In reply to:
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
623d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
623d
David Manheim
@davidmanheim
·
623d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
623d
The statement engages in a substantive discussion about the interpretation of research findings and their public dissemination, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is critical and somewhat dismissive, focusing on the misinterpretation of claims by a public figure with a large audience.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly, but the dismissive tone could be seen as unconstructive.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy but could be seen as dismissive, which might not fully respect the dignity of the person being criticized. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more focused on criticism. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not do so constructively and could be seen as a personal attack. [-2]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.