Some people think, when they are able to understand 5 words in a drama/movie/song, that they probably should share their wisdom with everyone else. Either that "everyone else" wants it or not. And they base their opinion on "what I think". Sorry to disappoint you but "what I think" methodology is wrong. Of course, in scientific research this approach is very appropriate under one condition - one needs to have the background for it. And background is not "cause I think so". The background is - getting familiar with the whole methodology. I hated this word during my MA studies, but now, when facing PhD, I feel like I'm in a deep hole because I lack the methodology. Fear not, I'm finding it slowly (some hawt guys don't make it any easier, but whatever). But to develop one's own approach, finding out more about the background - this is what's most important. You can't write a thesis about the dark matter (astron.) basing on your own thoughts. You need to read the results of someone else's research. Every great idea in the world comes exactly from this point. One is either against it (and proposes one's own interpretation of the matter), or agrees on it (and proposes the developped and deepened version of it).
This is why I'm annoyed, and probably not only me, of those who claim to know everything on some topic, basing on their own limited knowledge. You don't need to read all books in your library, that's not the point, but do some research on the matter that interests you the most.
