Something I notice is that in the good examples you use only I statements. “I don’t think humanity should be doing it”, “I’m not talking about a tiny risk”, “Oh I think I’ll do it better than the next guy”.
Whereas in the bad examples it’s different, “Well we can all agree that it’d be bad if AIs were used to enable terrorists to make bioweapons”, “Even if you think the chance of it happening is very small”, “In some unlikely but extreme cases, these companies put civilization at risk”
I think with the bad examples there’s a lot of pressure for the other person to agree, “the companies should be responsible (because I say so)”, “Even if you think… Its still worth focusing on (because I’ve decided what you should care about)”, “Well we can all agree (I’ve already decided you agree and you’re not getting a choice otherwise)”
Whereas with the good examples the other person is not under any pressure to agree, so they are completely free to think about the things you’re saying. I think that’s also part of what makes these statements courageous, that it’s stated in a way where the other person is free to agree or dissagree as they wish, and so you trust that what your saying is compelling enough to be persuasive on its own.
Something I notice is that in the good examples you use only I statements. “I don’t think humanity should be doing it”, “I’m not talking about a tiny risk”, “Oh I think I’ll do it better than the next guy”.
Whereas in the bad examples it’s different, “Well we can all agree that it’d be bad if AIs were used to enable terrorists to make bioweapons”, “Even if you think the chance of it happening is very small”, “In some unlikely but extreme cases, these companies put civilization at risk”
I think with the bad examples there’s a lot of pressure for the other person to agree, “the companies should be responsible (because I say so)”, “Even if you think… Its still worth focusing on (because I’ve decided what you should care about)”, “Well we can all agree (I’ve already decided you agree and you’re not getting a choice otherwise)”
Whereas with the good examples the other person is not under any pressure to agree, so they are completely free to think about the things you’re saying. I think that’s also part of what makes these statements courageous, that it’s stated in a way where the other person is free to agree or dissagree as they wish, and so you trust that what your saying is compelling enough to be persuasive on its own.