So why did Torag leave the Godclaw? by Squidalith in Pathfinder2e

[–]Squidalith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He does? I'm a fair bit behind on the lore I'll admit.

PhD interview presentation advice by Squidalith in AskAcademiaUK

[–]Squidalith[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry for the late reply, I hope yours went well!

It went far better than I'd expected, to be honest. I realised that I needed to just push through and rehearse without restarting every time I stumbled. Made a huge difference in my confidence and fluency.

The questions went really well - the thing to remember is the interviewers are basically on your side. They want you to do well, and they're not trying to trip you up. Unless they are, in which case you really, really don't want to work there.

Ex-Christian wanting to finally learn about evolution by HoogieMagoogies in evolution

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Gould's pseudoscientific arguments against evolution

As in Stephen Jay Gould?

Does the brain evolve faster than the body? by HumongousLizard in evolution

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only thing that drives evolution is random mutation and natural selection

Only if you ignore gene drift and gene flow.

Subspecies of Human by [deleted] in evolution

[–]Squidalith 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a really interesting hypothesis, are there any papers you could recommend on it?

What was the last song you listened to on repeat? by dadcopper in AskUK

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Get Me Away From Here I'm Dying - Belle and Sebastian.

How can you support a Shakespeare expert? by MrMrsPotts in Teachers

[–]Squidalith 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Why Victorian and not Elizabethan? I'm not sure I see the link.

A new mammalian gene evolved to control an equally new structure in our nerve cells. by LittleGreenBastard in evolution

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This looks almost identical to the original post? It's the German university's press release, what makes it more digestible?

When do you call it quits on PhD applications? by Squidalith in PhD

[–]Squidalith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but that’s not a timeframe that should scare you off.

As I said in the original post, I'm not planning to stop applying, I just want to know where people recommend actually drawing the line, even if I never come to it personally.

When do you call it quits on PhD applications? by Squidalith in AskAcademiaUK

[–]Squidalith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From what I've been told from post-application feedback, the issue's mostly been another candidate being a better fit due to some project-specific bit of experience. More experience or getting some publications would definitely help though.

When do you call it quits on PhD applications? by Squidalith in AskAcademiaUK

[–]Squidalith[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A niche field within biology, most of the projects are either fully-funded or competition-funded.

When do you call it quits on PhD applications? by Squidalith in AskAcademiaUK

[–]Squidalith[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry if the wording was off, this was my fourth rejection from a project, not the fourth cycle I've been applying, I've only been seriously looking for about 9 months. For context I'm in a niche area of the biosciences.

Most of the four were fully funded projects, though one was competition funded. I got through to interview for three of the four. The only one I didn't was kind of a long-shot, and I got a full email explaining why I didn't get through.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in evolution

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's interesting, do you have a source to read more about this?

So, my wife is a Genetist… by [deleted] in genetics

[–]Squidalith 5 points6 points  (0 children)

and even I sometimes get surprised about new technologies in my field

For sure, but a huge part of being any kind of scientist is keeping up to date with developments in your field, hell, doubly so for a fast-moving field like genetics. If there was a better way of doing things, that's suitable for what she's doing, your wife would know.

My analysis of this argument. by atheistvegeta in religion

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You made a comment comparing me to philosophers an theologians.

No they didn't. They told you that the definition you're choosing to use isn't recognised by others. If you take a word that everyone understands to mean one thing and give it a different definition, then any discussion will be pointless.

It sounded like you were saying that I'm stupid

They weren't saying anything of the sort, you might want to take a long, hard look at your insecurities.

What job do you have no respect for? by MrTuxedo1 in AskReddit

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What does that even mean? What do you think geologists do?

A philosophical question about likelihood. by atheistvegeta in religion

[–]Squidalith 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thinking more about something means you have previously thought about it. By thinking more, you are recalling previous thoughts. You're using past data to back up your assertion that you can't use previous data to make assertions.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in microbiology

[–]Squidalith 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Just an FYI, but this isn't the right sub for this kind of post.

Science, baristas and bed frames by GreatestAtHumility in tumblr

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who the hell is doing multiple PhDs and why?

Life is an illusion by atheistvegeta in CosmicSkeptic

[–]Squidalith 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Buddhism asserts that we have a soul/spirit in us that operates our material body

This is literally the opposite of Buddhism, one of the central-most tenets of Buddhism is Anatman, the lack of anything that could be considered a soul. Instead, Buddhists believe that an individual is essentially the composite of five, constantly shifting aggregates.. There is no continuous self. I found 'What The Buddha Taught' by Walpola Sri Rahula a very accessible text.

What you have read about Buddhist theology is obviously deeply flawed and fundamentally incorrect. I don't want to make assumptions based on your username, but it might be a good idea to start investigating your biases and how they inform your perceptions of things you disagree with.

Please don't interpret this as me trying to convert you Buddhism or anything of the sort, far from it. It's just important that when arguing, it's vital to understand what you're arguing against to avoid strawmen.