A Straight-jacket for Conceptual Breakthroughs (The Appraisal in Science as a Brake on the Progress of Knowledge). II. What to Do to Get Out of the Impasse of Neophobia

What changes should be done in the ways and procedures of appraisal in science to give original ideas more essential support? A thorough analysis undertaken by the author has brought to a series of guides to follow. First, science should be open to world as much as possible, the research problems and tasks being neatly connected with social goals and human values. Second, inner transparency of science is absolutely necessary – with distinct understanding how and by which criteria scientific findings are evaluated, in what way and on what ground the appointment to the offices are made, and what underlies the awards and the distribution of funds, only substantiated judgments announced openly and publicly being admitted. Third, the multiplicity of autonomous and alternative centers of evaluation acting in a truly competitive environment and fighting for their resounded name and highest reputation must be the core of science organization. Fourth, the institutional evaluators should be complemented by personal “lifts” – through endowing the most outstanding scientists with a right to single-handedly appraise, within the bounds of distinctly outlined power, the scientific findings and the potential of researchers. Fifth, no formal parameters and no accounts of publications; the only measure of assessing a researcher are to be the ideas advanced by him – how much original they are and what vistas open before science and practice. And sixth, more benevolent doubt and sound skepticism and less prophesying of “pillars” of science, for only the unvarnished, concerned intercourse – with captious but just appraisals can serve a pledge of viability of emerging knowledge. Albeit of general nature, and needing to be elaborated on, these suggestions outline the framework of interrelated measures which allow of directing the current practice of evaluating scientific plans, findings, and personnel at dynamic renewal of knowledge.