I'm facing a dilemma and I'm not sure how to proceed. Research has led me to information I think would be very useful to make a certain over-arching point, but doing so would be the equivalent of telling 40 years worth of researchers that they've been "doing it all wrong". There should be some sort of novelty and uniqueness in what I produce, but I'm not sure if even I am bold enough to make that contribution be a manifesto declaring that problems are conceptualized, researched, and pondered in a way that serves only to perpetuate endless research instead of finding actual answers to the questions so we can all move on to looking at other things.
Certainly I can't be the only person in the last 40 years that sees what I see, and I wonder if those other people faced this same dilemma and just decided to toe the line so they wouldn't place their academic/professional career aspirations in jeopardy. Part of me is just wondering how far I am wanting to jump past these arbitrary lines drawn in the metaphorical sand.