A scientific idea may arise out of an intuition or experimentation – but by no means a scientific work.

Students are interested in different areas of their subject. There is nothing wrong with following this interest and making it the topic of your own home, bachelor or master thesis. However, from this point on, it is necessary to work scientifically – and that means above all: formally comprehensible and systematic – the topic should be defined and worked on using a concrete hypothesis or question. The development of such a question requires systematics: On the one hand, it must be kept in mind what the previous science has to contribute (in some cases, one will also be disappointed to find that a long-considered, very detailed question has long since been answered). On the other hand, the exact wording of the core question dominates the entire work – and must therefore be chosen wisely.

The scientific system requires an objective view as possible. Especially for sensitive issues that are highly controversial, different perspectives should be included and discussed. This does not mean that the writer has to remain neutral, it also does not mean that all perspectives should be presented as equally strong or equally legitimate: Because often there is a majority opinion in science, but this must first be developed.

In particular, systematic work means dealing carefully with the central concepts of content – especially when they have become so widespread (and widespread) through public discussion that their significance is barely recognizable. In this case, a definition must first be found or, if necessary, self-created.

Not only the writing itself, but also the activities around the creation of texts – ie the search for literature, its evaluation and administration – should follow a system: Who has a database, from which he can take the current state of the evaluation, is clear in the Advantage and will spend less time searching for the missing slip for a quote.