本站小編為你精心整理了14篇《ted演講稿》的範文，但願對你的工作學習帶來幫助，希望你能喜歡！當然你還可以在本站搜索到更多與《ted演講稿》相關的範文。
when i was nine years old i went off to summer camp for the first time. and my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do. because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. and this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. you have the animal warmth of your family sitting right next to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventureland inside your own mind. and i had this idea that camp was going to be just like this, but better. (laughter) i had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns.
(laughter)
camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. and on the very first day our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that she said we would be doing every day for the rest of the summer to instill camp spirit. and it went like this: “r-o-w-d-i-e, that's the way we spell rowdie. rowdie, rowdie, let's get rowdie.” yeah. so i couldn't figure out for the life of me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this word incorrectly. (laughter) but i recited a cheer. i recited a cheer along with everybody else. i did my best. and i just waited for the time that i could go off and read my books.
but the first time that i took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girl in the bunk came up to me and she asked me, “why are you being so mellow?” -- mellow, of course, being the exact opposite of r-o-w-d-i-e. and then the second time i tried it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned expression on her face and she repeated the point about camp spirit and said we should all work very hard to be outgoing.
and so i put my books away, back in their suitcase, and i put them under my bed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. and i felt kind of guilty about this. i felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they were calling out to me and i was forsaking them. but i did forsake them and i didn't open that suitcase again until i was back home with my family at the end of the summer.
now, i tell you this story about summer camp. i could have told you 50 others just like it -- all the times that i got the message that somehow my quiet and introverted style of being was not necessarily the right way to go, that i should be trying to pass as more of an extrovert. and i always sensed deep down that this was wrong and that introverts were pretty excellent just as they were. but for years i denied this intuition, and so i became a wall street lawyer, of all things, instead of the writer that i had always longed to be -- partly because i needed to prove to myself that i could be bold and assertive too. and i was always going off to crowded bars when i really would have preferred to just have a nice dinner with friends. and i made these self-negating choices so reflexively, that i wasn't even aware that i was making them.
chinese restaurants have played an important role in american history, as a matter of fact. the cuban missile crisis was resolved in a chinese restaurant called yenching palace in washington, d.c., which unfortunately is closed now, and about to be turned into walgreen's. and the house that john wilkes booth planned the assassination of abraham lincoln is actually also now a chinese restaurant called wok 'n roll, on h street in washington.
事實上，中國餐館在美國曆史上發揮了很重要的作用。古巴導彈危機是在華盛頓一家名叫“燕京館”的中餐館裏解決的。很不幸，這家餐館現在關門了，即將被改建成沃爾格林連鎖藥店。而約翰·威爾克斯·布斯刺殺林肯總統的那所房子現在也成了一家中餐館，就是位於華盛頓的“鍋和卷”。
and if you think about it, a lot of the foods that you think of or we think of or americans think of as chinese food are barely recognizable to chinese, for e_ample: beef with broccoli, egg rolls, general tso's chicken, fortune cookies, chop suey, the take-out bo_es.
如果你仔細想想，就會發現很多你們所認為或我們所認為，或是美國人所認為的中國食物，中國人並不認識。比如西蘭花牛肉、蛋卷、左宗棠雞、幸運餅乾、雜碎、外賣盒子。
so, the interesting question is, how do you go from fortune cookies being something that is japanese to being something that is chinese? well, the short answer is, we locked up all the japanese during world war ii, including those that made fortune cookies, so that's the time when the chinese moved in, kind of saw a market opportunity and took over.
所以有趣的是，幸運餅乾是怎麼從日本的東西變成中國的東西的呢?簡單地説，我們在二戰時扣押了所以的日本人，包括那些做幸運餅乾的。這時候，中國人來了，看到了商機，自然就據為己有了。
general tso's chicken -- which, by the way, in the us naval academy is called admiral tso's chicken. i love this dish. the original name in my book was actually called the long march of general tso, and he has marched very far indeed, because he is sweet, he is fried, and he is chicken -- all things that americans love.
左宗棠雞，在美國海軍軍校被稱為左司令雞。我很喜歡這道菜。在我的書裏，這道菜實際上叫左將軍的長征，它確實在美國很受歡迎 ，因為它是甜的，油炸的，是雞肉做的——全部都是美國人的最愛。
so, you know, i realized when i was there, general tso is kind of a lot like colonel sanders in america, in that he's known for chicken and not war. but in china, this guy's actually known for war and not chicken.
我意識到左宗棠將軍有點像美國的桑德斯上校(肯德基創始人)，因為他是因雞肉而出名的而不是戰爭。而在中國，左宗棠確實是因為戰爭而不是雞肉聞名的。
so it's kind of part of the phenomenon i called spontaneous self-organization, right, where, like in ant colonies, where little decisions made by -- on the micro-level actually have a big impact on the macro-level.
這就有點像我所説的自發組織現象。就像在螞蟻羣中，在微觀層面上做的小小決定會在宏觀層面上產生巨大的影響。
and the great innovation of chicken mcnuggets was not nuggetfying them, because that's kind of an easy concept, but the trick behind chicken mcnuggets was, they were able to remove the chicken from the bone in a cost-effective manner, which is why it took so long for other people to copy them.
麥樂雞塊的發明並沒有給他們帶來切實收益，因為這個想法很簡單，但麥樂雞背後的技巧是如何用一種划算的方式來把雞肉從骨頭上剔出來。這就是為什麼過了這麼久才有人模仿他們。
we can think of chinese restaurants perhaps as linu_: sort of an open source thing, right, where ideas from one person can be copied and propagated across the entire system, that there can be specialized versions of chinese food, you know, depending on the region.
我們可以把中餐館比作linu_：一種開源系統。一個人的想法可以在整個系統中被複制，被普及。在不同的地區，就有特別版本的中國菜。
簡介：殘奧會短跑冠軍aimee mullins天生沒有腓骨，從小就要學習靠義肢走路和奔跑。如今，她不僅是短跑選手、演員、模特，還是一位穩健的演講者。她不喜歡字典中 “disabled”這個詞，因為負面詞彙足以毀掉一個人。但是，坦然面對不幸，你會發現等待你的是更多的機會。
i'd like to share with you a discovery that i made a few months ago while writing an article for italian wired. i always keep my thesaurus handy whenever i'm writing anything, but i'd already finished editing the piece, and i realized that i had never once in my life looked up the word “disabled” to see what i'd find.
let me read you the entry. “disabled, adjective: crippled, helpless, useless, wrecked, stalled, maimed, wounded, mangled, lame, mutilated, run-down, worn-out, weakened, impotent, castrated, paralyzed, handicapped, senile, decrepit, laid-up, done-up, done-for, done-in cracked-up, counted-out; see also hurt, useless and weak. antonyms, healthy, strong, capable.” i was reading this list out loud to a friend and at first was laughing, it was so ludicrous, but i'd just gotten past “mangled,” and my voice broke, and i had to stop and collect myself from the emotional shock and impact that the assault from these words unleashed.
you know, of course, this is my raggedy old thesaurus so i'm thinking this must be an ancient print date, right? but, in fact, the print date was the early 1980s, when i would have been starting primary school and forming an understanding of myself outside the family unit and as related to the other kids and the world around me. and, needless to say, thank god i wasn't using a thesaurus back then. i mean, from this entry, it would seem that i was born into a world that perceived someone like me to have nothing positive whatsoever going for them, when in fact, today i'm celebrated for the opportunities and adventures my life has procured.
so, i immediately went to look up the __ online edition, e_pecting to find a revision worth noting. here's the updated version of this entry. unfortunately, it's not much better. i find the last two words under “near antonyms,” particularly unsettling: “whole” and “wholesome.”
so, it's not just about the words. it's what we believe about people when we name them with these words. it's about the values behind the words, and how we construct those values. our language affects our thinking and how we view the world and how we view other people. in fact, many ancient societies, including the greeks and the romans, believed that to utter a curse verbally was so powerful, because to say the thing out loud brought it into e_istence. so, what reality do we want to call into e_istence: a person who is limited, or a person who's empowered? by casually doing something as simple as naming a person, a child, we might be putting lids and casting shadows on their power. wouldn't we want to open doors for them instead?
one such person who opened doors for me was my childhood doctor at the a.i. dupont institute in wilmington, delaware. his name was dr. pizzutillo, an italian american, whose name, apparently, was too difficult for most americans to pronounce, so he went by dr. p. and dr. p always wore really colorful bow ties and had the very perfect disposition to work with children.
i loved almost everything about my time spent at this hospital, with the e_ception of my physical therapy sessions. i had to do what seemed like innumerable repetitions of e_ercises with these thick, elastic bands -- different colors, you know -- to help build up my leg muscles, and i hated these bands more than anything -- i hated them, had names for them. i hated them. and, you know, i was already bargaining, as a five year-old child, with dr. p to try to get out of doing these e_ercises, unsuccessfully, of course. and, one day, he came in to my session -- e_haustive and unforgiving, these sessions -- and he said to me, “wow. aimee, you are such a strong and powerful little girl, i think you're going to break one of those bands. when you do break it, i'm going to give you a hundred bucks.”
now, of course, this was a simple ploy on dr. p's part to get me to do the e_ercises i didn't want to do before the prospect of being the richest five-year-old in the second floor ward, but what he effectively did for me was reshape an awful daily occurrence into a new and promising e_perience for me. and i have to wonder today to what e_tent his vision and his declaration of me as a strong and powerful little girl shaped my own view of myself as an inherently strong, powerful and athletic person well into the future.
this is an e_ample of how adults in positions of power can ignite the power of a child. but, in the previous instances of those thesaurus entries, our language isn't allowing us to evolve into the reality that we would all want, the possibility of an individual to see themselves as capable. our language hasn't caught up with the changes in our society, many of which have been brought about by technology. certainly, from a medical standpoint, my legs, laser surgery for vision impairment, titanium knees and hip replacements for aging bodies that are allowing people to more fully engage with their abilities, and move beyond the limits that nature has imposed on them -- not to mention social networking platforms allow people to self-identify, to claim their own descriptions of themselves, so they can go align with global groups of their own choosing. so, perhaps technology is revealing more clearly to us now what has always been a truth: that everyone has something rare and powerful to offer our society, and that the human ability to adapt is our greatest asset.
the human ability to adapt, it's an interesting thing, because people have continually wanted to talk to me about overcoming adversity, and i'm going to make an admission: this phrase never sat right with me, and i always felt uneasy trying to answer people's questions about it, and i think i'm starting to figure out why. implicit in this phrase of “overcoming adversity” is the idea that success, or happiness, is about emerging on the other side of a challenging e_perience unscathed or unmarked by the e_perience, as if my successes in life have come about from an ability to sidestep or circumnavigate the presumed pitfalls of a life with prosthetics, or what other people perceive as my disability. but, in fact, we are changed. we are marked, of course, by a challenge, whether physically, emotionally or both. and i'm going to suggest that this is a good thing. adversity isn't an obstacle that we need to get around in order to resume living our life. it's part of our life. and i tend to think of it like my shadow. sometimes i see a lot of it, sometimes there's very little, but it's always with me. and, certainly, i'm not trying to diminish the impact, the weight, of a person's struggle.
there is adversity and challenge in life, and it's all very real and relative to every single person, but the question isn't whether or not you're going to meet adversity, but how you're going to meet it. so, our responsibility is not simply shielding those we care for from adversity, but preparing them to meet it well. and we do a disservice to our kids when we make them feel that they're not equipped to adapt. there's an important difference and distinction between the objective medical fact of my being an amputee and the subjective societal opinion of whether or not i'm disabled. and, truthfully, the only real and consistent disability i've had to confront is the world ever thinking that i could be described by those definitions.
in our desire to protect those we care about by giving them the cold, hard truth about their medical prognosis, or, indeed, a prognosis on the e_pected quality of their life, we have to make sure that we don't put the first brick in a wall that will actually disable someone. perhaps the e_isting model of only looking at what is broken in you and how do we fi_ it, serves to be more disabling to the individual than the pathology itself.
by not treating the wholeness of a person, by not acknowledging their potency, we are creating another ill on top of whatever natural struggle they might have. we are effectively grading someone's worth to our community. so we need to see through the pathology and into the range of human capability. and, most importantly, there's a partnership between those perceived deficiencies and our greatest creative ability. so it's not about devaluing, or negating, these more trying times as something we want to avoid or sweep under the rug, but instead to find those opportunities wrapped in the adversity. so maybe the idea i want to put out there is not so much overcoming adversity as it is opening ourselves up to it, embracing it, grappling with it, to use a wrestling term, maybe even dancing with it. and, perhaps, if we see adversity as natural, consistent and useful, we're less burdened by the presence of it.
this year we celebrate the 200th birthday of charles darwin, and it was 150 years ago, when writing about evolution, that darwin illustrated, i think, a truth about the human character. to paraphrase: it's not the strongest of the species that survives, nor is it the most intelligent that survives; it is the one that is most adaptable to change. conflict is the genesis of creation. from darwin's work, amongst others, we can recognize that the human ability to survive and flourish is driven by the struggle of the human spirit through conflict into transformation. so, again, transformation, adaptation, is our greatest human skill. and, perhaps, until we're tested, we don't know what we're made of. maybe that's what adversity gives us: a sense of self, a sense of our own power. so, we can give ourselves a gift. we can re-imagine adversity as something more than just tough times. maybe we can see it as change. adversity is just change that we haven't adapted ourselves to yet.
i think the greatest adversity that we've created for ourselves is this idea of normalcy. now, who's normal? there's no normal. there's common, there's typical. there's no normal, and would you want to meet that poor, beige person if they e_isted? (laughter) i don't think so. if we can change this paradigm from one of achieving normalcy to one of possibility -- or potency, to be even a little bit more dangerous -- we can release the power of so many more children, and invite them to engage their rare and valuable abilities with the community.
anthropologists tell us that the one thing we as humans have always required of our community members is to be of use, to be able to contribute. there's evidence that neanderthals, 60,000 years ago, carried their elderly and those with serious physical injury, and perhaps it's because the life e_perience of survival of these people proved of value to the community. they didn't view these people as broken and useless; they were seen as rare and valuable.
a few years ago, i was in a food market in the town where i grew up in that red zone in northeastern pennsylvania, and i was standing over a bushel of tomatoes. it was summertime: i had shorts on. i hear this guy, his voice behind me say, “well, if it isn't aimee mullins.” and i turn around, and it's this older man. i have no idea who he is.
and i said, “i'm sorry, sir, have we met? i don't remember meeting you.”
he said, “well, you wouldn't remember meeting me. i mean, when we met i was delivering you from your mother's womb.” (laughter) oh, that guy. and, but of course, actually, it did click.
this man was dr. kean, a man that i had only known about through my mother's stories of that day, because, of course, typical fashion, i arrived late for my birthday by two weeks. and so my mother's prenatal physician had gone on vacation, so the man who delivered me was a complete stranger to my parents. and, because i was born without the fibula bones, and had feet turned in, and a few toes in this foot and a few toes in that, he had to be the bearer -- this stranger had to be the bearer of bad news.
he said to me, “i had to give this prognosis to your parents that you would never walk, and you would never have the kind of mobility that other kids have or any kind of life of independence, and you've been making liar out of me ever since.” (laughter) (applause)
the e_traordinary thing is that he said he had saved newspaper clippings throughout my whole childhood, whether winning a second grade spelling bee, marching with the girl scouts, you know, the halloween parade, winning my college scholarship, or any of my sports victories, and he was using it, and integrating it into teaching resident students, med students from hahnemann medical school and hershey medical school. and he called this part of the course the _ factor, the potential of the human will. no prognosis can account for how powerful this could be as a determinant in the quality of someone's life. and dr. kean went on to tell me, he said, “in my e_perience, unless repeatedly told otherwise, and even if given a modicum of support, if left to their own devices, a child will achieve.”
see, dr. kean made that shift in thinking. he understood that there's a difference between the medical condition and what someone might do with it. and there's been a shift in my thinking over time, in that, if you had asked me at 15 years old, if i would have traded prosthetics for flesh-and-bone legs, i wouldn't have hesitated for a second. i aspired to that kind of normalcy back then. but if you ask me today, i'm not so sure. and it's because of the e_periences i've had with them, not in spite of the e_periences i've had with them. and perhaps this shift in me has happened because i've been e_posed to more people who have opened doors for me than those who have put lids and cast shadows on me.
see, all you really need is one person to show you the epiphany of your own power, and you're off. if you can hand somebody the key to their own power -- the human spirit is so receptive -- if you can do that and open a door for someone at a crucial moment, you are educating them in the best sense. you're teaching them to open doors for themselves. in fact, the e_act meaning of the word “educate” comes from the root word “educe.” it means “to bring forth what is within, to bring out potential.” so again, which potential do we want to bring out?
there was a case study done in 1960s britain, when they were moving from grammar schools to comprehensive schools. it's called the streaming trials. we call it “tracking” here in the states. it's separating students from a, b, c, d and so on. and the “a students” get the tougher curriculum, the best teachers, etc. well, they took, over a three-month period, d-level students, gave them a's, told them they were “a's,” told them they were bright, and at the end of this three-month period, they were performing at a-level.
and, of course, the heartbreaking, flip side of this study, is that they took the “a students” and told them they were “d's.” and that's what happened at the end of that three-month period. those who were still around in school, besides the people who had dropped out. a crucial part of this case study was that the teachers were duped too. the teachers didn't know a switch had been made. they were simply told, “these are the 'a-students,' these are the 'd-students.'” and that's how they went about teaching them and treating them.
so, i think that the only true disability is a crushed spirit, a spirit that's been crushed doesn't have hope, it doesn't see beauty, it no longer has our natural, childlike curiosity and our innate ability to imagine. if instead, we can bolster a human spirit to keep hope, to see beauty in themselves and others, to be curious and imaginative, then we are truly using our power well. when a spirit has those qualities, we are able to create new realities and new ways of being.
i'd like to leave you with a poem by a fourteenth-century persian poet named hafiz that my friend, jacques dembois told me about, and the poem is called “the god who only knows four words”: “every child has known god, not the god of names, not the god of don'ts, but the god who only knows four words and keeps repeating them, saying, 'come dance with me. come, dance with me. come, dance with me.'”
thank you. (applause)
in a funny, rapid-fire 4 minutes, ale_is ohanian of reddit tells the real-life fable of one humpback whale's rise to web stardom. the lesson of mister splashy pants is a shoo-in classic for meme-makers and marketers in the facebook age.
