Back for the last time. This break was less of a break from my thesis and more of a break from my other responsibilities. Thesis, however, loomed in the not-so-far reaches of my mind. Yes, it is still fun do be doing semi-original research, but as the seminal quote of my last semester of college states, “playtime is over, we’re here to win.”
Over the last month I have gotten a chance to step away from and subsequently come back to my thesis argument and outline. While most of the main points and functional purpose of my argument remains, time away from my work has enabled me to clarify some of my points and come up with cleaner language to use in my analysis. Instead of relying on terms like “objectivity” and “value-based” to describe disciplines, I am now using “disinterested” and “interested” discourses respectively. This change will allow me to make more concise arguments with language that is in line with current publications relating to my topic.
My main argument has also shifted since the end of December. Instead of focusing squarely on value-free science and the issues with pining for the objective ideal, the center of attention is now on the problems that arise when questions in interested discourses are addressed with methodologies from disinterested discourses. With this shift in argument comes a need for a new key source to back up my thesis. The primary sources that I defined in December are still imperative but I need something more to drive my point home.
Finally, my outline needs to be edited. My current outline jumps into my main argument a little to quickly and I’d like to begin with a story instead of a moral. This will involve reworking the order in which the story is told and figuring out how I am going to weave my analysis in between the more widely accepted facts of the matter.
All in all, I’ve got a lot of work cut out for me in the next five weeks. It’ll get done. It has to get done.
Leave a Reply