Gary Marcus

The statement in question is part of a broader discussion on the nature of scientific laws and their empirical basis, which constitutes public discourse as it engages with a substantive issue in science and technology. The tone of the statement is somewhat dismissive and condescending, suggesting a lack of patience or willingness to engage constructively with differing viewpoints.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not directly cause harm, but its dismissive tone could be seen as unhelpful in fostering a respectful dialogue. Minor violation. [-1]
2. 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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. Neutral.
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is dismissive and does not seek to bridge gaps in understanding. Minor violation. [-1]
4. 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.

   The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. Instead, it dismisses the other party's understanding without providing a constructive counter-argument. Significant violation. [-2]