Rethinking Journal classification: Rethinking Journal classification in the twenty-first century in the interests of a higher quantum of scientific output

In this paper, we challenge Jeffrey Beall’s still dominant in the psyche approach to journal classification and some other ill-conceived approaches to journal classification, and attempt to show why such reductionist views are harmful to the healthy growth of science. While scientific fraud in any form must be horsewhipped and must not be exonerated or absolved at any cost and under any circumstances, journal classification and all other attendant issues and factors impacting and affecting science and healthy scientific progress must be taken in all the seriousness they deserve and merit, and must be assessed holistically and comprehensively. The scholars’ and the researchers’ point of view must also be taken into account and consideration at all times, and they must be asked to provide a reasonable and an elaborate justification and validation for all their actions including justifications for their publications in less prominent or less prestigious journals. We also propose an alternative approach to journal classification and ranking, but as no one researcher may be able to think through all the factors impacting and affecting the issue comprehensively enough, we invite other interested and concerned scholars, authors, scientists, researchers and educators to contribute more meaningfully to the benefit of the entire process.