1. Does the methodology, suggested in this book, is based on any information fund? If there is no information fund - we can not to speak something.


2. If it based on patent fund, are found out the levels of the solutions?


3. Is these recommendations the instrument? What for all this? How it to use?


4. Are whether recommendations practically checked up? Is whether such check possible? Sometimes such recommendations are given, for which check is impossible. Such recommendations are senseless.


5. Correspond the recommendations, given in the book, with what has already settled?


We admit, that the person with the good patent fund proves, that there is no law of increase of ideality, and there is a law of increase "to-to-ty". There should be a conformity with already known. Infringements are extremely interesting. It is the indication on existence something new, or the indication on hack-work.



6. Typical attributes of the bad publication: "quasi-science", "super-clever", abundance of unnecessary terminology, "super-mathematic" (many formulas for nothing, this formulas to use not possible really) for demonstration of "high- clever" of the author. Superfluous to citing of classics at the slightest pretext (the clever books are not citing successively classics only). Bulky proofs of positions not requiring the proof.


If this book about creativity - the absence of references to TRIZ is indicative in itself. Happens, the reference is present. But! In the book issued in 1986-87 reference to books issued in 1974 and is even more senior. Antiquities are good, but not in a science and not in soup...



Main page