Development of a thesis (part 2)
So in one class period, I have discovered that most of the research I've been exposed to so far is outdated. This means that all of the analysis I've done and papers I've written are junk - they are based on bad information.
Specifically, I have based a lot of my analysis on the work of Richard Elliott Friedman - who is apparently outdated. I know some of his theories have always been considered too "out there", and those aren't the ones I was focusing on. But it seems that his basic chronology of the writings from each source are also not really accepted any more. If things weren't written in the order I thought they were written in, then my ideas about how the prevailing traditions and now-historical goings-on in the area would have affected the authors is also...off.
I'm not sure what to make of this in terms of deciding my thesis topic. Do I bring myself up to date on the research, try to figure out what hasn't been asked, and synthesize all the new information? Or do I scrap it and just learn something entirely new?Â
Is this a common experience when going from undergrad to grad studies?
