Reposted by Gary Marcus
The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive debate about the nature of science, truth, and epistemology, which are significant public issues. The tone is critical and somewhat confrontational, aiming to correct perceived misunderstandings in the previous statements.
- The statement does not appear to intend harm, but its confrontational tone could be perceived as dismissive or disrespectful, which might cause harm indirectly. Minor violation. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It focuses on the argument rather than personal attacks. Adheres well. [+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 promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is more focused on correcting and criticizing the other person's viewpoint. Minor violation. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism but borders on being dismissive. It does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. Adheres moderately well. [+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.
- There is no indication in the statement that the speaker acknowledges or corrects their own mistakes. Not relevant.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform to engage in a public debate responsibly. Adheres well. [+2]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.