Big-data is an importanagnostic platform" and without dependence on any field or discipline; without aristocracy of epistemological knowledge or any other theory and with a disruption from previous scholars and scientists.
4- Massification of actors raises the question of whether the accumulative, aggregative, and evolutionary characteristic of science, as seen in the history of science, does not undergo a radical transformation? Doesn't it go out of its institutional context, i.e. the field of "academy"? Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, Telegram, WhatsApp and many others have come to the field of innovation by people whose original innovators were often not "scientists" in the conventional sense, and sometimes even dropped out of university. These initiatives and innovations have been the source of the growth of science. The result is that the scientific evolution has come from the academic environment to the business environment. Science has become more dependent on the market than before, and the "dynamism" of the market has become the source of the "dynamism" of science. Information technology has provided such a platform by facilitating communication and combining various technologies with each other to provide a context for mutual leap. Science is neither interdisciplinary nor disciplinary but non-disciplinary. This can disrupt the entire previous structure of science that have dominated since the Renaissance.
)