這段有趣的4分鐘演講，來自 reddit 網站創始人 ale_is ohanian。他講了一個座頭鯨在網上一夜成名的真實故事。“濺水先生”的故事是臉書時代米姆(小編注：根據《牛津英語詞典》，meme被定義為：“文化的基本單位，通過非遺傳的方式，特別是模仿而得到傳遞。”)製造者和傳播者共同創造的經典案例。
演講的開頭，ale_is ohanian 介紹了“濺水先生”的故事。“綠色和平”環保組織為了阻止日本的捕鯨行為，在一隻鯨魚體內植入新片，併發起一個為這隻座頭鯨起名的活動。“綠色和平”組織希望起低調奢華有內涵的名字，但經過 reddit 的宣傳和推動，票數最多的卻是非常不高大上的“濺水先生”這個名字。經過幾番折騰，“綠色和平”接受了這個名字，並且這一行動成功阻止了日本捕鯨活動。
演講內容節選(ale_ ohanian 從社交網絡的角度分析這個事件)
and actually, redditors in the internet community were happy to participate, but they weren't whale lovers. a few of them certainly were. but we're talking about a lot of people who were just really interested and really caught up in this great meme, and in fact someone from greenpeace came back on the site and thanked reddit for its participation. but this wasn't really out of altruism. this was just out of interest in doing something cool.
事實上，reddit 的社區用户們很高興參與其中，但他們並非是鯨魚愛好者。當然，他們中的一小部分或許是。我們看到的是一羣人積極地去參與到這個米姆(社會活動)中，實際上 “綠色和平”中的人登陸 ，感謝大家的參與。網友們這麼做並非是完全的利他主義。他們只是覺得做這件事很酷。
and this is kind of how the internet works. this is that great big secret. because the internet provides this level playing field. your link is just as good as your link, which is just as good as my link. as long as we have a browser, anyone can get to any website no matter how big a budget you have.
這就是互聯網的運作方式。這就是我説的祕密。因為互聯網提供的是一個機會均等平台。你分享的鏈接跟他分享的鏈接一樣有趣，我分享的鏈接也不賴。只要我們有一個瀏覽器，不論你的財富幾何，你都可以去到想瀏覽的頁面。
the other important thing is that it costs nothing to get that content online now. there are so many great publishing tools that are available, it only takes a few minutes of your time now to actually produce something. and the cost of iteration is so cheap that you might as well give it a go.
另外，從互聯網獲取內容不需要任何成本。如今，互聯網有各種各樣的發佈工具，你只需要幾分鐘就可以成為內容的提供者。這種行為的成本非常低，你也可以試試。
and if you do, be genuine about it. be honest. be up front. and one of the great lessons that greenpeace actually learned was that it's okay to lose control. the final message that i want to share with all of you -- that you can do well online. if you want to succeed you've got to be okay to just lose control. thank you.
如果你真的決定試試，那麼請真摯、誠實、坦率地去做。“綠色和平”在這個故事中獲得的教訓是，有時候失控並不一定是壞事。最後我想告訴你們的是——你可以在網絡上做得很好。如果你想在網絡上成功，你得經得起一點失控。謝謝。
try something new for 30 days 小計劃幫你實現大目標
a few years ago, i felt like i was stuck in a rut, so i decided to follow in the footsteps of the great american philosopher, morgan spurlock, and try something new for 30 days. the idea is actually pretty simple. think about something you’ve always wanted to add to your life and try it for the ne_t 30 days. it turns out, 30 days is just about the right amount of time to add a new habit or subtract a habit — like watching the news — from your life.
幾年前， 我感覺對老一套感到枯燥乏味， 所以我決定追隨偉大的美國哲學家摩根·斯普爾洛克的腳步，嘗試做新事情30天。這個想法的確是非常簡單。考慮下，你常想在你生命中做的一些事情 接下來30天嘗試做這些。 這就是，30天剛好是這麼一段合適的時間 去養成一個新的習慣或者改掉一個習慣——例如看新聞——在你生活中。
there’s a few things i learned while doing these 30-day challenges. the first was, instead of the months flying by, forgotten, the time was much more memorable. this was part of a challenge i did to take a picture everyday for a month. and i remember e_actly where i was and what i was doing that day. i also noticed that as i started to do more and harder 30-day challenges, my self-confidence grew. i went from desk-dwelling computer nerd to the kind of guy who bikes to work — for fun. even last year, i ended up hiking up mt. kilimanjaro, the highest mountain in africa. i would never have been that adventurous before i started my 30-day challenges.
當我在30天做這些挑戰性事情時，我學到以下一些事。第一件事是，取代了飛逝而過易被遺忘的歲月的是 這段時間非常的更加令人難忘。挑戰的一部分是要一個月內每天我要去拍攝一張照片。我清楚地記得那一天我所處的位置我都在幹什麼。我也注意到隨着我開始做更多的，更難的30天裏具有挑戰性的事時，我自信心也增強了。我從一個台式計算機宅男極客變成了一個愛騎自行車去工作的人——為了玩樂。甚至去年，我完成了在非洲最高山峯乞力馬扎羅山的遠足。在我開始這30天做挑戰性的事之前我從來沒有這樣熱愛冒險過。
i also figured out that if you really want something badly enough, you can do anything for 30 days. have you ever wanted to write a novel? every november, tens of thousands of people try to write their own 50,000 word novel from scratch in 30 days. it turns out, all you have to do is write 1,667 words a day for a month. so i did. by the way, the secret is not to go to sleep until you’ve written your words for the day. you might be sleep-deprived, but you’ll finish your novel. now is my book the ne_t great american novel? no. i wrote it in a month. it’s awful. but for the rest of my life, if i meet john hodgman at a ted party, i don’t have to say, “i’m a computer scientist.” no, no, if i want to i can say, “i’m a novelist.”
我也認識到如果你真想一些槽糕透頂的事，你可以在30天裏做這些事。你曾想寫小説嗎?每年11月，數以萬計的人們在30天裏，從零起點嘗試寫他們自己的5萬字小説。這結果就是，你所要去做的事就是每天寫1667個字要寫一個月。所以我做到了。順便説一下，祕密在於除非在一天裏你已經寫完了1667個字，要不你就甭想睡覺。你可能被剝奪睡眠，但你將會完成你的小説。那麼我寫的書會是下一部偉大的美國小説嗎?不是的。我在一個月內寫完它。它看上去太可怕了。但在我的餘生，如果我在一個ted聚會上遇見約翰·霍奇曼，我不必開口説，“我是一個電腦科學家。”不，不會的，如果我願意我可以説，“我是一個小説家。”
(laughter)
(笑聲)
so here’s one last thing i’d like to mention. i learned that when i made small, sustainable changes, things i could keep doing, they were more likely to stick. there’s nothing wrong with big, crazy challenges. in fact, they’re a ton of fun. but they’re less likely to stick. when i gave up sugar for 30 days, day 31 looked like this.
我這兒想提的最後一件事。當我做些小的、持續性的變化，我可以不斷嘗試做的事時，我學到我可以把它們更容易地堅持做下來。這和又大又瘋狂的具有挑戰性的事情無關。事實上，它們的樂趣無窮。但是，它們就不太可能堅持做下來。當我在30天裏拒絕吃糖果，31天后看上去就像這樣。
(laughter)
(笑聲)
so here’s my question to you: what are you waiting for? i guarantee you the ne_t 30 days are going to pass whether you like it or not, so why not think about something you have always wanted to try and give it a shot for the ne_t 30 days.
所以我給大家提的問題是：大家還在等什麼呀?我保準大家在未來的30天定會經歷你喜歡或者不喜歡的事，那麼為什麼不考慮一些你常想做的嘗試並在未來30天裏試試給自己一個機會。
thanks.
謝謝。
(applause)
(掌聲)
I was one of the only kids in college who had a reason to go to the P.O. bo_ at the end of the day, and that was mainly because my mother has never believed in email, in Facebook, in te_ting or cell phones in general. And so while other kids were BBM-ing their parents, I was literally waiting by the mailbo_ to get a letter from home to see how the weekend had gone, which was a little frustrating when Grandma was in the hospital, but I was just looking for some sort of scribble, some unkempt cursive from my mother.
And so when I moved to New York City after college and got completely sucker-punched in the face by depression, I did the only thing I could think of at the time. I wrote those same kinds of letters that my mother had written me for strangers, and tucked them all throughout the city, dozens and dozens of them. I left them everywhere, in cafes and in libraries, at the U.N., everywhere. I blogged about those letters and the days when they were necessary, and I posed a kind of crazy promise to the Internet: that if you asked me for a hand-written letter, I would write you one, no questions asked. Overnight, my inbo_ morphed into this harbor of heartbreak -- a single mother in Sacramento, a girl being bullied in rural Kansas, all asking me, a 22-year-old girl who barely even knew her own coffee order, to write them a love letter and give them a reason to wait by the mailbo_.
Well, today I fuel a global organization that is fueled by those trips to the mailbo_, fueled by the ways in which we can harness social media like never before to write and mail strangers letters when they need them most, but most of all, fueled by crates of mail like this one, my trusty mail crate, filled with the scriptings of ordinary people, strangers writing letters to other strangers not because they're ever going to meet and laugh over a cup of coffee, but because they have found one another by way of letter-writing.
But, you know, the thing that always gets me about these letters is that most of them have been written by people that have never known themselves loved on a piece of paper. They could not tell you about the ink of their own love letters. They're the ones from my generation, the ones of us that have grown up into a world where everything is paperless, and where some of our best conversations have happened upon a screen. We have learned to diary our pain onto Facebook, and we speak swiftly in 140 characters or less.
But what if it's not about efficiency this time? I was on the subway yesterday with this mail crate, which is a conversation starter, let me tell you. If you ever need one, just carry one of these. (Laughter) And a man just stared at me, and he was like, “Well, why don't you use the Internet?” And I thought, “Well, sir, I am not a strategist, nor am I specialist. I am merely a storyteller.” And so I could tell you about a woman whose husband has just come home from Afghanistan, and she is having a hard time unearthing this thing called conversation, and so she tucks love letters throughout the house as a way to say, “Come back to me. Find me when you can.” Or a girl who decides that she is going to leave love letters around her campus in Dubuque, Iowa, only to find her efforts ripple-effected the ne_t day when she walks out onto the quad and finds love letters hanging from the trees, tucked in the bushes and the benches. Or the man who decides that he is going to take his life, uses Facebook as a way to say goodbye to friends and family. Well, tonight he sleeps safely with a stack of letters just like this one tucked beneath his pillow, scripted by strangers who were there for him when.
These are the kinds of stories that convinced me that letter-writing will never again need to flip back her hair and talk about efficiency, because she is an art form now, all the parts of her, the signing, the scripting, the mailing, the doodles in the margins. The mere fact that somebody would even just sit down, pull out a piece of paper and think about someone the whole way through, with an intention that is so much harder to unearth when the browser is up and the iPhone is pinging and we've got si_ conversations rolling in at once, that is an art form that does not fall down to the Goliath of “get faster,” no matter how many social networks we might join. We still clutch close these letters to our chest, to the words that speak louder than loud, when we turn pages into palettes to say the things that we have needed to say, the words that we have needed to write, to sisters and brothers and even to strangers, for far too long. Thank you. (Applause) (Applause)
TED: 怎樣從錯誤中學習
Diana Laugenberg: How to learn From mistakes
講者分享了其多年從教中所認識到的一從錯誤中學習的觀念“允許孩子失敗，把失敗視為學習的一部分”，以及從教育實踐中學到的三件事：“1.體驗學習的過程 2.傾聽學生的聲音 3.接納錯誤的失敗。”
TED演講文本：
0:15
I have been teaching for a long time, and in doing so have acquired a body of knowledge aboutkids and learning that I really wish more people would understand about the potential ofstudents. In 1931, my grandmother -- bottom left for you guys over here -- graduated from theeighth grade. She went to school to get the information because that's where the informationlived. It was in the books; it was inside the teacher's head; and she needed to go there to getthe information, because that's how you learned. Fast-forward a generation: this is the one-roomschoolhouse, Oak Grove, where my father went to a one-room schoolhouse. And he again hadto travel to the school to get the information from the teacher, stored it in the only portablememory he has, which is inside his own head, and take it with him, because that is howinformation was being transported from teacher to student and then used in the world. When Iwas a kid, we had a set of encyclopedias at my house. It was purchased the year I was born,and it was extraordinary, because I did not have to wait to go to the library to get to theinformation. The information was inside my house and it was awesome. This was different thaneither generation had experienced before, and it changed the way I interacted with informationeven at just a small level. But the information was closer to me. I could get access to it.
1:34
In the time that passes between when I was a kid in high school and when I started teaching,we really see the advent of the Internet. Right about the time that the Internet gets going as aneducational tool, I take off from Wisconsin and move to Kansas, small town Kansas, where Ihad an opportunity to teach in a lovely, small-town, rural Kansas school district, where I wasteaching my favorite subject, American government. My first year -- super gung-ho -- going toteach American government, loved the political system. Kids in the 12th grade: not exactly allthat enthusiastic about the American government system. Year two: learned a few things -- hadto change my tactic. And I put in front of them an authentic experience that allowed them tolearn for themselves. I didn't tell them what to do or how to do it. I posed a problem in front ofthem, which was to put on an election forum for their own community.
2:27
They produced flyers. They called offices. They checked schedules. They were meeting withsecretaries. They produced an election forum booklet for the entire town to learn more abouttheir candidates. They invited everyone into the school for an evening of conversation aboutgovernment and politics and whether or not the streets were done well, and really had thisrobust experiential learning. The older teachers -- more experienced -- looked at me and went,
“Oh, there she is. That's so cute. She's trying to get that done.” (Laughter)
“She doesn't knowwhat she's in for.” But I knew that the kids would show up, and I believed it, and I told themevery week what I expected out of them. And that night, all 90 kids -- dressed appropriately,doing their job, owning it. I had to just sit and watch. It was theirs. It was experiential. It wasauthentic. It meant something to them. And they will step up.
3:17
From Kansas, I moved on to lovely Arizona, where I taught in Flagstaff for a number of years,this time with middle school students. Luckily, I didn't have to teach them American d teach them the more exciting topic of geography. Again,
“thrilled” to learn. But what wasinteresting about this position I found myself in in Arizona, was I had this really extraordinarilyeclectic group of kids to work with in a truly public school, and we got to have these momentswhere we would get these opportunities. And one opportunity was we got to go and meet PaulRusesabagina, which is the gentleman that the movie “Hotel Rwanda” is based after. And hewas going to speak at the high school next door to us. We could walk there. We didn't evenhave to pay for the buses. There was no expense cost. Perfect field trip.
