In reply to:
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
282d
Focoinvestor
@focoinvestor
·
282d
The statement is part of a conversation about the 'illusion of explanatory depth,' referencing a study on people's understanding of how a bicycle works. It involves a critique of a drawing and a suggestion for improvement, indicating engagement with a public issue related to cognitive science and education.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm; it is a critique of a drawing related to a cognitive science topic.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by discussing a cognitive science concept, though the tone could be perceived as slightly dismissive. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by suggesting an example that would be understandable to 4th graders, though the tone could be seen as slightly condescending. [-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.