The statement critiques the reluctance of experts to embrace disruptive ideas, suggesting that such ideas are often resisted not due to their impracticality but because they challenge established expertise. The tone is critical and aims to provoke thought about the dynamics of innovation and resistance within expert communities.
- The statement does not directly harm others but could be seen as critical of experts, which might indirectly challenge their dignity.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement encourages understanding of why radical ideas face resistance, promoting empathy for innovators. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement critiques a group (experts) but does not engage in 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 free speech to challenge existing norms and provoke thought, aligning with responsible use of a platform. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.