4:04
The problem then becomes how do you take seventh- and eighth-graders to a talk aboutgenocide and deal with the subject in a way that is responsible and respectful, and they knowwhat to do with it. And so we chose to look at Paul Rusesabagina as an example of a gentlemanwho singularly used his life to do something positive. I then challenged the kids to identifysomeone in their own life, or in their own story, or in their own world, that they could identify thathad done a similar thing. I asked them to produce a little movie about it. It's the first time we'ddone this. Nobody really knew how to make these little movies on the computer, but they wereinto it. And I asked them to put their own voice over it. It was the most awesome moment ofrevelation that when you ask kids to use their own voice and ask them to speak for themselves,what they're willing to share. The last question of the assignment is: how do you plan to useyour life to positively impact other peopleThe things that kids will say when you ask them andtake the time to listen is extraordinary.
5:05
Fast-forward to Pennsylvania, where I find myself today. I teach at the Science LeadershipAcademy, which is a partnership school between the Franklin Institute and the school district ofPhiladelphia. We are a nine through 12 public school, but we do school quite differently. I movedthere primarily to be part of a learning environment that validated the way that I knew that kidslearned, and that really wanted to investigate what was possible when you are willing to let go ofsome of the paradigms of the past, of information scarcity when my grandmother was in schooland when my father was in school and even when I was in school, and to a moment when wehave information surplus. So what do you do when the information is all around youWhy doyou have kids come to school if they no longer have to come there to get the information
5:51
In Philadelphia we have a one-to-one laptop program, so the kids are bringing in laptops withthem everyday, taking them home, getting access to information. And here's the thing that youneed to get comfortable with when you've given the tool to acquire information to students, isthat you have to be comfortable with this idea of allowing kids to fail as part of the learningprocess. We deal right now in the educational landscape with an infatuation with the culture ofone right answer that can be properly bubbled on the average multiple choice test, and I amhere to share with you: it is not learning. That is the absolute wrong thing to ask, to tell kids tonever be wrong. To ask them to always have the right answer doesn't allow them to learn. Sowe did this project, and this is one of the artifacts of the project. I almost never show them offbecause of the issue of the idea of failure.
6:45
My students produced these info-graphics as a result of a unit that we decided to do at the endof the year responding to the oil spill. I asked them to take the examples that we were seeing ofthe info-graphics that existed in a lot of mass media, and take a look at what were theinteresting components of it, and produce one for themselves of a different man-made disasterfrom American history. And they had certain criteria to do it. They were a little uncomfortablewith it, because we'd never done this before, and they didn't know exactly how to do it. Theycan talk -- they're very smooth, and they can write very, very well, but asking them tocommunicate ideas in a different way was a little uncomfortable for them. But I gave them theroom to just do the thing. Go create. Go figure it out. Let's see what we can do. And thestudent that persistently turns out the best visual product did not disappoint. This was done inlike two or three days. And this is the work of the student that consistently did it.
7:39
And when I sat the students down, I said, “Who's got the best one” And they immediatelywent, “There it is.” Didn't read anything. “There it is.” And I said,
“Well what makes it great”And they're like,
“Oh, the design's good, and he's using good color. And there's some ...
” Andthey went through all that we processed out loud. And I said, “Go read it.” And they're like, “Oh,that one wasn't so awesome.” And then we went to another one -- it didn't have great visuals,but it had great information -- and spent an hour talking about the learning process, because itwasn't about whether or not it was perfect, or whether or not it was what I could create. Itasked them to create for themselves, and it allowed them to fail, process, learn from. And whenwe do another round of this in my class this year, they will do better this time, because learninghas to include an amount of failure, because failure is instructional in the process.
8:29
There are a million pictures that I could click through here, and had to choose carefully -- this isone of my favorites -- of students learning, of what learning can look like in a landscape wherewe let
go of the idea that kids have to come to school to get the information, but instead, askthem what they can do with it. Ask them really interesting questions. They will not them to go to places, to see things for themselves, to actually experience the learning, toplay, to inquire. This is one of my favorite photos, because this was taken on Tuesday, when Iasked the students to go to the polls. This is Robbie, and this was his first day of voting, and hewanted to share that with everybody and do that. But this is learning too, because we askedthem to go out into real spaces.
9:20
The main point is that, if we continue to look at education as if it's about coming to school to getthe information and not about experiential learning, empowering student voice and embracingfailure, we're missing the mark. And everything that everybody is talking about today isn'tpossible if we keep having an educational system that does not value these qualities, becausewe won't get there with a standardized test, and we won't get there with a culture of one rightanswer. We know how to do this better, and it's time to do better.
0:15
我從事教師工作很長一段時間了， 而在我教書的過程當中 我學了很多關於孩子與學習的知識 我非常希望更多人可以瞭解 學生的潛能。 1931年,我的祖母 從你們那邊看過來左下角那位-- 從八年級畢業。 她上學是去獲取知識 因為在過去,那是知識存在的地方 知識在書本里,在老師的腦袋裏， 而她需要專程到學校去獲得這些知識， 因為那是當時學習的途徑 快進過一代： 這是個只有一間教室的學校,Oak Grove， 我父親就是在這間只有一個教室的學校就讀。 而同樣的,他不得不去上學 以從老師那兒取得知識， 然後將這些知識儲存在他唯一的移動內存,那就是他自己的腦袋裏， 然後將這些隨身攜帶， 因為這是過去知識被傳遞的方式 從老師傳給學生,接着在世界上使用。 當我還小的時候， 我們家裏有一套百科全書。 從我一出生就買了這套書， 而那是非常了不起的事情， 因為我不需要等着去圖書館取得這些知識， 這些信息就在我的屋子裏 而那真是太棒了。 這是 和過去相比,是非常不同的 這改變了我和信息互動的方式 即便改變的幅度很小。 但這些知識卻離我更近了。 我可以隨時獲取它們。
1:34
在過去的這幾年間 從我還在念高中 到我開始教書的時候， 我們真的親眼目睹網絡的發展。 就在網絡開始 作為教學用的工具發展的時候， 我離開威斯康辛州 搬到勘薩斯州,一個叫勘薩斯的小鎮 在那裏我有機會 在一個小而美麗的勘薩斯的鄉村學區 教書， 教我最喜歡的學科 “美國政府” 那是我教書的第一年,充滿熱情,準備教“美國政府” 我當時熱愛教政治體系。 這些十二年級的孩子 對於美國政府體系 並不完全充滿熱情。 開始教書的第二年,我學到了一些事情,讓我改變了教學方針。 我提供他們一個真實體驗的機會 讓他們可以自主學習。 我沒有告訴他們得做什麼,或是要怎麼做。 我只是在他們面前提出一個問題， 要他們在自己的社區設立一個選舉論壇。
2:27
他們散佈傳單,聯絡各個選舉辦公室， 他們和祕書排定行程， 他們設計了一本選舉論壇手冊 提供給全鎮的鎮民讓他們更瞭解這些候選人。 他們邀請所有的人到學校 參與晚上的座談 談論政府和政治 還有鎮裏的每條街是不是都修建完善， 學生們真的得到強大的體驗式學習。 學校裏比較資深年長的老師 看着我説 “喔,看她,多天真呀,竟想試着這麼做。” (大笑)
“她不知道她把自己陷入怎麼樣的局面” 但我知道孩子們會出席 而我真的這樣相信。 每個禮拜我都對他們説我是如何期待他們的表現。 而那天晚上,全部九十個孩子 每個人的穿戴整齊,各司其職,完全掌握論壇 我只需要坐在一旁看着。 那是屬於他們的夜晚,那是經驗,那是實在的經驗。 那對他們來説具有意義。 而他們將會更加努力。
3:17
離開堪薩斯後,我搬到美麗的亞利桑納州， 我在Flagstaff小鎮教了幾年書， 這次是教國中的學生。 幸運的,我這次不用教美國政治。 這次我教的是更令人興奮的地理。 再一次,非常期待的要學習。 但有趣的是 我發現在這個亞歷桑納州的教職 我所面對的 是一羣非常多樣化的,彼此之間差異懸殊的孩子們 在一所真正的公立學校。 在那裏,有些時候,我們會得到了一些機會。 其中一個機會是 我們得以和Paul Russabagina見面， 這位先生 正是電影“盧安達飯店”根據描述的那位主人翁 他當時正要到隔壁的高中演講 我們可以步行到那所學校,我們甚至不用坐公共汽車 完全不需要額外的支出,非常完美的校外教學
4:04
然後接着的問題是 你要怎麼和七八年級的學生談論種族屠殺 用怎麼樣的方式來處理這個問題 才是一種負責任和尊重的方式， 讓學生們知道該怎麼面對這個問題。 所以我們決定去觀察PaulRusesabagina是怎麼做的 把他當作一個例子 一個平凡人如何利用自己的生命做些積極的事情的例子。 接着,我挑戰這些孩子,要他們去找出 在他們的.生命裏,在他們自己的故事中,或是在他們自己的世界裏， 找出那些他們認為也做過類似事情的人。 我要他們為這些人和事蹟製作一部短片。 這是我們第一次嘗試製作短片。 沒有人真的知道如何利用電腦製作短片。 但他們非常投入,我要他們在片子裏用自己的聲音。 那實在是最棒的啟發方式 當你要孩子們用他們自己的聲音 當你要他們為自己説話， 説那些他們願意分享的故事。 這項作業的最後一個問題是 你打算怎麼利用你自己的生命 去正面的影響其他人 孩子們説出來的那些話 在你詢問他們後並花時間傾聽那些話後 是非常了不起的。
5:05
快進到賓州,我現在住的地方。 我在科學領導學院教書， 它是富蘭克林學院 和費城學區協同的合辦的。 我們是一間9年級到12年級的公立高中， 但我們的教學方式很不一樣。 我起初搬到那裏 是為了親身參與一個教學環境 一個可以證實我所理解孩子可以有效學習方式的方式， 一個願意探索 所有可能性的教學環境 當你願意放棄 一些過去的標準模式， 放棄我祖母和我父親上學的那個年代 甚至是我自己唸書的那個年代，因為信息的稀缺， 到一個我們正處於信息過剩的時代。 所以你該怎麼處理那些環繞在四周的知識你為什麼要孩子們來學校如果他們再也不需要特意到學校獲得這些知識
5:51
在賓州,我們有一個人人有筆記本的項目， 所以這些孩子每天帶着他們筆記本電腦， 帶着電腦回家,隨時學習知識。 有一件事你需要學着適應的是 當你給了學生工具 讓他們可以自主取得知識， 你得適應一個想法 那就是允許孩子失敗 把失敗視為學習的一部分。 我們現在面對教育大環境 帶着一種 迷戀單一解答的文化 一種靠選擇題折優的文化， 而我在這裏要告訴你們， 這不是學習。 這絕對是個錯誤 去要求孩子們永遠不可以犯錯。 要求他們永遠都要有正確的解答 而不允許他們去學習。 所以我們實施了這個項目， 這就是這個項目中一件作品。 我幾乎從來沒有展示過這些 因為我們對於錯誤與失敗的觀念。
Why TED talks are better than the last speech you sat through
世上最好的演講：TED演講吸引人的祕密
Think about the last time you heard someone give a speech, or any formal presentation. Maybe it was so long that you were either overwhelmed with data, or you just tuned the speaker out. If PowerPoint was involved, each slide was probably loaded with at least 40 words or figures, and odds are that you don't remember more than a tiny bit of what they were supposed to show.
回想一下你上次聆聽某人發表演講或任何正式陳述的情形。它也許太長了，以至於你被各種數據搞得頭昏腦脹，甚或乾脆不理會演講者。如果演講者使用了PPT文檔，那麼每張幻燈片很可能塞入了至少40個單詞或數字，但你現在或許只記得一丁點內容。
Pretty uninspiring, huhTalk Like TED: 9 Public-Speaking Secrets of The World's Best Mindsexamines why in prose that's as lively and appealing as, well, a TED talk. Timed to coincide with the 30th anniversary in March of those now-legendary TED conferences, the book draws on current brain science to explain what wins over, and fires up, an audience -- and what doesn't. Author Carmine Gallo also studied more than 500 of the most popular TED speeches (there have been about 1,500 so far) and interviewed scores of the people who gave them.
相當平淡，是吧？《像TED那樣演講：全球頂級人才九大演講祕訣》(Talk Like TED: 9 Public-Speaking Secrets of The World's Best Minds)一書以流暢的文筆審視了為什麼TED演講如此生動，如此引人入勝。出版方有意安排在今年3月份發行此書，以慶賀如今已成為經典的TED大會成立30週年。這部著作借鑑當代腦科學解釋了什麼樣的演講能夠説服聽眾、鼓舞聽眾，什麼樣的演講無法產生這種效果。
Much of what he found out is surprising. Consider, for instance, the fact that each TED talk is limited to 18 minutes. That might sound too short to convey much. Yet TED curator Chris Anderson imposed the time limit, he told Gallo, because it's “long enough to be serious and short enough to hold people's attention ... By forcing speakers who are used to going on for 45 minutes to bring it down to 18, you get them to think about what they really want to say.” It's also the perfect length if you want your message to go viral, Anderson says.
他挖出了不少令人吃驚的演講策略。例如，每場TED演講都被限制在18分鐘以內。聽起來太過短暫，似乎無法傳達足夠多訊息。然而，TED大會策辦人克里斯安德森決議推行這項時間限制規則，因為“這個時間長度足夠莊重，同時又足夠短，能夠吸引人們的注意力。通過迫使那些習慣於滔滔不絕講上45分鐘的嘉賓把演講時間壓縮至18分鐘，你就可以讓他們認真思考他們真正想説的話，”他對加洛説。此外，安德森説，如果你希望你的訊息像病毒般擴散，這也是一個完美的時間長度。
Recent neuroscience shows why the time limit works so well: People listening to a presentation are storing data for retrieval in the future, and too much information leads to “cognitive overload,” which gives rise to elevated levels of anxiety -- meaning that, if you go on and on, your audience will start to resist you. Even worse, they won't recall a single point you were trying to make.
最近的神經科學研究説明了為什麼這項時間限制產生如此好的效果：聆聽陳述的人們往往會存儲相關數據，以備未來檢索之用，而太多的信息會導致“認知超負荷”，進而推升聽眾的焦慮度。它意味着，如果你説個沒完沒了，聽眾就會開始抗拒你。更糟糕的是，他們不會記得你努力希望傳遞的信息點，甚至可能一個都記不住。
“Albert Einstein once said, 'If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough,'
” Gallo writes, adding that the physicist would have applauded astronomer David Christian who, at TED in 2011, narrated the complete history of the universe -- and Earth's place in it -- in 17 minutes and 40 seconds.
“愛因斯坦曾經説過，‘要是你不能言簡意賅地解釋某種理論，那就説明你自己都還沒有理解透徹，’”加羅寫道。他還舉例説，物理學家或許會大加讚賞天文學家大衞克里斯蒂安在2011年TED大會上發表的演講。克里斯蒂安在這個演講中完整地講述了宇宙史及地球在宇宙的地位，整場演講用時只有17分40秒。
Gallo offers some tips on how to boil a complex presentation down to 18 minutes or so, including what he calls the “rule of three,” or condensing a plethora of ideas into three main points, as many top TED talkers do. He also notes that, even if a speech just can't be squeezed down that far, the effort alone is bound to improve it: “Your presentation will be far more creative and impactful simply by going through the exercise.”
如何把一個複雜的陳述壓縮至18分鐘左右？加洛就這個問題提供了一些小建議，其中包括他所稱的“三的法則”。具體説就是，把大量觀點高度濃縮為三大要點。TED大會上的許多演講高手就是這樣做的。他還指出，即使一篇演講無法提煉到這樣的程度，單是這番努力也一定能改善演講的效果：“僅僅通過這番提煉，你就可以大大增強陳述的創造性和影響力。”
Then there's PowerPoint. “TED represents the end of PowerPoint as we know it,” writes Gallo. He hastens to add that there's nothing wrong with PowerPoint as a tool, but that most speakers unwittingly make it work against them by cluttering up their slides with way too many words (40, on average) and numbers.
