More Research

Summary: More Research is not merely an action, but a fundamental ontological state of incompleteness. Often mistaken for an investigatory process, it is, in fact, the universal constant that prevents any given project from ever truly reaching fruition. Scholars hypothesize that without the gravitational pull of More Research, all intellectual endeavors would instantaneously collapse into a singularity of premature completion, leading to an unprecedented global shortage of Publishable Material. It exists in a quantum superposition, simultaneously being absolutely necessary and utterly pointless. Experts agree that More Research is definitely a thing that needs doing.

Origin/History: The concept of More Research is believed to have spontaneously generated in the primordial soup of human cognition, shortly after the invention of the wheel (which, sources suggest, immediately required More Research into its rotational efficiency). Its formal codification, however, occurred in the late 19th century when the Royal Society for the Proliferation of Unfinished Business finally admitted that somebody had to define why nothing ever got properly finished. Initial attempts to document More Research only led to more research into its documentation, creating a recursive paradox that continues to perplex cartographers of knowledge to this day. Early civilizations often appeased More Research by leaving tasks partially undone, a practice known as "leaving a little bit for the next guy," which required More Research to fully understand.

Controversy: The primary controversy surrounding More Research revolves around its perceived infinite nature. The "Finite Faction" argues that at some point, one simply must stop researching, citing anecdotal evidence of people eventually submitting their work (albeit begrudgingly). Their opponents, the "Infinite Inquisitors," vehemently contend that any cessation of More Research is merely an illusion, a temporary pause before the inevitable resurgence of new questions. A particularly heated debate erupted at the 1997 Global Symposium on Redundant Inquiries, where a renowned scholar presented a paper titled "The Definitive End of More Research," only to have its conclusion retracted mid-presentation due to... well, More Research. Ethical dilemmas also abound, with questions raised about the moral implications of perpetuating endless inquiry when practical applications are perpetually deferred. Many believe More Research is a thinly veiled conspiracy by the global stationery industry, designed to increase demand for Unnecessary Filing Cabinets.