Keyword: «criminalistics»

The article is devoted to the topic of "traces of the past” interpretation; its relevance is due to both the need to improve the training of history majors and the aggravation of the fight against falsifications of history (primarily domestic). The aim of the research is to analyze the correlation of humanitarian, social and technological components in the methodology of teaching historical disciplines. The comparative method was chosen as a key method. The work uses the method of hypotheses, content analysis of the source base, and experience in studying University teaching practice. Identifying the prerequisites for «incorrect" interpretation of historical events, the author compares legal, forensic and philosophical approaches. The theoretical significance of the article lies in the novelty of an interdisciplinary, integrated technosocial humanitarian outlook on historical research. According to the author, the best way to overcome bias is adherence to principles; a person must inspire and justify trust: this requirement is true for both a forensic expert and a scientist. The main thing is to avoid simplifications, geometric sketching of the past, reducing it to parallels and piles of additional constructions, politicized speculations. No less great is the temptation to fall into exegesis, and from the interpreter of texts to become the owner of stylization and meta-history. The task of the researcher is to establish the specifics of the typical. It is extremely difficult to find the “median nerve” of an era, but this is the only way to “qualify the subjective side of an act” from a historiosophical perspective. The sensation and awareness of belonging to humanity obliges the scientist to think in integral, complex, figurative, and not abstract categories. Intersubjectivity itself (even intrasubjectivity) characterizes history as a humanitarian science, and not as narrowly social one (akin to jurisprudence or sociology, especially in their positivistic interpretations). The practical significance of the study lies in the fact that the material of the article can be used in the pedagogical process, and a comparison of fundamental and applied disciplines will help history majors to sort out professional and worldview issues, and teach them to distinguish between the eternal and the vain-trendy, the ideological and the tendentious. History, the author believes, is about the eternally alive, and not about the outdated things.

The Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus are not just states on the political map of the world, but Union states, and every year counterfeiters forge banknotes in each of them. In Belarus, Russian rubles are forged, but not in Russia. In this regard, the study raises the question: why is this happening? Based on the statistics of the banks of the two states (and on the example of one of the most frequently forged banknotes), the article discusses ways to protect these popular paper banknotes in the counterfeiting environment, identifies typical and unique means of protecting each banknote in relation to each other. The authors of the study come to the conclusion that Belarusian banknotes contain more protective elements that can be checked without special devices, and therefore counterfeiters face a more difficult task since these protection elements can be checked without special equipment and «at a glance» determine which banknote is in front of a person – fake or genuine. It also offers ways to counter this crime, such as: creating new ways to protect against counterfeiting, modernizing existing methods and popularizing «cashless» payments.