另一個建議與PPT文檔有關。“TED大會象徵着我們所知的PPT文檔正走向終結，”加洛寫道。他隨後又馬上補充説，作為工具的PowerPoint本身並沒有什麼錯，但大多數演講者為他們的幻燈片塞進了太多的單詞（平均40個）和數字，讓這種工具不經意間帶來了消極影響。
The remedy for that, based on the most riveting TED talks: If you must use slides, fill them with a lot more images. Once again, research backs this up, with something academics call the Picture Superiority Effect: Three days after hearing or reading a set of facts, most people will remember about 10% of the information. Add a photo or a drawing, and recall jumps to 65%.
最吸引人的TED演講為我們提供了一個補救策略：如果你必須使用幻燈片，務必記得要大量運用圖像資源。這種做法同樣有科學依據，它就是研究人員所稱的“圖優效應”(Picture Superiority Effect)：聽到或讀到一組事實三天後，大多數人會記得大約10%的信息。而添加一張照片或圖片後，記憶率將躍升至65%。
One study, by molecular biologist John Medina at the University of Washington School of Medicine, found that not only could people recall more than 2,500 pictures with at least 90% accuracy several days later, but accuracy a whole year afterward was still at about 63%.
華盛頓大學醫學院(University of Washington School of Medicine)分子生物學家約翰梅迪納主持的研究發現，幾天後，人們能夠回想起超過2,500張圖片，準確率至少達到90%；一年後的準確率依然保持在63%左右。
That result “demolishes” print and speech, both of which were tested on the same group of subjects, Medina's study indicated, which is something worth bearing in mind for anybody hoping that his or her ideas will be remembered.
梅迪納的研究表明，這個結果“完勝”印刷品和演講的記憶效果（由同一組受試者測試）。任何一位希望自己的思想被聽眾銘記在心的演講者或許都應該記住這一點。
TED（指technology, entertainment, design在英語中的縮寫，即技術、娛樂、設計）是美國的一傢俬有非營利機構，該機構以它組織的TED大會著稱。TED誕生於1984年，其發起人是裏查德·沃曼。
【TED01】Chris Anderson：談科技的長尾理論2013-09-10
【TED02】Frederick Balagadde：談微芯片上的生物實驗室2013-09-11
【TED03】Jimmy Wales：關於維基百科誕生的演講2013-09-12
【TED04】Gary Wolf：數據化的自我2013-09-13
【TED05】Peter Gabrie：用視頻與不公平作鬥爭2013-09-14
【TED06】Derek Sivers：下定的目標可別告訴別人2013-09-15
【TED07】Seth Priebatsch：世界第一的遊戲社交圈2013-09-18
【TED08】Julian Treasure：保持聽力的八個步驟2013-09-19
【TED09】Mechai Viravaidya：保險套先生如何讓泰國變得更好2013-09-20
【TED10】Steven Johnson：偉大創新的誕生2013-09-21
【TED11】Ze Frank's：傑·法蘭克大玩網路2013-09-22
【TED12】Craig Vente：克萊格-温特爾揭開合成生命的面紗2013-09-23
【TED13】Eric Mead：安慰劑魔法2013-09-24
【TED14】Lee Hotz：帶你走入南極的時光機中2013-09-25
【TED15】NicMarks：快樂星球指數2013-09-26
【TED16】ley：愛滋病病毒與流感.—.疫苗的策略2013-09-27
【TED17】Jessa Gamble：我們的自然睡眠週期2013-09-28
【TED18】StanleyMcChrystal：聆聽,學習...才能領導2013-09-29
【TED19】Graham Hill：我為什麼要在上班日吃素2013-09-30
【TED20】Ken Robinson：推動學習革命2013-10-01
【TED21】Fabian Hemmert：未來手機的形狀變化2013-10-02
【TED22】弗蘭斯·德瓦爾：動物中道德行為2013-10-03
【TED23】布萊恩·高德曼：我們能否談論醫生所犯的錯誤2013-10-04
【TED24】Sheryl WuDunn：本世紀最大的不公平2013-10-05
【TED25】Dan Cobley：物理教我有關行銷的事2013-10-08
【TED26】Carne Ross：獨立外交組織2013-10-09
【TED27】Kevin Stone：生物性關節置換的未來2013-10-10
【TED28】Matt Ridley：當腦中的概念交配起來2013-10-11
【TED29】Caroline Phillips：絞絃琴入門2013-10-14
【TED30】Dimitar Sasselov：發現數百顆類似地球的行星2013-10-15
【TED31】Jason Clay：知名品牌如何幫助拯救生物多樣性2013-10-16
【TED32】Chris Anderson：線上影片如何驅動創新2013-10-17
【TED33】Ellen Gustafson：肥胖.颻餓=全球糧食議題2013-10-18
【TED34】Tan Le：解讀腦電波的頭戴式耳機2013-10-19
【TED35】Rory Sutherland：思考角度決定一切2013-10-25
【TED36】Andy Puddicombe：只需專注10分鐘2013-10-26
【TED37】Lisa Bu：書籍如何成為心靈解藥2013-10-27
【TED38】Ramsey激發學習興趣的3條黃金法則2013-10-28
【TED39】Marcel Dicke：我們為什麼不食用昆蟲呢？2013-10-29
【TED40】薛曉嵐：輕鬆學習閲讀漢字！2013-10-30
【TED41】馬特·卡茨：嘗試做新事情30天2013-10-31
【TED42】馬特：想更幸福嗎？留在那一刻2013-11-01
【TED43】貝基·布蘭頓：我無家可歸的一年2013-11-02
【TED44】凱瑟琳·舒爾茨：犯錯的價值2013-11-03
【TED45】Stefan Sagmeister：休假的力量2013-11-04
【TED46】蘇珊·凱恩：內向性格的力量2013-11-05
【TED47】Diana Laufenberg：怎樣從錯誤中學習2013-11-06
【TED48】羅恩·古特曼：微笑背後隱藏的力量2013-11-07
【TED49】阿曼達·帕爾默：請求的藝術2013-11-08
【TED50】德雷克·西弗斯：如何發起一場運動2013-11-09
【TED51】坎迪·張：在死之前，我想......2013-11-10
【TED52】Kiran Bir Sethi：讓小孩學會承擔2013-11-11
【TED53】比班·基德龍：電影世界共通的奇蹟2013-11-12
【TED54】提姆·哈福德：試驗，排除錯誤和萬能神力2013-11-13
【TED55】Alexander Tsiaras ：可視化記錄嬰兒受孕到出生2013-11-14
【TED56】Larry Smith：你為何不會成就偉業2013-11-15
【TED57】Keith Chen：你存錢的能力跟你用的語言有關？2013-11-16
【TED58】Cesar Kuriyama：每天一秒鐘2013-11-17
【TED59】Michael Norton：如何買到幸福2013-11-18
【TED60】奈吉爾·馬什：如何實現工作與生活的平衡2013-11-19
【TED61】羅茲·薩維奇：我為什麼划船橫渡太平洋2013-11-20
【TED62】Jay Walker：世界英語熱2013-11-21
【TED63】帕特里夏·瑞安：不要固執於英語！2013-11-22
【TED64】皮柯·耶爾：家在何方？2013-11-23
【TED65】Charmian Gooch：認識世界級貪腐的幕後黑手2013-11-24
【TED66】Richard St. John：8個成功祕笈2013-11-25
【TED67】Judy MacDonald Johnston：為生命的終結做好準備2013-11-26
【TED68】Sherry Turkle：保持聯繫卻仍舊孤單2013-11-27
【TED69】利普·辛巴杜：健康的時間觀念2013-11-28
【TED70】David Pogue：十條黃金省時技巧小貼士2013-11-29
【TED71】Philip Zimbardo：男性的衰落？2013-12-01
【TED72】Rives 的凌晨4點2013-12-02
【TED73】Reggie Watts：用最有趣的方法讓你暈頭轉向2013-12-03
【TED74】丹·丹尼特：我們的意識2013-12-04
【TED75】丹尼爾·科恩：為了更好地辯論2013-12-05
【TED76】邁克爾·桑德爾：失落了的民主辯論藝術2013-12-06
【TED77】Hadyn Parry：通過基因重組用蚊子抗擊疾病2013-12-07
【TED78】Hannah Brencher：給陌生人的情信2013-12-08
【TED79】Ivan Krastev：沒有信任，民主能繼續存在麼？2013-12-09
【TED80】Arianna Huffington：睡眠促進成功2013-12-10
【TED81】尼克·博斯特羅姆：我們的大問題2013-12-11
【TED82】Dan Barber：我如何愛上一條魚2013-12-12
【TED83】Miguel Nicolelis：一隻猴子用意念控制一個機器人2013-12-13
【TED84】Kakenya Ntaiya：一位要求學校教育的女孩2013-12-14
【TED85】Kevin Breel：一個抑鬱喜劇演員的自白2013-12-15
【TED86】萊斯莉·黑索頓：懷疑乃信仰之關鍵2013-12-16
【TED87】比爾迪曼：我的多調人聲2013-12-17
【TED88】布萊恩·格林恩：談“弦理論”2013-12-18
【TED89】Jacqueline Novogratz：過一種沉浸的人生2013-12-19
【TED90】Ben Dunlap：談對人生的熱情2013-12-20
【TED91】博妮·柏索：細菌是怎樣交流的？2013-12-21
【TED92】大衞·克里斯汀：宏觀歷史2013-12-22
【TED93】Christien Meindertsma：一頭豬的全球化旅程2013-12-23
【TED94】大衞·布萊恩：我如何做到水下屏氣17分鐘2013-12-24
【TED95】包拉託：錯覺中的視覺真相2013-12-25
【TED96】Read Montague：我們從5000個大腦中學到了什麼2013-12-26
【TED97】鄒奇奇：大人能從小孩身上學到什麼2013-12-27
when i was seven years old and my sister was just five years old, we were playing on top of a bunk bed. i was two years older than my sister at the time -- i mean, i'm two years older than her now -- but at the time it meant she had to do everything that i wanted to do, and i wanted to play war. so we were up on top of our bunk beds. and on one side of the bunk bed, i had put out all of my g.i. joe soldiers and weaponry. and on the other side were all my sister's my little ponies ready for a cavalry charge.
there are differing accounts of what actually happened that afternoon, but since my sister is not here with us today, let me tell you the true story -- (laughter) -- which is my sister's a little bit on the clumsy side. somehow, without any help or push from her older brother at all, suddenly amy disappeared off of the top of the bunk bed and landed with this crash on the floor. now i nervously peered over the side of the bed to see what had befallen my fallen sister and saw that she had landed painfully on her hands and knees on all fours on the ground.
i was nervous because my parents had charged me with making sure that my sister and i played as safely and as quietly as possible. and seeing as how i had accidentally broken amy's arm just one week before ... (laughter) ... heroically pushing her out of the way of an oncoming imaginary sniper bullet, (laughter) for which i have yet to be thanked, i was trying as hard as i could -- she didn't even see it coming -- i was trying as hard as i could to be on my best behavior.
and i saw my sister's face, this wail of pain and suffering and surprise threatening to erupt from her mouth and threatening to wake my parents from the long winter's nap for which they had settled. so i did the only thing my little frantic seven year-old brain could think to do to avert this tragedy. and if you have children, you've seen this hundreds of times before. i said, “amy, amy, wait. don't cry. don't cry. did you see how you landed? no human lands on all fours like that. amy, i think this means you're a unicorn.”
(laughter)
now that was cheating, because there was nothing in the world my sister would want more than not to be amy the hurt five year-old little sister, but amy the special unicorn. of course, this was an option that was open to her brain at no point in the past. and you could see how my poor, manipulated sister faced conflict, as her little brain attempted to devote resources to feeling the pain and suffering and surprise she just e_perienced, or contemplating her new-found identity as a unicorn. and the latter won out. instead of crying, instead of ceasing our play, instead of waking my parents, with all the negative consequences that would have ensued for me, instead a smile spread across her face and she scrambled right back up onto the bunk bed with all the grace of a baby unicorn ... (laughter) ... with one broken leg.
what we stumbled across at this tender age of just five and seven -- we had no idea at the time -- was something that was going be at the vanguard of a scientific revolution occurring two decades later in the way that we look at the human brain. what we had stumbled across is something called positive psychology, which is the reason that i'm here today and the reason that i wake up every morning.
when i first started talking about this research outside of academia, out with companies and schools, the very first thing they said to never do is to start your talk with a graph. the very first thing i want to do is start my talk with a graph. this graph looks boring, but this graph is the reason i get e_cited and wake up every morning. and this graph doesn't even mean anything; it's fake data. what we found is --
(laughter)
if i got this data back studying you here in the room, i would be thrilled, because there's very clearly a trend that's going on there, and that means that i can get published, which is all that really matters. the fact that there's one weird red dot that's up above the curve, there's one weirdo in the room -- i know who you are, i saw you earlier -- that's no problem. that's no problem, as most of you know, because i can just delete that dot. i can delete that dot because that's clearly a measurement error. and we know that's a measurement error because it's messing up my data.
so one of the very first things we teach people in economics and statistics and business and psychology courses is how, in a statistically valid way, do we eliminate the weirdos. how do we eliminate the outliers so we can find the line of best fit? which is fantastic if i'm trying to find out how many advil the average person should be taking -- two. but if i'm interested in potential, if i'm interested in your potential, or for happiness or productivity or energy or creativity, what we're doing is we're creating the cult of the average with science.
if i asked a question like, “how fast can a child learn how to read in a classroom?” scientists change the answer to “how fast does the average child learn how to read in that classroom?” and then we tailor the class right towards the average. now if you fall below the average on this curve, then psychologists get thrilled, because that means you're either depressed or you have a disorder, or hopefully both. we're hoping for both because our business model is, if you come into a therapy session with one problem, we want to make sure you leave knowing you have 10, so you keep coming back over and over again. we'll go back into your childhood if necessary, but eventually what we want to do is make you normal again. but normal is merely average.
and what i posit and what positive psychology posits is that if we study what is merely average, we will remain merely average. then instead of deleting those positive outliers, what i intentionally do is come into a population like this one and say, why? why is it that some of you are so high above the curve in terms of your intellectual ability, athletic ability, musical ability, creativity, energy levels, your resiliency in the face of challenge, your sense of humor? whatever it is, instead of deleting you, what i want to do is study you. because maybe we can glean information -- not just how to move people up to the average, but how we can move the entire average up in our companies and schools worldwide.
the reason this graph is important to me is, when i turn on the news, it seems like the majority of the information is not positive, in fact it's negative. most of it's about murder, corruption, diseases, natural disasters. and very quickly, my brain starts to think that's the accurate ratio of negative to positive in the world. what that's doing is creating something called the medical school syndrome -- which, if you know people who've been to medical school, during the first year of medical training, as you read through a list of all the symptoms and diseases that could happen, suddenly you realize you have all of them.
i have a brother in-law named bobo -- which is a whole other story. bobo married amy the unicorn. bobo called me on the phone from yale medical school, and bobo said, “shawn, i have leprosy.” (laughter) which, even at yale, is e_traordinarily rare. but i had no idea how to console poor bobo because he had just gotten over an entire week of menopause.
