In reply to:
Adam Shame
@AdamShame3
·
532d
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
532d
The statement '@AdamShame3 that’s a pejorative label, not a counterargument.' constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about the nature of arguments and labels in a political context. The tone is corrective and aims to steer the conversation towards more constructive dialogue.
- The statement strives to do no harm by pointing out the use of a pejorative label, which can be harmful in discourse. This aligns well with the principle. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the dignity of others by not engaging in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It calls out a pejorative label, which is a form of respectful engagement. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement promotes understanding by clarifying that a pejorative label is not a valid counterargument, thus encouraging more thoughtful and empathetic dialogue. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing the use of a pejorative label without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It focuses on the quality of the argument rather than the person making it. [+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.