Аңдатпа
It is shown that the difficulties that appear during attempts to uncover the mechanisms of changing of scientific paradigms can be overcome by consistent application of the apparatus of dialectics and by the interpretation of science as a social institution that produces intangible assets. This interpretation demonstrates analogy between T. Kuhn’s theory of changing scientific paradigms and the theory of innovation cycles, which goes back to the works of J. Schumpeter. The fact allows one to consider the production of intangible assets by the methods of institutional economics. The basic dialectical contradiction in this interpretation is the contradiction between the innovativeness of a set of ideas that form a new paradigm and ensure the systematic generation of intangible assets, and its liquidity. The liquidity of intangible assets is primarily determined by the extent to which society is ready to accept new ideas and views. The resolution of the identified contradiction is carried out through a cyclical change in resistance to innovation. The period of dominance of a certain paradigm ends when it exhausts the potential of its development, which determines the finiteness of the life cycle of any scientific paradigm, just as the life cycle of any innovation is finite.