In reply to:
David Deutsch
@DavidDeutschOxf
·
573d
Steven Pinker
@sapinker
·
573d
The statement in question is a critique of the practice of selectively reading scientific papers, which may inadvertently marginalize the work of outsiders, women, and minorities. It suggests that limiting one's reading to papers by known individuals can contribute to systemic biases in academia and science. The tone is constructive and aims to promote inclusivity and fairness in the scientific community. The image attached to the conversation highlights concerns about the quality of scientific content in the context of AI-generated papers, which is a separate but related issue.
- The statement promotes inclusivity and aims to prevent harm that may arise from exclusionary practices. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It respects the dignity of all researchers by advocating for equal consideration of their work. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement encourages dialogue about the importance of diversity in scientific literature. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- It uses influence to suggest improvements in the scientific community's approach to reading and valuing research. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.