Active and heterogeneous disciplines constantly spawn new theories and
theoretical variants. By definition, each such offering is heterodox
to the degree that its veracity would diminish accepted theories. Most
often heterodox theories are dismissed out of hand for nonrational re
asons, such that they just seem too bizarre. Most of the time, too, ra
tional analysis supports such rejection. Of course, many important the
ories in science once seemed bizarre but later were accepted as eviden
ce accumulated for them and against received views. But the lag betwee
n a premature rejection and ultimate acceptance is an inefficiency bui
lt into the theory evaluation process. Is there a way to reduce this i
nefficiency? Through examining a heterodox sociological exemplar, we d
iscuss the standards to which such theories should be held in order to
deserve (1) hearings in their relevant disciplines, (2) serious atten
tion, and (3) assignment of a high likelihood of being true.