is, is knowledge of what? And what is, for us, the benefit of this virtue, conceived as knowledge? These are some of the issues examined by Socrates in this dialogue. This work intends to follow step by step this is that the first Socratic investigation (ἐξέτασις) about σωφροσύνη in the dialogues of Plato. Or, put another way, this work intends to follow step by step the Socratic philosophy in dialogue Charmides.

O que é e como é a σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? Esta é a questão que Sócrates propõe a seus interlocutores, Carmides e Critias, examinarem juntos no diálogo de juventude de Platão, o Carmides, diálogo tentativo ou de exame (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη é fazer todas as coisas ordenada e calmamente (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? É um sentimento como pudor ou reserva (άἰδως)? É cuidar de suas próprias coisas (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη seria fazer coisas boas (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Ou, ainda, conhecer-se a si mesmo (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Seria ciência das outras ciências e ciência de si mesma (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Ou seria, finalmente, o conhecimento do bem e do mal (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Como em outros propriamente chamados diálogos socráticos de Platão (no Laques é a coragem, no Eutífron é a piedade) nos quais se examina se uma virtude particular é conhecimento, no Carmides trata-se de examinar se a σωφροσύνη é conhecimento. Se é, é conhecimento de quê? E qual é, para nós, o benefício desta virtude, concebida como conhecimento? Estas são algumas das questões examinadas por Sócrates neste diálogo. Este trabalho pretende acompanhar passo a passo esta que é a primeira investigação (ἐξέτασις) socrática acerca da σωφροσύνη nos diálogos de Platão. Ou, dito de outro modo, este trabalho pretende acompanhar o passo a passo do filosofar socrático no diálogo Carmides. / What is it and how is σωφροσύνη (ό τι ἐστι καὶ ὁποȋόν τι ἡ σωφροσύνη)? This is the question that Socrates proposes to his interlocutors, Critias and Charmides, examine together in the dialogue of youth of Plato, the Charmides, tentative dialogue or examination (πϵιραστικός). Σωφροσύνη is make all things orderly and quietly (τò κοσμίως πάυτα πράττϵιν καὶ ἡσυxῇ)? Its a feeling like modesty or reserve (άἰδως)? You take care of your own things (τὸ τὰ αὑτοῡ πράττϵιν)? Σωφροσύνη would do good things (τῶν ἀγαθῶν πρᾱξιν)? Or even know himself (τὸ γιγνώσκϵιν ἑαυτόν)? Would be science of other sciences and science of herself (ἐπιστημῶυ ἐπιστήμη ἐστὶ καὶ αὐτὴ ἑαυτῆς)? Or would it be finally the knowledge of good and evil (τὸ ἀγαθόν καὶ τὸ κακόν)? Like in others properly called Socratic dialogues of Plato (in the Laches is the courage, in the Euthyphro is the piety) in which examines whether a particular virtue is knowledge, in the Charmides it is examining whether σωφροσύνη is knowledge. If it is, is knowledge of what? And what is, for us, the benefit of this virtue, conceived as knowledge? These are some of the issues examined by Socrates in this dialogue. This work intends to follow step by step this is that the first Socratic investigation (ἐξέτασις) about σωφροσύνη in the dialogues of Plato. Or, put another way, this work intends to follow step by step the Socratic philosophy in dialogue Charmides.

Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) Plato\'s διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. / Platão pensou que a dialética é o método de investigação filosófica. No entanto, não há consenso entre os estudiosos a respeito da sua visão da dialética. A interpretação dominante, que se remonta ao trabalho de Robinson Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, que eu chamo de interpretação \"descontínua\" (ID), pressupõe que há uma ruptura na visão de Platão sobre a dialética no decorrer dos seus diálogos. Isto significa que ele considerou a dialética como o método de investigação filosófica, mas o termo \'dialética\' é apenas uma façon de parler para se referir ao método que considerou mais adequado em diferentes momentos. Portanto, (ID) implica o seguinte trilema: Devese identificar a visão de Platão sobre a dialética, enquanto o método de investigação filosófica, com o Elenchus (E), com a Hypotesis (H), ou com a Coleção & Divisão (C&D)? Por exemplo, Irwin (1988: 7) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (E), enquanto Benson (2015: 238) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (H). Em contraste com (ID), o objetivo do presente trabalho é defender uma interpretação \"contínua\" (IC): No Fedro Platão introduz uma visão unificada da dialética como método de investigação filosófica. Meu argumento para defender (IC) está baseado em três premissas: (1) os chamados três métodos, (E), (H) e (C&D) são realmente três procedimentos diferentes de uma διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) a τέχνη διαλεκτικὴ de Platão é o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade; e (3) o Fedro (261a-266b) contém a visão unificada de Platão sobre a διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, concebida como uma amálgama de (E), (H) e (C e D), e o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade.