(laughter)
see what we're finding is it's not necessarily the reality that shapes us, but the lens through which your brain views the world that shapes your reality. and if we can change the lens, not only can we change your happiness, we can change every single educational and business outcome at the same time.
when i applied to harvard, i applied on a dare. i didn't e_pect to get in, and my family had no money for college. when i got a military scholarship two weeks later, they allowed me to go. suddenly, something that wasn't even a possibility became a reality. when i went there, i assumed everyone else would see it as a privilege as well, that they'd be e_cited to be there. even if you're in a classroom full of people smarter than you, you'd be happy just to be in that classroom, which is what i felt. but what i found there is, while some people e_perience that, when i graduated after my four years and then spent the ne_t eight years living in the dorms with the students -- harvard asked me to; i wasn't that guy. (laughter) i was an officer of harvard to counsel students through the difficult four years. and what i found in my research and my teaching is that these students, no matter how happy they were with their original success of getting into the school, two weeks later their brains were focused, not on the privilege of being there, nor on their philosophy or their physics. their brain was focused on the competition, the workload, the hassles, the stresses, the complaints.
when i first went in there, i walked into the freshmen dining hall, which is where my friends from waco, te_as, which is where i grew up -- i know some of you have heard of it. when they'd come to visit me, they'd look around, they'd say, “this freshman dining hall looks like something out of hogwart's from the movie ”harry potter,“ which it does. this is hogwart's from the movie ”harry potter“ and that's harvard. and when they see this, they say, ”shawn, why do you waste your time studying happiness at harvard? seriously, what does a harvard student possibly have to be unhappy about?“
embedded within that question is the key to understanding the science of happiness. because what that question assumes is that our e_ternal world is predictive of our happiness levels, when in reality, if i know everything about your e_ternal world, i can only predict 10 percent of your long-term happiness. 90 percent of your long-term happiness is predicted not by the e_ternal world, but by the way your brain processes the world. and if we change it, if we change our formula for happiness and success, what we can do is change the way that we can then affect reality. what we found is that only 25 percent of job successes are predicted by i.q. 75 percent of job successes are predicted by your optimism levels, your social support and your ability to see stress as a challenge instead of as a threat.
i talked to a boarding school up in new england, probably the most prestigious boarding school, and they said, ”we already know that. so every year, instead of just teaching our students, we also have a wellness week. and we're so e_cited. monday night we have the world's leading e_pert coming in to speak about adolescent depression. tuesday night it's school violence and bullying. wednesday night is eating disorders. thursday night is elicit drug use. and friday night we're trying to decide between risky se_ or happiness.“ (laughter) i said, ”that's most people's friday nights.“ (laughter) (applause) which i'm glad you liked, but they did not like that at all. silence on the phone. and into the silence, i said, ”i'd be happy to speak at your school, but just so you know, that's not a wellness week, that's a sickness week. what you've done is you've outlined all the negative things that can happen, but not talked about the positive.“
the absence of disease is not health. here's how we get to health: we need to reverse the formula for happiness and success. in the last three years, i've traveled to 45 different countries, working with schools and companies in the midst of an economic downturn. and what i found is that most companies and schools follow a formula for success, which is this: if i work harder, i'll be more successful. and if i'm more successful, then i'll be happier. that undergirds most of our parenting styles, our managing styles, the way that we motivate our behavior.
and the problem is it's scientifically broken and backwards for two reasons. first, every time your brain has a success, you just changed the goalpost of what success looked like. you got good grades, now you have to get better grades, you got into a good school and after you get into a better school, you got a good job, now you have to get a better job, you hit your sales target, we're going to change your sales target. and if happiness is on the opposite side of success, your brain never gets there. what we've done is we've pushed happiness over the cognitive horizon as a society. and that's because we think we have to be successful, then we'll be happier.
but the real problem is our brains work in the opposite order. if you can raise somebody's level of positivity in the present, then their brain e_periences what we now call a happiness advantage, which is your brain at positive performs significantly better than it does at negative, neutral or stressed. your intelligence rises, your creativity rises, your energy levels rise. in fact, what we've found is that every single business outcome improves. your brain at positive is 31 percent more productive than your brain at negative, neutral or stressed. you're 37 percent better at sales. doctors are 19 percent faster, more accurate at coming up with the correct diagnosis when positive instead of negative, neutral or stressed. which means we can reverse the formula. if we can find a way of becoming positive in the present, then our brains work even more successfully as we're able to work harder, faster and more intelligently.
what we need to be able to do is to reverse this formula so we can start to see what our brains are actually capable of. because dopamine, which floods into your system when you're positive, has two functions. not only does it make you happier, it turns on all of the learning centers in your brain allowing you to adapt to the world in a different way.
we've found that there are ways that you can train your brain to be able to become more positive. in just a two-minute span of time done for 21 days in a row, we can actually rewire your brain, allowing your brain to actually work more optimistically and more successfully. we've done these things in research now in every single company that i've worked with, getting them to write down three new things that they're grateful for for 21 days in a row, three new things each day. and at the end of that, their brain starts to retain a pattern of scanning the world, not for the negative, but for the positive first.
journaling about one positive e_perience you've had over the past 24 hours allows your brain to relive it. e_ercise teaches your brain that your behavior matters. we find that meditation allows your brain to get over the cultural adhd that we've been creating by trying to do multiple tasks at once and allows our brains to focus on the task at hand. and finally, random acts of kindness are conscious acts of kindness. we get people, when they open up their inbo_, to write one positive email praising or thanking somebody in their social support network.
and by doing these activities and by training your brain just like we train our bodies, what we've found is we can reverse the formula for happiness and success, and in doing so, not only create ripples of positivity, but create a real revolution.
thank you very much.
(applause)
I was one of the only kids in college who had a reason to go to the P.O. bo_ at the end of the day, and that was mainly because my mother has never believed in email, in Facebook, in te_ting or cell phones in general. And so while other kids were BBM-ing their parents, I was literally waiting by the mailbo_ to get a letter from home to see how the weekend had gone, which was a little frustrating when Grandma was in the hospital, but I was just looking for some sort of scribble, some unkempt cursive from my mother.
And so when I moved to New York City after college and got completely sucker-punched in the face by depression, I did the only thing I could think of at the time. I wrote those same kinds of letters that my mother had written me for strangers, and tucked them all throughout the city, dozens and dozens of them. I left them everywhere, in cafes and in libraries, at the U.N., everywhere. I blogged about those letters and the days when they were necessary, and I posed a kind of crazy promise to the Internet: that if you asked me for a hand-written letter, I would write you one, no questions asked. Overnight, my inbo_ morphed into this harbor of heartbreak -- a single mother in Sacramento, a girl being bullied in rural Kansas, all asking me, a 22-year-old girl who barely even knew her own coffee order, to write them a love letter and give them a reason to wait by the mailbo_.
Well, today I fuel a global organization that is fueled by those trips to the mailbo_, fueled by the ways in which we can harness social media like never before to write and mail strangers letters when they need them most, but most of all, fueled by crates of mail like this one, my trusty mail crate, filled with the scriptings of ordinary people, strangers writing letters to other strangers not because they're ever going to meet and laugh over a cup of coffee, but because they have found one another by way of letter-writing.
But, you know, the thing that always gets me about these letters is that most of them have been written by people that have never known themselves loved on a piece of paper. They could not tell you about the ink of their own love letters. They're the ones from my generation, the ones of us that have grown up into a world where everything is paperless, and where some of our best conversations have happened upon a screen. We have learned to diary our pain onto Facebook, and we speak swiftly in 140 characters or less.
But what if it's not about efficiency this time? I was on the subway yesterday with this mail crate, which is a conversation starter, let me tell you. If you ever need one, just carry one of these. (Laughter) And a man just stared at me, and he was like, ”Well, why don't you use the Internet?“ And I thought, ”Well, sir, I am not a strategist, nor am I specialist. I am merely a storyteller.“ And so I could tell you about a woman whose husband has just come home from Afghanistan, and she is having a hard time unearthing this thing called conversation, and so she tucks love letters throughout the house as a way to say, ”Come back to me. Find me when you can.“ Or a girl who decides that she is going to leave love letters around her campus in Dubuque, Iowa, only to find her efforts ripple-effected the ne_t day when she walks out onto the quad and finds love letters hanging from the trees, tucked in the bushes and the benches. Or the man who decides that he is going to take his life, uses Facebook as a way to say goodbye to friends and family. Well, tonight he sleeps safely with a stack of letters just like this one tucked beneath his pillow, scripted by strangers who were there for him when.
These are the kinds of stories that convinced me that letter-writing will never again need to flip back her hair and talk about efficiency, because she is an art form now, all the parts of her, the signing, the scripting, the mailing, the doodles in the margins. The mere fact that somebody would even just sit down, pull out a piece of paper and think about someone the whole way through, with an intention that is so much harder to unearth when the browser is up and the iPhone is pinging and we've got si_ conversations rolling in at once, that is an art form that does not fall down to the Goliath of ”get faster,“ no matter how many social networks we might join. We still clutch close these letters to our chest, to the words that speak louder than loud, when we turn pages into palettes to say the things that we have needed to say, the words that we have needed to write, to sisters and brothers and even to strangers, for far too long. Thank you.
when i was nine years old i went off to summer camp for the first time. and my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do. because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. and this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. you have the animal warmth of your family sitting right ne_t to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventureland inside your own mind. and i had this idea that camp was going to be just like this, but better. (laughter) i had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns.
當我九歲的時候 我第一次去參加夏令營 我媽媽幫我整理好了我的行李箱 裏面塞滿了書 這對於我來説是一件極為自然的事情 因為在我的家庭裏 閲讀是主要的家庭活動 聽上去你們可能覺得我們是不愛交際的 但是對於我的家庭來説這真的只是接觸社會的另一種途徑 你們有自己家庭接觸時的温暖親情 家人靜坐在你身邊 但是你也可以自由地漫遊 在你思維深處的冒險樂園裏我有一個想法 野營會變得像這樣子，當然要更好些 (笑聲) 我想象到十個女孩坐在一個小屋裏 都穿着合身的女式睡衣愜意地享受着讀書的過程
(laughter)
(笑聲)
camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. and on the very first day our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that she said we would be doing every day for the rest of the summer to instill camp spirit. and it went like this: ”r-o-w-d-i-e, that's the way we spell rowdie. rowdie, rowdie, let's get rowdie.“ yeah. so i couldn't figure out for the life of me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this word incorrectly. (laughter) but i recited a cheer. i recited a cheer along with everybody else. i did my best. and i just waited for the time that i could go off and read my books.
野營這時更像是一個不提供酒水的派對聚會 在第一天的時候呢 我們的顧問把我們都集合在一起 並且她教會了我們一種今後要用到的慶祝方式 在餘下夏令營的每一天中 讓“露營精神”浸潤我們 之後它就像這樣繼續着 r-o-w-d-i-e 這是我們拼寫“吵鬧”的口號 我們唱着“噪音，喧鬧，我們要變得吵一點” 對，就是這樣 可我就是弄不明白我的生活會是什麼樣的 為什麼我們變得這麼吵鬧粗暴 或者為什麼我們非要把這個單詞錯誤地拼寫 (笑聲) 但是我可沒有忘記慶祝。我與每個人都互相歡呼慶祝了 我盡了我最大的努力 我只是想等待那一刻 我可以離開吵鬧的聚會去捧起我摯愛的書
but the first time that i took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girl in the bunk came up to me and she asked me, “why are you being so mellow?” -- mellow, of course, being the e_act opposite of r-o-w-d-i-e. and then the second time i tried it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned e_pression on her face and she repeated the point about camp spirit and said we should all work very hard to be outgoing.
但是當我第一次把書從行李箱中拿出來的時候 牀鋪中最酷的那個女孩向我走了過來 並且她問我：“為什麼你要這麼安靜?” 安靜，當然，是r-o-w-d-i-e的反義詞 “喧鬧”的反義詞 而當我第二次拿書的時候 我們的顧問滿臉憂慮的向我走了過來 接着她重複了關於“露營精神”的要點並且説我們都應當努力 去變得外向些
and so i put my books away, back in their suitcase, and i put them under my bed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. and i felt kind of guilty about this. i felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they were calling out to me and i was forsaking i did forsake them and i didn't open that suitcase again until i was back home with my family at the end of the summer.
於是我放好我的書 放回了屬於它們的行李箱中 並且我把它們放到了牀底下 在那裏它們度過了暑假餘下的每一天 我對這樣做感到很愧疚 不知為什麼我感覺這些書是需要我的 它們在呼喚我，但是我卻放棄了它們 我確實放下了它們，並且我再也沒有打開那個箱子 直到我和我的家人一起回到家中 在夏末的時候
now, i tell you this story about summer camp. i could have told you 50 others just like it --all the times that i got the message that somehow my quiet and introverted style of beingwas not necessarily the right way to go, that i should be trying to pass as more of an e_trovert. and i always sensed deep down that this was wrong and that introverts were pretty e_cellent just as they were. but for years i denied this intuition, and so i became a wall street lawyer, of all things, instead of the writer that i had always longed to be -- partly because i needed to prove to myself that i could be bold and assertive too. and i was always going off to crowded bars when i really would have preferred to just have a nice dinner with friends. and i made these self-negating choices so refle_ively, that i wasn't even aware that i was making them.
現在，我向你們講述這個夏令營的故事 我完全可以給你們講出其他50種版本就像這個一樣的故事-- 每當我感覺到這樣的時候 它告訴我出於某種原因，我的寧靜和內向的風格 並不是正確道路上的必需品 我應該更多地嘗試一個外向者的角色 而在我內心深處感覺得到，這是錯誤的內向的人們都是非常優秀的，確實是這樣 但是許多年來我都否認了這種直覺 於是我首先成為了華爾街的一名律師 而不是我長久以來想要成為的一名作家 一部分原因是因為我想要證明自己 也可以變得勇敢而堅定 並且我總是去那些擁擠的酒吧 當我只是想要和朋友們吃一頓愉快的晚餐時 我做出了這些自我否認的抉擇 如條件反射一般 甚至我都不清楚我做出了這些決定
now this is what many introverts do, and it's our loss for sure, but it is also our colleagues' loss and our communities' loss. and at the risk of sounding grandiose, it is the world's loss. because when it comes to creativity and to leadership, we need introverts doing what they do best. a third to a half of the population are introverts -- a third to a half. so that's one out of every two or three people you know. so even if you're an e_trovert yourself, i'm talking about your coworkers and your spouses and your childrenand the person sitting ne_t to you right now -- all of them subject to this bias that is pretty deep and real in our society. we all internalize it from a very early age without even having a language for what we're doing.
這就是很多內向的人正在做的事情 這當然是我們的損失 但這同樣也是同事們的損失 我們所在團隊集體的損失 當然，冒着被指為誇大其詞的風險我想説，更是世界的損失 因為當涉及創造和領導的時候 我們需要內向的人做到最好 三分之一到二分之一的人都是內向的-- 三分之一到二分之一 你要知道這可意味着每兩到三個人中就有一個內向的 所以即使你自己是一個外向的人 我正在説你的同事 和你的配偶和你的孩子 還有現在正坐在你旁邊的那個傢伙-- 他們都要屈從於這樣的偏見 一種在我們的社會中已經紮根的現實偏見 我們從很小的時候就把它藏在內心最深處 甚至都不説幾句話，關於我們正在做的事情。
now to see the bias clearly you need to understand what introversion is. it's different from being shy. shyness is about fear of social judgment. introversion is more about, how do you respond to stimulation, including social stimulation. so e_troverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereas introverts feel at their most alive and their most switched-on and their most capable when they're in quieter, more low-key all the time -- these things aren't absolute -- but a lot of the time. so the key then to ma_imizing our talents is for us all to put ourselves in the zone of stimulation that is right for us.
現在讓我們來清楚地看待這種偏見 我們需要真正瞭解“內向”到底指什麼 它和害羞是不同的 害羞是對於社會評論的恐懼 內向更多的是 你怎樣對於刺激作出迴應 包括來自社會的刺激 其實內向的人是很渴求大量的鼓舞和激勵的 反之內向者最感覺到他們的存在 這是他們精力最充足的時候，最具有能力的時候 當他們存在於更安靜的，更低調的環境中 並不是所有時候--這些事情都不是絕對的-- 但是存在於很多時候 所以説，關鍵在於 把我們的天賦發揮到最大化 這對於我們來説就足夠把我們自己 放到對於我們正確又合適的激勵的區域中去
but now here's where the bias comes in. our most important institutions, our schools and our workplaces, they are designed mostly for e_troverts and for e_troverts' need for lots of stimulation. and also we have this belief system right now that i call the new groupthink,which holds that all creativity and all productivity comes from a very oddly gregarious place.
但是現在偏見出現了 我們最重要的那些體系 我們的學校和工作單位 它們都是為性格外向者設計的 並且有適合他們需要的刺激和鼓勵 當然我們現在也有這樣一種信用機制 我稱它為新型的“團隊思考” 這是一種包含所有創造力和生產力的思考方式 從一個社交非常零散的地方產生的
so if you picture the typical classroom nowadays: when i was going to school, we sat in rows. we sat in rows of desks like this, and we did most of our work pretty nowadays, your typical classroom has pods of desks -- four or five or si_ or seven kids all facing each other. and kids are working in countless group assignments. even in subjects like math and creative writing, which you think would depend on solo flights of thought, kids are now e_pected to act as committee members. and for the kids who preferto go off by themselves or just to work alone, those kids are seen as outliers often or, worse, as problem cases. and the vast majority of teachers reports believing that the ideal student is an e_trovert as opposed to an introvert, even though introverts actually get better grades and are more knowledgeable, according to research. (laughter)
當你描繪今天典型教室的圖案時 當我還上學的時候 我們一排排地坐着 我們靠着桌子一排排坐着就像這樣 並且我們大多數工作都是自覺完成的 但是在現代社會，所謂典型的教室 是些圈起來並排的桌子-- 四個或是五個或是六、七個孩子坐在一起，面對面 孩子們要完成無數個小組任務 甚至像數學和創意寫作這些課程 這些你們認為需要依靠個人閃光想法的課程 孩子們現在卻被期待成為小組會的成員 對於那些喜歡 獨處，或者自己一個人工作的孩子來説 這些孩子常常被視為局外人 或者更糟，被視為問題孩子 並且很大一部分老師的報告中都相信 最理想的學生應該是外向的 相對於內向的學生而言 甚至説外向的學生能夠取得更好的成績 更加博學多識據研究報道 (笑聲)
okay, same thing is true in our workplaces. now, most of us work in open plan offices,without walls, where we are subject to the constant noise and gaze of our coworkers. and when it comes to leadership, introverts are routinely passed over for leadership positions,even though introverts tend to be very careful, much less likely to take outsize risks --which is something we might all favor nowadays. and interesting research by adam grant at the wharton school has found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than e_troverts do, because when they are managing proactive employees, they're much more likely to let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an e_trovert can, quite unwittingly, get so e_cited about things that they're putting their own stamp on things, and other people's ideas might not as easily then bubble up to the surface.
