  We propose an extension of the classical dichotomous categorization of
research programmes into progress and degeneration according to Lakatos in the
form of a neutral third category: the stagnant research programme. First, a
critical examination of the primary literature with its often criticized
definitional gaps justifies such a category. Through a generic derivation of
criteria for stagnant programmes, a clear demarcation from progressive and
degenerative ones is achieved. An empirical cross-check is subsequently
employed for support: Both a series of examples from fundamental physics and a
general analysis of today's research landscape also suggest on an empirical
level the need to go beyond the traditional Lakatosian conception. Attributing
stagnation is entirely in line with Lakatos' original intentions, which aimed
not to hastily discard promising research but to exercise patience until the
lifting of certain external constraints potentially enables progress once
again.