Plato thought that dialectic is the method of philosophical inquiry. Yet there is no agreement between scholars regarding Plato\'s view of dialectic. The dominant interpretation, dating back to Robinson\'s Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, which I call the \"discontinuous\" interpretation (DI), assumes a significant gap between Plato\'s account of dialectic as it is presented in the course of the dialogues. As such, although Plato considered dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry, the term \'Dialectic\' is just a façon de parler conveying the method he deemed most suitable at different moments. One should note that (DI) entails the following trilemma: Plato\'s dialectic, as the method of philosophical inquiry, must be identified with either Elenchus (E), Hypothesis (H) or Collection & Division (C&D). For example, Irwin (1988:7) argues that one should identify dialectic with (E) while Benson (2015:238) argues that one should identify dialectic with (H). In contrast with (DI), the goal of this dissertation is to defend a \"continuous\" interpretation (CI): Plato introduced a unified view of dialectic as the method of philosophical inquiry in the Phaedrus. My argument supporting (CI) relies on three main premises: (1) The so-called three methods, (E), (H) and (C&D), are three different procedures of one διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) Plato\'s διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη is both a method of communication and a method of discovering truth; and (3) The Phaedrus (261a-266b) contains Plato\'s unified view of διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, conceived as an amalgam of (E), (H) and (C&D), and a method of communication and a method of discovering truth. / Platão pensou que a dialética é o método de investigação filosófica. No entanto, não há consenso entre os estudiosos a respeito da sua visão da dialética. A interpretação dominante, que se remonta ao trabalho de Robinson Plato\'s Earlier Dialectic, que eu chamo de interpretação \"descontínua\" (ID), pressupõe que há uma ruptura na visão de Platão sobre a dialética no decorrer dos seus diálogos. Isto significa que ele considerou a dialética como o método de investigação filosófica, mas o termo \'dialética\' é apenas uma façon de parler para se referir ao método que considerou mais adequado em diferentes momentos. Portanto, (ID) implica o seguinte trilema: Devese identificar a visão de Platão sobre a dialética, enquanto o método de investigação filosófica, com o Elenchus (E), com a Hypotesis (H), ou com a Coleção & Divisão (C&D)? Por exemplo, Irwin (1988: 7) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (E), enquanto Benson (2015: 238) afirma que a dialética deve ser identificada com (H). Em contraste com (ID), o objetivo do presente trabalho é defender uma interpretação \"contínua\" (IC): No Fedro Platão introduz uma visão unificada da dialética como método de investigação filosófica. Meu argumento para defender (IC) está baseado em três premissas: (1) os chamados três métodos, (E), (H) e (C&D) são realmente três procedimentos diferentes de uma διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη; (2) a τέχνη διαλεκτικὴ de Platão é o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade; e (3) o Fedro (261a-266b) contém a visão unificada de Platão sobre a διαλεκτικὴ τέχνη, concebida como uma amálgama de (E), (H) e (C e D), e o método de comunicação e descoberta da verdade.