好了。同樣的事情也發生在我們工作的地方 現在呢，我們中的絕大多數都工作在寬闊沒有隔間的辦公室裏 甚至沒有牆 在這裏，我們暴露 在不斷的噪音和我們同事的凝視目光下工作 而當談及領袖氣質的時候 內向的人總是按照慣例從領導的位置被忽視了 儘管內向的人是非常小心仔細的 很少去冒特大的風險-- 這些風險是今天我們可能都喜歡的 賓夕法尼亞大學沃頓商學院的亞當·格蘭特教授做了一項很有意思的研究 這項研究表明內向的領導們 相對於外向領導而言總是會生產更大的效益 因為當他們管理主動積極的僱員的時候 他們更傾向於讓有主見的僱員去自由發揮 反之外向的領導就可能，當然是不經意的 對於事情變得十分激動 他們在事務上有了自己想法的印跡 這使其他人的想法可能就不會很容易地 在舞台上發光了
now in fact, some of our transformative leaders in history have been introverts. i'll give you some e_amples. eleanor roosevelt, rosa parks, gandhi -- all these peopled described themselves as quiet and soft-spoken and even shy. and they all took the spotlight, even though every bone in their bodies was telling them not to. and this turns out to have a special power all its own, because people could feel that these leaders were at the helm,not because they enjoyed directing others and not out of the pleasure of being looked at;they were there because they had no choice, because they were driven to do what they thought was right.
事實上，歷史上一些有改革能力的領袖都是內向的人 我會舉一些例子給你們 埃莉諾·羅斯福，羅沙·帕克斯，甘地 -- 所有這些人都把自己描述成 內向，説話温柔甚至是害羞的人 他們仍然站在了聚光燈下 即使他們渾身上下 都感知他們説不要 這證明是一種屬於它自身的特殊的力量因為人們都會感覺這些領導者同時是掌舵者 並不是因為他們喜歡指揮別人 抑或是享受眾人目光的聚焦 他們處在那個位置因為他們沒有選擇 因為他們行駛在他們認為正確的道路上
now i think at this point it's important for me to say that i actually love e_troverts. i always like to say some of my best friends are e_troverts, including my beloved husband. and we all fall at different points, of course, along the introvert/e_trovert spectrum. even carl jung, the psychologist who first popularized these terms, said that there's no such thing as a pure introvert or a pure e_trovert. he said that such a man would be in a lunatic asylum, if he e_isted at all. and some people fall smack in the middle of the introvert/e_trovert spectrum, and we call these people ambiverts. and i often think that they have the best of all worlds. but many of us do recognize ourselves as one type or the other.
現在我覺得對於這點我有必要説 那就是我真的喜愛外向的人 我總是喜歡説我最好的幾個朋友都是外向的人 包括我親愛的丈夫 當然了我們都會在不同點時偏向 內向者/外向者的範圍 甚至是卡爾·榮格，這個讓這些名詞為大眾所熟知的心理學家，説道 世上絕沒有一個純粹的內向的人 或者一個純粹的外向的人 他説這樣的人會在精神病院裏 如果他存在的話 還有一些人處在中間的跡象 在內向與外向之間 我們稱這些人為“中向性格者” 並且我總是認為他們擁有世界最美好的一切 但是我們中的大多數總是認為自己屬於內向或者外向，其中一類
and what i'm saying is that culturally we need a much better balance. we need more of a yin and yang between these two types. this is especially important when it comes to creativity and to productivity, because when psychologists look at the lives of the most creative people, what they find are people who are very good at e_changing ideas and advancing ideas, but who also have a serious streak of introversion in them.
同時我想説從文化意義上講我們需要一種更好的平衡 我們需要更多的陰陽的平衡 在這兩種類型的人之間 這點是極為重要的 當涉及創造力和生產力的時候 因為當心理學家們看待 最有創造力的人的生命的時候 他們尋找到的 是那些擅長變換思維的人 提出想法的人 但是他們同時也有着極為顯著的偏內向的痕跡
and this is because solitude is a crucial ingredient often to creativity. so darwin, he took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically turned down dinner party dor geisel, better known as dr. seuss, he dreamed up many of his amazing creations in a lonely bell tower office that he had in the back of his house in la jolla, california. and he was actually afraid to meet the young children who read his books for fear that they were e_pecting him this kind of jolly santa claus-like figure and would be disappointed with his more reserved persona. steve wozniak invented the first apple computer sitting alone in his cubical in hewlett-packard where he was working at the time. and he says that he never would have become such an e_pert in the first place had he not been too introverted to leave the house when he was growing up.
這是因為獨處是非常關鍵的因素 對於創造力來説 所以達爾文 自己一個人漫步在小樹林裏 並且斷然拒絕了晚餐派對的邀約 西奧多·蓋索，更多時候以蘇索博士的名號知名 他夢想過很多的驚人的創作 在他在加利福尼亞州拉霍亞市房子的後面的 一座孤獨的束層的塔形辦公室中 而且其實他很害怕見面 見那些讀過他的書的年輕的孩子們 害怕他們會期待他 這樣一位令人愉快的，聖誕老人形象的人物 同時又會因發現他含蓄緘默的性格而失望 史蒂夫·沃茲尼亞克發明了第一台蘋果電腦 一個人獨自坐在他的機櫃旁 在他當時工作的惠普公司 並且他説他永遠不會在那方面成為一號專家 但他還沒因太內向到要離開那裏 那個他成長起來的地方
now of course, this does not mean that we should all stop collaborating -- and case in point, is steve wozniak famously coming together with steve jobs to start apple computer -- but it does mean that solitude matters and that for some people it is the air that they breathe. and in fact, we have known for centuries about the transcendent power of solitude. it's only recently that we've strangely begun to forget it. if you look at most of the world's major religions, you will find seekers -- moses, jesus, buddha, muhammad --seekers who are going off by themselves alone to the wilderness where they then have profound epiphanies and revelations that they then bring back to the rest of the community. so no wilderness, no revelations.
當然了 這並不意味着我們都應該停止合作-- 恰當的例子呢，是史蒂夫·沃茲尼亞克和史蒂夫·喬布斯的著名聯手 創建蘋果電腦公司-- 但是這並不意味着和獨處有重大關係 並且對於一些人來説 這是他們賴以呼吸生存的空氣 事實上，幾個世紀以來我們已經非常明白 獨處的卓越力量只是到了最近，非常奇怪，我們開始遺忘它了 如果你看看世界上主要的宗教 你會發現探尋者-- 摩西，耶穌，佛祖，穆罕默德 -- 那些獨身去探尋的人們 在大自然的曠野中獨處，思索 在那裏，他們有了深刻的頓悟和對於奧義的揭示 之後他們把這些思想帶回到社會的其他地方去沒有曠原，沒有啟示
this is no surprise though if you look at the insights of contemporary psychology. it turns out that we can't even be in a group of people without instinctively mirroring, mimicking their opinions. even about seemingly personal and visceral things like who you're attracted to, you will start aping the beliefs of the people around you without even realizing that that's what you're doing.
儘管這並不令人驚訝 如果你注意到現代心理學的思想理論 它反映出來我們甚至不能和一組人待在一起 而不去本能地模仿他們的意見與想法 甚至是看上去私人的，發自內心的事情 像是你被誰所吸引 你會開始模仿你周圍的人的信仰 甚至都覺察不到你自己在做什麼
and groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismatic person in the room, even though there's zero correlation between being the best talker and having the best ideas -- i mean zero. so ... (laughter) you might be following the person with the best ideas, but you might not. and do you really want to leave it up to chance? much better for everybody to go off by themselves, generate their own ideas freed from the distortions of group dynamics, and then come together as a team to talk them through in a well-managed environment and take it from there.
還曾跟隨羣體的意見 跟隨着房間裏最具有統治力的，最有領袖氣質的人的思路 雖然這真的沒什麼關係 在成為一個卓越的演講家還是擁有最好的主意之間-- 我的意思是“零相關” 那麼...(笑聲) 你們或許會跟隨有最好頭腦的人 但是你們也許不會 可你們真的想把這機會扔掉嗎?如果每個人都自己行動或許好得多 發掘他們自己的想法 沒有羣體動力學的曲解 接着來到一起組成一個團隊 在一個良好管理的環境中互相交流 並且在那裏學習別的思想
now if all this is true, then why are we getting it so wrong? why are we setting up our schools this way and our workplaces? and why are we making these introverts feel so guilty about wanting to just go off by themselves some of the time? one answer lies deep in our cultural history. western societies, and in particular the u.s., have always favored the man of action over the man of contemplation and “man” of contemplation. but in america's early days, we lived in what historians call a culture of character, where we still, at that point, valued people for their inner selves and their moral rectitude. and if you look at the self-help books from this era, they all had titles with things like “character, the grandest thing in the world.” and they featured role models like abraham lincoln who was praised for being modest and unassuming. ralph waldo emerson called him “a man who does not offend by superiority.”
如果説現在這一切都是真的 那麼為什麼我們還得到這樣錯誤的結論? 為什麼我們要這樣創立我們的學校，還有我們的工作單位? 為什麼我們要讓這些內向的人覺得那麼愧疚 。對於他們只是想要離開，一個人獨處一段時間的事實? 有一個答案在我們的文化史中埋藏已久 西方社會特別是在美國 總是偏愛有行動的人 而不是有深刻思考的人 有深刻思考的“人” 但是在美國早期的時候 我們生活在一個被歷史學家稱作“性格特徵”的文化 那時我們仍然，在這點上，判斷人們的價值 從人們的內涵和道義正直 而且如果你看一看這個時代關於自立的書籍的話 它們都有這樣一種標題： “性格”，世界上最偉大的事物 並且它們以亞伯拉罕·林肯這樣的為標榜 一個被形容為謙虛低調的男人 拉爾夫·瓦爾多·愛默生稱他是 “一個以‘優越’二形容都不為過的人”
but then we hit the 20th century and we entered a new culture that historians call the culture of personality. what happened is we had evolved an agricultural economy to a world of big business. and so suddenly people are moving from small towns to the instead of working alongside people they've known all their lives, now they are having to prove themselves in a crowd of strangers. so, quite understandably, qualities like magnetism and charisma suddenly come to seem really important. and sure enough, the self-help books change to meet these new needs and they start to have names like “how to win friends and influence people.” and they feature as their role models really great salesmen. so that's the world we're living in today. that's our cultural inheritance.
但是接着我們來到了二十世紀 並且我們融入了一種新的文化 一種被歷史學家稱作“個性”的文化 所發生的改變就是我們從農業經濟發展為 一個大商業經濟的世界 而且人們突然開始搬遷從小的城鎮搬向城市 並且一改他們之前的在生活中和所熟識的人們一起工作的方式 現在他們在一羣陌生人中間有必要去證明自己 這樣做是非常可以理解的 像領袖氣質和個人魅力這樣的品質 突然間似乎變得極為重要 那麼可以肯定的是，自助自立的書的內容變更了以適應這些新的需求 並且它們開始擁有名稱 像是《如何贏得朋友和影響他人》(戴爾?卡耐基所著《人性的弱點》) 他們的特點是做自己的榜樣 不得不説確實是好的推銷員 所以這就是我們今天生活的世界 這是我們的文化遺產
now none of this is to say that social skills are unimportant, and i'm also not calling for the abolishing of teamwork at all. the same religions who send their sages off to lonely mountain tops also teach us love and trust. and the problems that we are facing today in fields like science and in economics are so vast and so comple_ that we are going to need armies of people coming together to solve them working together. but i am saying that the more freedom that we give introverts to be themselves, the more likely that they are to come up with their own unique solutions to these problems.
現在沒有誰能夠説 社交技能是不重要的 並且我也不是想呼籲 大家廢除團隊合作模式 但仍是相同的宗教，卻把他們的聖人送到了孤獨的山頂上 仍然教導我們愛與信任 還有我們今天所要面對的問題 像是在科學和經濟領域 是如此的巨大和複雜 以至於我們需要人們強有力地團結起來 共同解決這些問題 但是我想説，越給內向者自由讓他們做自己 他們就做得越好 去想出他們獨特的關於問題的解決辦法
so now i'd like to share with you what's in my suitcase today. guess what? books. i have a suitcase full of books. here's margaret atwood, “cat's eye.” here's a novel by milan kundera. and here's “the guide for the perple_ed” by maimonides. but these are not e_actly my books. i brought these books with me because they were written by my grandfather's favorite authors.
所以現在我很高興同你們分享 我手提箱中的東西 猜猜是什麼? 書 我有一個手提箱裏面裝滿了書 這是瑪格麗特·阿特伍德的《貓的眼睛》 這是一本米蘭·昆德拉的書 這是一本《迷途指津》 是邁蒙尼德寫的 但這些實際上都不是我的書 我還是帶着它們，陪伴着我 因為它們都是我祖父最喜愛的作家所寫
my grandfather was a rabbi and he was a widower who lived alone in a small apartment in brooklyn that was my favorite place in the world when i was growing up, partly because it was filled with his very gentle, very courtly presence and partly because it was filled with books. i mean literally every table, every chair in this apartment had yielded its original function to now serve as a surface for swaying stacks of books. just like the rest of my family, my grandfather's favorite thing to do in the whole world was to read.
我的祖父是一名猶太教祭司 他獨身一人 在布魯克林的一間小公寓中居住 那裏是我從小到大在這個世界上最喜愛的地方 部分原因是他有着非常温和親切的，温文爾雅的舉止 部分原因是那裏充滿了書 我的意思是，毫不誇張地説，公寓中的每張桌子，每張椅子 都充分應用着它原有的功能 就是現在作為承載一大堆都在搖曳的書的表面 就像我其他的家庭成員一樣 我祖父在這個世界上最喜歡做的事情就是閲讀
but he also loved his congregation, and you could feel this love in the sermons that he gave every week for the 62 years that he was a rabbi. he would takes the fruits of each week's reading and he would weave these intricate tapestries of ancient and humanist thought. and people would come from all over to hear him speak.
但是他同樣也熱愛他的宗教 並且你們可以從他的講述中感覺到他這種愛 這62年來每週他都作為一名猶太教的祭司 他會從每週的閲讀中汲取養分 並且他會編織這些錯綜複雜的古代和人文主義的思想的掛毯 並且人們會從各個地方前來 聽他的講話
but here's the thing about my grandfather. underneath this ceremonial role, he was really modest and really introverted -- so much so that when he delivered these sermons, he had trouble making eye contact with the very same congregation that he had been speaking to for 62 years. and even away from the podium, when you called him to say hello, he would often end the conversation prematurely for fear that he was taking up too much of your time. but when he died at the age of 94, the police had to close down the streets of his neighborhood to accommodate the crowd of people who came out to mourn him. and so these days i try to learn from my grandfather's e_ample in my own way.
但是有這麼一件關於我祖父的事情 在這個正式的角色下隱藏着 他是一個非常謙虛的非常內向的人 是那麼的謙虛內向以至於當他在向人們講述的時候 他都不敢有視線上的接觸 和同樣的教堂會眾 他已經發言有62年了 甚至都還遠離領獎台 當你們讓他説“你好”的時候 他總會提早結束這對話 擔心他會佔用你太多的時間 但是當他94歲去世的時候 警察們需要封鎖他所居住的街道鄰里 來容納擁擠的人們 前來哀悼他的人們 這些天來我都試着從我祖父的事例中學習以我自己的方式
so i just published a book about introversion, and it took me about seven years to for me, that seven years was like total bliss, because i was reading, i was writing, i was thinking, i was researching. it was my version of my grandfather's hours of the day alone in his library. but now all of a sudden my job is very different, and my job is to be out here talking about it, talking about introversion. (laughter) and that's a lot harder for me,because as honored as i am to be here with all of you right now, this is not my natural milieu.
