jef 🛰️
@jefgrav
·
1d
The statement critiques the idea of singular 'facts' determined by experts, suggesting the need for 'alternative facts.' It engages in public discourse by addressing issues of censorship, expert authority, and the nature of truth in media.
- The statement challenges the authority of experts, which could be seen as promoting skepticism but may also undermine trust in factual information, potentially causing harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- By advocating for 'alternative facts,' the statement may not promote understanding or empathy, as it could lead to confusion about what constitutes truth. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism of Obama's views but does not resort to personal attacks, maintaining a level of constructive dialogue. [+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 question authority and promote a particular viewpoint on free speech and censorship, which can be seen as using influence for societal debate. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.