Plurale Weltinterpretationen praktizieren wir täglich, meist ohne uns darüber bewusst zu sein. Zustande kommen sie durch die gleichzeitige und gleichwertige Existenz verschiedener Modelle der Weltinterpretation. Sie sind Produkte menschlicher Schöpferkraft und stehen als parallele Realitäten einander ergänzend und einander widersprechend nebeneinander. Das Buch führt am Beispiel der Tyva Südsibiriens in zwei Modelle der Weltinterpretation und in die Praxis des Umgangs mit ihnen ein. Es zeigt, wie einzelne lokale Akteure zwei von mehreren Modellen flexibel zum Einsatz bringen, um Situationen zu deuten und in ihnen zu handeln. Es wird deutlich, welchen Regeln die Tyva dabei folgen, welche Gründe sie leiten und welche Folgen sie zu tragen haben. Das Ergebnis ist ein Bild zeitgenössischer Kultur, das der gegenwärtig gegebenen Flexibilität und Pluralität des menschlichen Deutens, Handelns und Verhaltens gerecht wird. / Plural World Interpretations are part of our everyday lives, even if we are not aware of the fact. They result from the simultaneous existence of different but equal models for interpreting the world we live in. These models are the product of human constructivity and co-exist as parallel realities, complementing and contradicting each other. Based on fieldwork among the Tyva of southern Siberia, the book discusses the practice of dealing with this multiplicity of world interpretations and shows how individual actors oscillate flexibly between two of many possible models for interpreting specific situations and act on them. The rules Tyvans apply in varying contexts, the reasons behind their choices and the consequences they have to deal with, are analysed. The result is an account of contemporary culture that explores the flexibility and plurality of human interpretation, action and behaviour. / Мы используем множественные интерпретации мира (нем. plurale Weltinterpretationen) ежедневно и, в большинстве случаев, неосознанно. Осуществляется это за счёт одновременного и равноценного сосуществования различных моделей мировоззрения. Они являются продуктом творческой деятельностей человека и сосуществуют в качестве параллельных реальностей, дополняя и, одновременно, противореча друг другу. На примере тувинцев Южной Сибири данная книга знакомит с двумя моделями мировоззрения, а также с практикой их применения. Показывается, как локальные акторы гибко применяют две из существующего множества моделей: и для того, чтобы действовать в складывающихся ситуациях, и чтобы толковать их. Станет понятным, каким правилам при этом следуют тувинцы, какими мотивами руководствуются и какие это имеет последствия. Результатом явится картина современной культуры, которая будет отвечать имеющимся на данный момент запросам гибкости и многообразия в мировоззрении, действиях и поведении человека.

Plurale Weltinterpretationen praktizieren wir täglich, meist ohne uns darüber bewusst zu sein. Zustande kommen sie durch die gleichzeitige und gleichwertige Existenz verschiedener Modelle der Weltinterpretation. Sie sind Produkte menschlicher Schöpferkraft und stehen als parallele Realitäten einander ergänzend und einander widersprechend nebeneinander. Das Buch führt am Beispiel der Tyva Südsibiriens in zwei Modelle der Weltinterpretation und in die Praxis des Umgangs mit ihnen ein. Es zeigt, wie einzelne lokale Akteure zwei von mehreren Modellen flexibel zum Einsatz bringen, um Situationen zu deuten und in ihnen zu handeln. Es wird deutlich, welchen Regeln die Tyva dabei folgen, welche Gründe sie leiten und welche Folgen sie zu tragen haben. Das Ergebnis ist ein Bild zeitgenössischer Kultur, das der gegenwärtig gegebenen Flexibilität und Pluralität des menschlichen Deutens, Handelns und Verhaltens gerecht wird. / Plural World Interpretations are part of our everyday lives, even if we are not aware of the fact. They result from the simultaneous existence of different but equal models for interpreting the world we live in. These models are the product of human constructivity and co-exist as parallel realities, complementing and contradicting each other. Based on fieldwork among the Tyva of southern Siberia, the book discusses the practice of dealing with this multiplicity of world interpretations and shows how individual actors oscillate flexibly between two of many possible models for interpreting specific situations and act on them. The rules Tyvans apply in varying contexts, the reasons behind their choices and the consequences they have to deal with, are analysed. The result is an account of contemporary culture that explores the flexibility and plurality of human interpretation, action and behaviour. / Мы используем множественные интерпретации мира (нем. plurale Weltinterpretationen) ежедневно и, в большинстве случаев, неосознанно. Осуществляется это за счёт одновременного и равноценного сосуществования различных моделей мировоззрения. Они являются продуктом творческой деятельностей человека и сосуществуют в качестве параллельных реальностей, дополняя и, одновременно, противореча друг другу. На примере тувинцев Южной Сибири данная книга знакомит с двумя моделями мировоззрения, а также с практикой их применения. Показывается, как локальные акторы гибко применяют две из существующего множества моделей: и для того, чтобы действовать в складывающихся ситуациях, и чтобы толковать их. Станет понятным, каким правилам при этом следуют тувинцы, какими мотивами руководствуются и какие это имеет последствия. Результатом явится картина современной культуры, которая будет отвечать имеющимся на данный момент запросам гибкости и многообразия в мировоззрении, действиях и поведении человека.