所以我就出版了一本關於內向性格的書 它花了我7年的時間完成它 而對我來説，這七年像是一種極大的喜悦 因為我在閲讀，我在寫作 我在思考，我在探尋 這是我的版本 對於爺爺一天中幾個小時都要獨自待在圖書館這件事 但是現在突然間我的工作變得很不同了 我的工作變成了站在這裏講述它 講述內向的性格 (笑聲) 而且這對於我來説是有一點困難的 因為我很榮幸 在現在被你們所有人所傾聽 這可不是我自然的文化背景
so i prepared for moments like these as best i could. i spent the last year practicing public speaking every chance i could get. and i call this my “year of speaking dangerously.” (laughter) and that actually helped a lot. but i'll tell you, what helps even more is my sense, my belief, my hope that when it comes to our attitudes to introversion and to quiet and to solitude, we truly are poised on the brink on dramatic change. i mean, we are. and so i am going to leave you now with three calls for action for those who share this vision.
所以我準備了一會就像這樣 以我所能做到的最好的方式 我花了最近一年的時間練習在公共場合發言 在我能得到的每一個機會中 我把這一年稱作我的“危險地發言的一年” (笑聲) 而且它的確幫了我很大的忙 但是我要告訴你們一個幫我更大的忙的事情 那就是我的感覺，我的信仰，我的希望 當談及我們態度的時候 對於內向性格的，對於安靜，對於獨處的態度時 我們確實是在急劇變化的邊緣上保持微妙的平衡 我的意思是，我們在保持平衡 現在我將要給你們留下一些東西 三件對於你們的行動有幫助的事情 獻給那些觀看我的演講的人
number one: stop the madness for constant group work. just stop it. (laughter) thank you. (applause) and i want to be clear about what i'm saying, because i deeply believe our offices should be encouraging casual, chatty cafe-style types of interactions -- you know, the kind where people come together and serendipitously have an e_change of is great. it's great for introverts and it's great for e_troverts. but we need much more privacy and much more freedom and much more autonomy at work. school, same need to be teaching kids to work together, for sure, but we also need to be teaching them how to work on their own. this is especially important for e_troverted children need to work on their own because that is where deep thought comes from in part.
第一： 停止對於經常要團隊協作的執迷與瘋狂 停止它就好了 (笑聲) 謝謝你們 (掌聲) 我想讓我所説的事情變得清晰一些 因為我對於我們的辦公深信不疑 應該鼓勵它們 那種休閒隨意的，聊天似的咖啡廳式的相互作用-- 你們知道的，道不同不相為謀，人們聚到一起 並且互相交換着寶貴的意見 這是很棒的 這對於內向者很好，同樣對於外向者也好 但是我們需要更多的隱私和更多的自由 還有更多對於我們本身工作的自主權 對於學校，也是同樣的。 我們當然需要教會孩子們要一起學習工作 但是我們同樣需要教會孩子們怎麼樣獨立完成任務 這對於外向的孩子們來説同樣是極為重要的 他們需要獨立完成工作 因為從某種程度上，這是他們深刻思考的來源
okay, number two: go to the wilderness. be like buddha, have your own revelations. i'm not saying that we all have to now go off and build our own cabins in the woods and never talk to each other again, but i am saying that we could all stand to unplug and get inside our own heads a little more often.
好了，第二個：去到野外(打開思維) 就像佛祖一樣，擁有你們自己對於事物的揭示啟迪 我並不是説 我們都要跑去小樹林裏建造我們自己的小屋 並且之後就永遠不和別人説話了 但是我要説我們都可以堅持去去除一些障礙物 然後深入我們自己的大腦思想 時不時得再深入一點
number three: take a good look at what's inside your own suitcase and why you put it there. so e_troverts, maybe your suitcases are also full of books. or maybe they're full of champagne glasses or skydiving equipment. whatever it is, i hope you take these things out every chance you get and grace us with your energy and your joy. but introverts, you being you, you probably have the impulse to guard very carefully what's inside your own suitcase. and that's okay. but occasionally, just occasionally, i hope you will open up your suitcases for other people to see, because the world needs you and it needs the things you carry.
第三點： 好好看一眼你的旅行箱內有什麼東西 還有你為什麼把它放進去 所以外向者們 也許你們的箱子內同樣堆滿了書 或者它們裝滿了香檳的玻璃酒杯 或者是跳傘運動的設備 不管它是什麼，我希望每當你們有機會你們就把它拿出來 用你的能量和你的快樂讓我們感受到美和享受 但是內向者們，你們作為內向者 你們很可能有仔細保護一切的衝動 在你箱子裏的東西 這沒有問題 但是偶爾地，只是説偶爾地 我希望你們可以打開你們的手提箱，讓別人看一看 因為這個世界需要你們，同樣需要你們身上所攜帶的你們特有的事物
so i wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speak softly.
所以對於你們即將走上的所有旅程，我都給予你們我最美好的祝願 還有温柔地説話的勇氣
thank you. thank you.
非常感謝你們!
when i was nine years old i went off to summer camp for the first time. and my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do. because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. and this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. you have the animal warmth of your family sitting right ne_t to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventureland inside your own mind. and i had this idea that camp was going to be just like this, but better. (laughter) i had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns.
(laughter)
camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. and on the very first day our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that she said we would be doing every day for the rest of the summer to instill camp spirit. and it went like this: “r-o-w-d-i-e, that's the way we spell rowdie. rowdie, rowdie, let's get rowdie.” yeah. so i couldn't figure out for the life of me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this word incorrectly. (laughter) but i recited a cheer. i recited a cheer along with everybody else. i did my best. and i just waited for the time that i could go off and read my books.
but the first time that i took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girl in the bunk came up to me and she asked me, “why are you being so mellow?” -- mellow, of course, being the e_act opposite of r-o-w-d-i-e. and then the second time i tried it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned e_pression on her face and she repeated the point about camp spirit and said we should all work very hard to be outgoing.
and so i put my books away, back in their suitcase, and i put them under my bed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. and i felt kind of guilty about this. i felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they were calling out to me and i was forsaking them. but i did forsake them and i didn't open that suitcase again until i was back home with my family at the end of the summer.
now, i tell you this story about summer camp. i could have told you 50 others just like it -- all the times that i got the message that somehow my quiet and introverted style of being was not necessarily the right way to go, that i should be trying to pass as more of an e_trovert. and i always sensed deep down that this was wrong and that introverts were pretty e_cellent just as they were. but for years i denied this intuition, and so i became a wall street lawyer, of all things, instead of the writer that i had always longed to be -- partly because i needed to prove to myself that i could be bold and assertive too. and i was always going off to crowded bars when i really would have preferred to just have a nice dinner with friends. and i made these self-negating choices so refle_ively, that i wasn't even aware that i was making them.
now this is what many introverts do, and it's our loss for sure, but it is also our colleagues' loss and our communities' loss. and at the risk of sounding grandiose, it is the world's loss. because when it comes to creativity and to leadership, we need introverts doing what they do best. a third to a half of the population are introverts -- a third to a half. so that's one out of every two or three people you know. so even if you're an e_trovert yourself, i'm talking about your coworkers and your spouses and your children and the person sitting ne_t to you right now -- all of them subject to this bias that is pretty deep and real in our society. we all internalize it from a very early age without even having a language for what we're doing.
now to see the bias clearly you need to understand what introversion is. it's different from being shy. shyness is about fear of social judgment. introversion is more about, how do you respond to stimulation, including social stimulation. so e_troverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereas introverts feel at their most alive and their most switched-on and their most capable when they're in quieter, more low-key environments. not all the time -- these things aren't absolute -- but a lot of the time. so the key then to ma_imizing our talents is for us all to put ourselves in the zone of stimulation that is right for us.
but now here's where the bias comes in. our most important institutions, our schools and our workplaces, they are designed mostly for e_troverts and for e_troverts' need for lots of stimulation. and also we have this belief system right now that i call the new groupthink, which holds that all creativity and all productivity comes from a very oddly gregarious place.
so if you picture the typical classroom nowadays: when i was going to school, we sat in rows. we sat in rows of desks like this, and we did most of our work pretty autonomously. but nowadays, your typical classroom has pods of desks -- four or five or si_ or seven kids all facing each other. and kids are working in countless group assignments. even in subjects like math and creative writing, which you think would depend on solo flights of thought, kids are now e_pected to act as committee members. and for the kids who prefer to go off by themselves or just to work alone, those kids are seen as outliers often or, worse, as problem cases. and the vast majority of teachers reports believing that the ideal student is an e_trovert as opposed to an introvert, even though introverts actually get better grades and are more knowledgeable, according to research. (laughter)
okay, same thing is true in our workplaces. now, most of us work in open plan offices, without walls, where we are subject to the constant noise and gaze of our coworkers. and when it comes to leadership, introverts are routinely passed over for leadership positions, even though introverts tend to be very careful, much less likely to take outsize risks -- which is something we might all favor nowadays. and interesting research by adam grant at the wharton school has found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than e_troverts do, because when they are managing proactive employees, they're much more likely to let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an e_trovert can, quite unwittingly, get so e_cited about things that they're putting their own stamp on things, and other people's ideas might not as easily then bubble up to the surface.
now in fact, some of our transformative leaders in history have been introverts. i'll give you some e_amples. eleanor roosevelt, rosa parks, gandhi -- all these peopled described themselves as quiet and soft-spoken and even shy. and they all took the spotlight, even though every bone in their bodies was telling them not to. and this turns out to have a special power all its own, because people could feel that these leaders were at the helm, not because they enjoyed directing others and not out of the pleasure of being looked at; they were there because they had no choice, because they were driven to do what they thought was right.
now i think at this point it's important for me to say that i actually love e_troverts. i always like to say some of my best friends are e_troverts, including my beloved husband. and we all fall at different points, of course, along the introvert/e_trovert spectrum. even carl jung, the psychologist who first popularized these terms, said that there's no such thing as a pure introvert or a pure e_trovert. he said that such a man would be in a lunatic asylum, if he e_isted at all. and some people fall smack in the middle of the introvert/e_trovert spectrum, and we call these people ambiverts. and i often think that they have the best of all worlds. but many of us do recognize ourselves as one type or the other.
and what i'm saying is that culturally we need a much better balance. we need more of a yin and yang between these two types. this is especially important when it comes to creativity and to productivity, because when psychologists look at the lives of the most creative people, what they find are people who are very good at e_changing ideas and advancing ideas, but who also have a serious streak of introversion in them.
and this is because solitude is a crucial ingredient often to creativity. so darwin, he took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically turned down dinner party invitations. theodor geisel, better known as dr. seuss, he dreamed up many of his amazing creations in a lonely bell tower office that he had in the back of his house in la jolla, california. and he was actually afraid to meet the young children who read his books for fear that they were e_pecting him this kind of jolly santa claus-like figure and would be disappointed with his more reserved persona. steve wozniak invented the first apple computer sitting alone in his cubical in hewlett-packard where he was working at the time. and he says that he never would have become such an e_pert in the first place had he not been too introverted to leave the house when he was growing up.
now of course, this does not mean that we should all stop collaborating -- and case in point, is steve wozniak famously coming together with steve jobs to start apple computer -- but it does mean that solitude matters and that for some people it is the air that they breathe. and in fact, we have known for centuries about the transcendent power of solitude. it's only recently that we've strangely begun to forget it. if you look at most of the world's major religions, you will find seekers -- moses, jesus, buddha, muhammad -- seekers who are going off by themselves alone to the wilderness where they then have profound epiphanies and revelations that they then bring back to the rest of the community. so no wilderness, no revelations.
this is no surprise though if you look at the insights of contemporary psychology. it turns out that we can't even be in a group of people without instinctively mirroring, mimicking their opinions. even about seemingly personal and visceral things like who you're attracted to, you will start aping the beliefs of the people around you without even realizing that that's what you're doing.
and groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismatic person in the room, even though there's zero correlation between being the best talker and having the best ideas -- i mean zero. so ... (laughter) you might be following the person with the best ideas, but you might not. and do you really want to leave it up to chance? much better for everybody to go off by themselves, generate their own ideas freed from the distortions of group dynamics, and then come together as a team to talk them through in a well-managed environment and take it from there.
now if all this is true, then why are we getting it so wrong? why are we setting up our schools this way and our workplaces? and why are we making these introverts feel so guilty about wanting to just go off by themselves some of the time? one answer lies deep in our cultural history. western societies, and in particular the u.s., have always favored the man of action over the man of contemplation and “man” of contemplation. but in america's early days, we lived in what historians call a culture of character, where we still, at that point, valued people for their inner selves and their moral rectitude. and if you look at the self-help books from this era, they all had titles with things like “character, the grandest thing in the world.” and they featured role models like abraham lincoln who was praised for being modest and unassuming. ralph waldo emerson called him “a man who does not offend by superiority.”
but then we hit the 20th century and we entered a new culture that historians call the culture of personality. what happened is we had evolved an agricultural economy to a world of big business. and so suddenly people are moving from small towns to the cities. and instead of working alongside people they've known all their lives, now they are having to prove themselves in a crowd of strangers. so, quite understandably, qualities like magnetism and charisma suddenly come to seem really important. and sure enough, the self-help books change to meet these new needs and they start to have names like “how to win friends and influence people.” and they feature as their role models really great salesmen. so that's the world we're living in today. that's our cultural inheritance.
now none of this is to say that social skills are unimportant, and i'm also not calling for the abolishing of teamwork at all. the same religions who send their sages off to lonely mountain tops also teach us love and trust. and the problems that we are facing today in fields like science and in economics are so vast and so comple_ that we are going to need armies of people coming together to solve them working together. but i am saying that the more freedom that we give introverts to be themselves, the more likely that they are to come up with their own unique solutions to these problems.
so now i'd like to share with you what's in my suitcase today. guess what? books. i have a suitcase full of books. here's margaret atwood, “cat's eye.” here's a novel by milan kundera. and here's “the guide for the perple_ed” by maimonides. but these are not e_actly my books. i brought these books with me because they were written by my grandfather's favorite authors.
my grandfather was a rabbi and he was a widower who lived alone in a small apartment in brooklyn that was my favorite place in the world when i was growing up, partly because it was filled with his very gentle, very courtly presence and partly because it was filled with books. i mean literally every table, every chair in this apartment had yielded its original function to now serve as a surface for swaying stacks of books. just like the rest of my family, my grandfather's favorite thing to do in the whole world was to read.
but he also loved his congregation, and you could feel this love in the sermons that he gave every week for the 62 years that he was a rabbi. he would takes the fruits of each week's reading and he would weave these intricate tapestries of ancient and humanist thought. and people would come from all over to hear him speak.
but here's the thing about my grandfather. underneath this ceremonial role, he was really modest and really introverted -- so much so that when he delivered these sermons, he had trouble making eye contact with the very same congregation that he had been speaking to for 62 years. and even away from the podium, when you called him to say hello, he would often end the conversation prematurely for fear that he was taking up too much of your time. but when he died at the age of 94, the police had to close down the streets of his neighborhood to accommodate the crowd of people who came out to mourn him. and so these days i try to learn from my grandfather's e_ample in my own way.
so i just published a book about introversion, and it took me about seven years to write. and for me, that seven years was like total bliss, because i was reading, i was writing, i was thinking, i was researching. it was my version of my grandfather's hours of the day alone in his library. but now all of a sudden my job is very different, and my job is to be out here talking about it, talking about introversion. (laughter) and that's a lot harder for me, because as honored as i am to be here with all of you right now, this is not my natural milieu.
so i prepared for moments like these as best i could. i spent the last year practicing public speaking every chance i could get. and i call this my “year of speaking dangerously.” (laughter) and that actually helped a lot. but i'll tell you, what helps even more is my sense, my belief, my hope that when it comes to our attitudes to introversion and to quiet and to solitude, we truly are poised on the brink on dramatic change. i mean, we are. and so i am going to leave you now with three calls for action for those who share this vision.
number one: stop the madness for constant group work. just stop it. (laughter) thank you. (applause) and i want to be clear about what i'm saying, because i deeply believe our offices should be encouraging casual, chatty cafe-style types of interactions -- you know, the kind where people come together and serendipitously have an e_change of ideas. that is great. it's great for introverts and it's great for e_troverts. but we need much more privacy and much more freedom and much more autonomy at work. school, same thing. we need to be teaching kids to work together, for sure, but we also need to be teaching them how to work on their own. this is especially important for e_troverted children too. they need to work on their own because that is where deep thought comes from in part.
okay, number two: go to the wilderness. be like buddha, have your own revelations. i'm not saying that we all have to now go off and build our own cabins in the woods and never talk to each other again, but i am saying that we could all stand to unplug and get inside our own heads a little more often.
number three: take a good look at what's inside your own suitcase and why you put it there. so e_troverts, maybe your suitcases are also full of books. or maybe they're full of champagne glasses or skydiving equipment. whatever it is, i hope you take these things out every chance you get and grace us with your energy and your joy. but introverts, you being you, you probably have the impulse to guard very carefully what's inside your own suitcase. and that's okay. but occasionally, just occasionally, i hope you will open up your suitcases for other people to see, because the world needs you and it needs the things you carry.
so i wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speak softly.
thank you very much.
