"Nuance" describes subtle differences, generally referring to color, tone, or meaning. But what does this difference exactly refer to in the context of a thesis? For example, if my thesis is "nuanced," what does my thesis have subtle differences from? Is this referring to "theses in general," and therefore meaning that my thesis is original by its subtle differences, but similar to many arguments made on the subject?
Or, does this mean that my thesis handles many similar but slightly different ways to interpret the subject it is talking about?
Or, perhaps, does this mean that my thesis talks about a subject, but has "slight differences" from a simple answer to the question—that is, the thesis answers the given prompt on the subject, but is structured with "subtle differences" such that it answers more than what the given prompt asks you to answer?
Edit: A fourth interpretation came to mind: does this mean that the ideas within my thesis are subtly different from each other?
The context for this is that I am studying for the ACT, and one of the criteria for "Ideas and Analysis" part of the rubric says that "the argument’s thesis [should reflect] nuance and precision in thought and purpose."
If my thesis should reflect nuance in thought and purpose, and nuance is defined as "subtle difference," what exactly should my thought and purpose reflect subtle difference from? I'm assuming this is stating that my thought and purpose should be subtly different from the thoughts and purpose of "people in general" (whatever that means), but when I search for examples of a "nuanced thesis," I am unsure as to whether this interpretation of the word in this context is right.
Here is an example given by hateessays.com:
“Q: The main purpose of a film is to entertain the audience. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?.”
- You can argue ‘yes, the main purpose of a film is to entertain the audience’ by using examples of humour, suspense etc.
- You can also argue ‘no, the purpose of a film is not to entertain -it’s to educate’. Or you could go as far as saying ‘the purpose of a film is to indoctrinate – or solely to make money’. Those are extreme positions, though – good luck arguing them.
A nuanced argument: elegant and sophisticated.
- one nuanced argument would be to define “entertain[ing] an audience” to include feelings of horror and pity, as well as happiness.
From this, it seems my third interpretation of what "nuanced" is supposed to mean is correct. In this usage of the word, what do "nuanced" things have subtle differences from?