The grounds of science provide the growth of knowledge until the general features of systemic organization of objects which are taken into account in the world, and the methods of delivery correspond the established norms and ideals of the research. While developing, science could face fundamentally new types of facilities which require a different vision of reality compared to those which involve the prevailing picture of the world. New objects may require changes in the scheme of cognitive activity, the system provided by the ideals and norms of the study. In this situation, the growth of scientific knowledge involves the restructuring the grounds of science. The latter can be implemented into two varieties:  1. the revolution associated with the transformation of special picture of the world without significant changes ideals and norms of research,  2. the revolution, during which the picture of the world has radically changed together with the ideals and norms of science. The famous philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn in his famous book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” (1962) established the model for science, which involves alternating episodes of competition between different scientific communities and stages, involving systematic theories, the clarification of concepts, improved technology (phases of the so-called normal science). The period of dominating paradigm is changed by the collapse of the paradigm that is reflected in the term “scientific revolution”. Winning one of the warring parties again restores the normal stage of development of science. In the period until a new paradigm appears there is always an accumulation of facts. The withdrawal from this period has meant the setting standards of scientific practice, the theoretical postulates, accurate picture of the world, connect theory and method. According to Kuhn, the scientific paradigm shift, the transition phase in the “revolutionary break” provides for full or partial replacement of the disciplinary matrix, research techniques, methods and theoretical assumptions. The knowledge transformed the entire set of values. The scheme proposed by Kuhn, included the following stages: prescientific stage – the crisis – the revolution – the new normal science, that is calm evolutionary development of science – a new crisis, etc. Kuhn, exploring the turning points in the history of science shows that the period of development of “normal science” in details can also be represented by traditional concepts, such as the concept of progress, which in this case is the criterion of the number of solutions to problems. For Kuhn “the normal science” involves the expansion of the scope paradigm with increased accuracy. The criterion in the period of stay “the normal science” is the preservation of the conceptual grounds. We can say that there is a sort of immunity to leave the conceptual framework of a paradigm unchanged. The purpose of “the normal science”, notes T. Kuhn, in no way provides predictions of new types of phenomena. The immunity or immune to the outside, which is opposite to accepted standards of factors, could not entirely resist the so-called anomalous events and facts – they gradually undermine the sustainability paradigm. Kuhn describes the “the normal science” a