The paper claims that patterns of behavior can be re-gardered as institutional forms, and their dynamics are described using the model of the Helical Institutional Development Scheme (HIDS). This approach allows for more effective control actions in the face of dramatic changes in science, education and technology. The term “so-ciotechnical transformations” adopted today reflects only a small part of the changes in institutional structures. At the same time, the event of “transformation” is accompanied by the transfer of the “social relay”, and this can be recorded as a change in the structure of the institutional vector (IV). Structure parameters: 4 basic norms –utilitarianism (U), interpretive rationality (IR), empathy (E), trust (T). With a certain de-gree of conditionality, the signs-attributes of a modernist project (Sovi-et context) are revealed in the “Marshal – Designer” example. The hypothesis about the structure of IV in these conditions: {U, E, IR, T}. Following the theoretical constructions of the European philosophy of science (in particular, the ideas of P. Feyerabend), according to the Russian traditions of organizing interaction within scientific communities, we get the ideal desired type of IV structure: {T, E, IR, Y, U}. But, for a number of reasons, this will not be enough for a proper “relay”. The restoration of the integrity of science is possible under the auspices of a higher-order structure, the role of which is reserved to the convention of dignity. The dignity of scientists, the dignity of science.
epistemology of science; Feyerabend; structure of institutional vector; development of institutional forms; social relay.