10 sources for my Bio paper and I'm STILL not happy with my thesis

[PaolaShreider]

I'm writing this massive research paper on the CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing technology and its ethical implications. I've been at it for two weeks. I have 10 peer-reviewed sources, a pile of highlighter pens, and enough sticky notes to build a small fort.

But here's my problem: my thesis statement feels so... basic. It's like, "CRISPR is cool but maybe we shouldn't design super-babies yet." Groundbreaking, right? Every time I try to make it more specific, I feel like I'm getting in over my head. I'm just a sophomore, what do I know about bioethics?

And don't even get me started on citations. I'm using Zotero, but I still double-check every single one because I'm terrified of accidental plagiarism. My professor said he "checks them all," and I believe him. He's that guy.

I guess I'm just wondering: at what point do you stop researching and just start writing? I feel like I could read 100 more papers and still not feel ready. Is this just the pre-med perfectionism gene kicking in? Send help (and maybe some coffee).

 

[AdamWolf]

You're doing GREAT. Ten sources is solid work for two weeks.

Second—the "sticky note fort" visual made me cackle because SAME. Here's my trick: I take all my sticky notes (or notecards, if I'm being fancy) and literally spread them on the floor. Then I group them by theme. Whatever has the biggest pile? That's probably where your real argument is hiding.

For CRISPR, maybe you're not actually interested in "should we do this?" but rather "WHO gets to decide?" That's a whole different angle. The democracy of science. The profit motives of biotech companies. Follow YOUR questions, not the assignment's expectations.

And yes, just start writing. The thesis will evolve. It always does