The statement questions the financial practices of Ivy League universities, particularly their large endowments and high tuition fees, in light of Harvard's decision to offer free tuition to students from families earning $200,000 or less. It engages with public issues related to education affordability and university funding.
- The statement does not use harmful language and raises a valid question about university funding practices, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- By questioning the financial practices of universities, the statement encourages a discussion that could lead to greater understanding and empathy for students who struggle with tuition costs. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement invites dialogue by questioning why other universities do not follow Harvard's example, without resorting to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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.
- The statement uses its platform to highlight an important societal issue, potentially influencing public opinion and encouraging other universities to reconsider their financial practices. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement responsibly uses free speech to address a public concern about education affordability and university endowment practices. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.