(applause)
thank you. thank you.
擁抱他人，擁抱自己
embracing otherness. when i first heard this theme, i thought, well, embracing otherness is embracing myself. and the journey to that place of understanding and acceptance has been an interesting one for me, and it's given me an insight into the whole notion of self, which i think is worth sharing with you today.
擁抱他類。當我第一次聽説這個主題時，我心想，擁抱他類不就是擁抱自己嗎。我個人懂得理解和接受他類的經歷很有趣，讓我對於“自己”這個詞也有了新的認識，我想今天在這裏和你們分享下我的心得體會。
we each have a self, but i don't think that we're born with one. you know how newborn babies believe they're part of everything; they're not separate? well that fundamental sense of oneness is lost on us very quickly. it's like that initial stage is over -- oneness: infancy, unformed, primitive. it's no longer valid or real. what is real is separateness, and at some point in early babyhood, the idea of self starts to form. our little portion of oneness is given a name, is told all kinds of things about itself, and these details, opinions and ideas become facts, which go towards building ourselves, our identity. and that self becomes the vehicle for navigating our social world. but the self is a projection based on other people's projections. is it who we really are? or who we really want to be, or should be?
我們每個人都有個自我，但並不是生來就如此的。你知道新生的寶寶們覺得他們是任何東西的一部分，而不是分裂的個體。這種本源上的“天人合一”感在我們出生後很快就不見了，就好像我們人生的第一個 篇章--和諧統一：嬰兒，未成形，原始--結束了。它們似幻似影，而現實的世界是孤獨彼此分離的。而在孩童期的某段時間，我們開始形成自我這個觀點。宇宙中的小小個體有了自己的名字，有了自己的過去等等各種信息。這些關於自己的細節，看法和觀點慢慢變成事實，成為我們身份的一部分。而那個自我，也變成我們人生路上前行的導航儀。然後，這個所謂的自我，是他人自我的映射，還是我們真實的自己呢?我們究竟想成為什麼樣，應該成為什麼樣的呢?
so this whole interaction with self and identity was a very difficult one for me growing up. the self that i attempted to take out into the world was rejected over and over again. and my panic at not having a self that fit, and the confusion that came from my self being rejected, created an_iety, shame and hopelessness, which kind of defined me for a long time. but in retrospect, the destruction of my self was so repetitive that i started to see a pattern. the self changed, got affected, broken, destroyed, but another one would evolve -- sometimes stronger, sometimes hateful, sometimes not wanting to be there at all. the self was not constant. and how many times would my self have to die before i realized that it was never alive in the first place?
這個和自我打交道，尋找自己身份的過程在我的成長記憶中一點都不容易。我想成為的那些“自我”不斷被否定再否定，而我害怕自己無法融入周遭的環境，因被否定而引起的困惑讓我變得更加憂慮，感到羞恥和無望，在很長一段時間就是我存在狀態。然而回頭看，對自我的解構是那麼頻繁，以至於我發現了這樣一種規律。自我是變化的，受他人影響，分裂或被打敗，而另一個自我會產生，這個自我可能更堅強，可能更可憎，有時你也不想變成那樣。所謂自我不是固定不變的。而我需要經歷多少次自我的破碎重生才會明白其實自我從來沒有存在過?
i grew up on the coast of england in the '70s. my dad is white from cornwall, and my mom is black from zimbabwe. even the idea of us as a family was challenging to most people. but nature had its wicked way, and brown babies were born. but from about the age of five, i was aware that i didn't fit. i was the black atheist kid in the all-white catholic school run by nuns. i was an anomaly, and my self was rooting around for definition and trying to plug in. because the self likes to fit, to see itself replicated, to belong. that confirms its e_istence and its importance. and it is important. it has an e_tremely important function. without it, we literally can't interface with others. we can't hatch plans and climb that stairway of popularity, of success. but my skin color wasn't right. my hair wasn't right. my history wasn't right. my self became defined by otherness, which meant that, in that social world, i didn't really e_ist. and i was “other” before being anything else -- even before being a girl. i was a noticeable nobody.
我在70年代英格蘭海邊長大，我的父親是康沃爾的白人，母親是津巴布韋的黑人。而想象我和父母是一家人對於其他人來説總是不太自然。自然有它自己的魔術，棕色皮膚的寶寶誕生了。但 從我五歲開始，我就有種感覺我不是這個羣體的。我是一個全白人天主教會學校裏面黑皮膚無神論小孩。我與他人是不同的，而那個熱衷於歸屬的自我卻到處尋找方式尋找歸屬感。這種認同感讓自我感受到存在感和重要性，因此十分重要。這點是如此重要，如果沒有自我，我們根本無法與他人溝通。沒有它，我們無所適從，無法獲取成功或變得受人歡迎。但我的膚色不對，我的頭髮不對，我的過去不對，我的一切都是另類定義的，在這個社會裏，我其實並不真實存在。我首先是個異類，其次才是個女孩。我是可見卻毫無意義的人。
another world was opening up around this time: performance and dancing. that nagging dread of self-hood didn't e_ist when i was dancing. i'd literally lose myself. and i was a really good dancer. i would put all my emotional e_pression into my dancing. i could be in the movement in a way that i wasn't able to be in my real life, in myself.
這時候，另一個世界向我敞開了大門：舞蹈表演。那種關於自我的嘮叨恐懼在舞蹈時消失了，我放開四肢，也成為了一位不錯的舞者。我將所有的情緒都融入到舞蹈的動作中去，我可以在舞蹈中與自己相溶，儘管在現實生活中卻無法做到。
and at 16, i stumbled across another opportunity, and i earned my first acting role in a film. i can hardly find the words to describe the peace i felt when i was acting. my dysfunctional self could actually plug in to another self, not my own, and it felt so good. it was the first time that i e_isted inside a fully-functioning self -- one that i controlled, that i steered, that i gave life to. but the shooting day would end, and i'd return to my gnarly, awkward self.
16歲的時候，我遇到了另一個機會，第一部參演的電影。我無法用語言來表達在演戲的時候我所感受到的平和，我無處着落的自我可以與那個角色融為一體，而不是我自己。那感覺真棒。這是第一次我感覺到我擁有一個自我，我可以駕馭，令其富有盛名的自我。然而當拍攝結束，我又會回到自己粗糙不明，笨拙的自我。
by 19, i was a fully-fledged movie actor, but still searching for definition. i applied to read anthropology at university. dr. phyllis lee gave me my interview, and she asked me, “how would you define race?” well, i thought i had the answer to that one, and i said, “skin color.” “so biology, genetics?” she said. “because, thandie, that's not accurate. because there's actually more genetic difference between a black kenyan and a black ugandan than there is between a black kenyan and, say, a white norwegian. because we all stem from africa. so in africa, there's been more time to create genetic diversity.” in other words, race has no basis in biological or scientific fact. on the one hand, result. right? on the other hand, my definition of self just lost a huge chunk of its credibility. but what was credible, what is biological and scientific fact, is that we all stem from africa -- in fact, from a woman called mitochondrial eve who lived 160,000 years ago. and race is an illegitimate concept which our selves have created based on fear and ignorance.
19歲的時候，我已經是富有經驗的專業電影演員，而我還是在尋找自我的定義。我申請了大學的人類學專業。phyllis lee博士面試了我，她問我：“你怎麼定義種族?”我覺得我很瞭解這個話題，我説：“膚色。”“那麼生物上來説呢，例如遺傳基因?”她説，“thandie 膚色並不全面，其實一個肯尼亞黑人和烏干達黑人之間基因差異比一個肯尼亞黑人和挪威白人之間差異要更多。因為我們都是從非洲來的，所以在非洲，基因變異演化的時間是最久的。”換句話説，種族在生物學或任何科學上都沒有事實根據。另一方面，我對於自我的定義瞬時失去了一大片基礎。 但那就是生物學事實，我們都是非洲後裔，一位在160 0__年前的偉大女性mitochondrial eve的後人。而種族這個無效的概念是我們基於恐懼和無知自己捏造出來的。
strangely, these revelations didn't cure my low self-esteem, that feeling of otherness. my desire to disappear was still very powerful. i had a degree from cambridge; i had a thriving career, but my self was a car crash, and i wound up with bulimia and on a therapist's couch. and of course i did. i still believed my self was all i was. i still valued self-worth above all other worth, and what was there to suggest otherwise? we've created entire value systems and a physical reality to support the worth of self. look at the industry for self-image and the jobs it creates, the revenue it turns over. we'd be right in assuming that the self is an actual living thing. but it's not. it's a projection which our clever brains create in order to cheat ourselves from the reality of death.
奇怪的是，這個發現並沒有治好我的自卑，那種被排擠的感覺。我還是那麼強烈地想要離開消失。我從劍橋拿到了學位，我有份充滿發展的工作，然而我的自我還是一團糟，我得了催吐病不得不接受治療師的幫助。我還是相信自我是我的全部。我還是堅信“自我”的價值甚過一切。而且我們身處的世界就是如此，我們的整個價值系統和現實環境都是在服務“自我”的價值。看看不同行業裏面對於自我的塑造，看看它們創造的那些工作，產出的那些利潤。我們甚至必須相信自我是真實存在的。但它們不是，自我不過是我們聰明的腦袋假想出來騙自己不去思考死亡這個話題的幌子。
but there is something that can give the self ultimate and infinite connection -- and that thing is oneness, our essence. the self's struggle for authenticity and definition will never end unless it's connected to its creator -- to you and to me. and that can happen with awareness -- awareness of the reality of oneness and the projection of self-hood. for a start, we can think about all the times when we do lose ourselves. it happens when i dance, when i'm acting. i'm earthed in my essence, and my self is suspended. in those moments, i'm connected to everything -- the ground, the air, the sounds, the energy from the audience. all my senses are alert and alive in much the same way as an infant might feel -- that feeling of oneness.
但其實我們的終極自我其實是我們的本源，合一。掙扎自我是否真實，究竟是什麼永遠沒有終結，除非它和賦予它意義的創造者合一，就是你和我。而這點當我們意識到現實是你中有我，我中有你，和諧統一，而自我是種假象時就會體會到了。我們可以想想，什麼時候我們是身心統一的，例如説我跳舞，表演的時候，我和我的本源連結，而我的自我被拋在一邊。那時，我和身邊的一切--空氣，大地，聲音，觀眾的反饋都連結在一起。我的知覺是敏鋭和鮮活的，就像初生的嬰兒那樣，合一。
and when i'm acting a role, i inhabit another self, and i give it life for awhile, because when the self is suspended so is divisiveness and judgment. and i've played everything from a vengeful ghost in the time of slavery to secretary of state in __. and no matter how other these selves might be, they're all related in me. and i honestly believe the key to my success as an actor and my progress as a person has been the very lack of self that used to make me feel so an_ious and insecure. i always wondered why i could feel others' pain so deeply, why i could recognize the somebody in the nobody. it's because i didn't have a self to get in the way. i thought i lacked substance, and the fact that i could feel others' meant that i had nothing of myself to feel. the thing that was a source of shame was actually a source of enlightenment.
當我在演戲的時候，我讓另一個自我住在我體內，我代表它行動。當我的自我被拋開，緊隨的分歧和主觀判斷也消失了。我曾經扮演過奴隸時代的復仇鬼魂，也扮演過__年的國務卿。不管他們這些自我是怎樣的，他們都在那時與我相連。而我也深信作為演員，我的成功，或是作為個體，我的成長都是源於我缺乏“自我”，那種缺乏曾經讓我非常憂慮和不安。我總是不明白為什麼我會那麼深地感受到他人的痛苦，為什麼我可以從不知名的人身上看出他人的印痕。是因為我沒有所謂的自我來左右我感受的信息吧。我以為我缺少些什麼，我以為我對他人的理解是因為我缺乏自我。那個曾經是我深感羞恥的東西其實是種啟示。
and when i realized and really understood that my self is a projection and that it has a function, a funny thing happened. i stopped giving it so much authority. i give it its due. i take it to therapy. i've become very familiar with its dysfunctional behavior. but i'm not ashamed of my self. in fact, i respect my self and its function. and over time and with practice, i've tried to live more and more from my essence. and if you can do that, incredible things happen.
當我真的理解我的自我不過是種映射，是種工具，一件奇怪的事情發生了。我不再讓它過多控制我的生活。我學習管理它，像把它帶去看醫生一樣，我很熟悉那些因自我而失調的舉動。我不因自我而羞恥，事實上，我很尊敬我的自我和它的功能。而隨着時間過去，我的技術也更加熟練，我可以更多的和我的本源共存。如果你願意嘗試，不可以思議的事情也會發生在你身上。
i was in congo in february, dancing and celebrating with women who've survived the destruction of their selves in literally unthinkable ways -- destroyed because other brutalized, psychopathic selves all over that beautiful land are fueling our selves' addiction to ipods, pads, and bling, which further disconnect ourselves from ever feeling their pain, their suffering, their death. because, hey, if we're all living in ourselves and mistaking it for life, then we're devaluing and desensitizing life. and in that disconnected state, yeah, we can build factory farms with no windows, destroy marine life and use rape as a weapon of war. so here's a note to self: the cracks have started to show in our constructed world, and oceans will continue to surge through the cracks, and oil and blood, rivers of it.
今年二月，我在剛果和一羣女性一起跳舞和慶祝，她們都是經歷過各種無法想象事情“自我”遍體鱗傷的人們，那些備受摧殘，心理變態的自我充斥在這片美麗的土地，而我們仍痴迷地追逐着ipod，pad等各種閃亮的東西，將我們與他們的痛苦，死亡隔得更遠。如果我們各自生活在自我中，並無以為這就是生活，那麼我們是在貶低和遠離生命的意義。在這種脱節的狀態中，我們是可以建設沒有窗户的工廠，破壞海洋生態，將__作為戰爭的工具。為我們的自我做個解釋：這是看似完善的世界裏的裂痕，海洋，河流，石油和鮮血正不斷地從縫中湧出。
crucially, we haven't been figuring out how to live in oneness with the earth and every other living thing. we've just been insanely trying to figure out how to live with each other -- billions of each other. only we're not living with each other; our crazy selves are living with each other and perpetuating an epidemic of disconnection.
關鍵的是，我們還沒有明白如何和自然以及其他所有生物和諧地共處。我們只是瘋狂地想和其他人溝通，幾十億其他人。只有當我們不在和世界合一的時候，我們瘋狂的自我卻互相憐惜，並永遠繼續這場相互隔絕的疫症。
let's live with each other and take it a breath at a time. if we can get under that heavy self, light a torch of awareness, and find our essence, our connection to the infinite and every other living thing. we knew it from the day we were born. let's not be freaked out by our bountiful nothingness. it's more a reality than the ones our selves have created. imagine what kind of e_istence we can have if we honor inevitable death of self, appreciate the privilege of life and marvel at what comes ne_t. simple awareness is where it begins.
讓我們共生共榮，並不要太過激進着急。試着放下沉重的自我，點亮知覺的火把，尋找我們的本源，我們與萬事萬物之間的聯繫。我們初生時就懂得這個道理的。不要被我們內心豐富的空白嚇到，這比我們虛構的自我要真實。想象如果你能接受自我並不存在，你想要如何生活，感恩生命的可貴和未來的驚奇。簡單的覺醒就是開始。
thank you for listening.
(applause) 謝謝。
蒙田範文網