演讲稿首先必须开头要开门见山，既要一下子抓住听众又要提出你的观点，中间要用各种方法和所准备的材料说明、支持你的论点，感染听众，然后在结尾加强说明论点或得出结论，结束演讲。好的演讲稿对于我们的帮助很大，所以我们要好好写一篇演讲稿以下我给大家整理了一些优质的演讲稿模板范文，希望对大家能够有所帮助。

ted演讲稿篇一

i'd like to share with you a discovery that i made a few months ago whilewriting an article for italian wired. i always keep my thesaurus handy wheneveri'm writing anything, but i'd already finished editing the piece, and i realizedthat i had never once in my life looked up the word "disabled" to see what i'dfind.

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 alsohurt, useless and weak. antonyms, healthy, strong, capable." i was reading thislist out loud to a friend and at first was laughing, it was so ludicrous, buti'd just gotten past "mangled," and my voice broke, and i had to stop andcollect myself from the emotional shock and impact that the assault from thesewords unleashed.

you know, of course, this is my raggedy old thesaurus so i'm thinking thismust be an ancient print date, right? but, in fact, the print date was the early1980s, when i would have been starting primary school and forming anunderstanding of myself outside the family unit and as related to the other kidsand the world around me. and, needless to say, thank god i wasn't using athesaurus back then. i mean, from this entry, it would seem that i was born intoa world that perceived someone like me to have nothing positive whatsoever goingfor them, when in fact, today i'm celebrated for the opportunities andadventures my life has procured.

so, i immediately went to look up the __ online edition, e_pecting to finda revision worth noting. here's the updated version of this unately, it's not much better. i find the last two words under "nearantonyms," particularly unsettling: "whole" and "wholesome."

so, it's not just about the words. it's what we believe about people whenwe name them with these words. it's about the values behind the words, and howwe construct those values. our language affects our thinking and how we view theworld and how we view other people. in fact, many ancient societies, includingthe greeks and the romans, believed that to utter a curse verbally was sopowerful, because to say the thing out loud brought it into e_istence. so, whatreality do we want to call into e_istence: a person who is limited, or a personwho's empowered? by casually doing something as simple as naming a person, achild, we might be putting lids and casting shadows on their power. wouldn't wewant to open doors for them instead?

one such person who opened doors for me was my childhood doctor at the institute in wilmington, delaware. his name was dr. pizzutillo, anitalian american, whose name, apparently, was too difficult for most americansto pronounce, so he went by dr. p. and dr. p always wore really colorful bowties and had the very perfect disposition to work with children.

i loved almost everything about my time spent at this hospital, with thee_ception of my physical therapy sessions. i had to do what seemed likeinnumerable repetitions of e_ercises with these thick, elastic bands --different colors, you know -- to help build up my leg muscles, and i hated thesebands 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 tryto get out of doing these e_ercises, unsuccessfully, of course. and, one day, hecame in to my session -- e_haustive and unforgiving, these sessions -- and hesaid to me, "wow. aimee, you are such a strong and powerful little girl, i thinkyou're going to break one of those bands. when you do break it, i'm going togive you a hundred bucks."

now, of course, this was a simple ploy on dr. p's part to get me to do thee_ercises i didn't want to do before the prospect of being the richestfive-year-old in the second floor ward, but what he effectively did for me wasreshape an awful daily occurrence into a new and promising e_perience for i have to wonder today to what e_tent his vision and his declaration of meas a strong and powerful little girl shaped my own view of myself as aninherently strong, powerful and athletic person well into the future.

this is an e_ample of how adults in positions of power can ignite the powerof a child. but, in the previous instances of those thesaurus entries, ourlanguage isn't allowing us to evolve into the reality that we would all want,the possibility of an inspanidual to see themselves as capable. our languagehasn't caught up with the changes in our society, many of which have beenbrought about by technology. certainly, from a medical standpoint, my legs,laser surgery for vision impairment, titanium knees and hip replacements foraging 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 mentionsocial networking platforms allow people to self-identify, to claim their owndescriptions of themselves, so they can go align with global groups of their ownchoosing. so, perhaps technology is revealing more clearly to us now what hasalways been a truth: that everyone has something rare and powerful to offer oursociety, and that the human ability to adapt is our greatest asset.

the human ability to adapt, it's an interesting thing, because people havecontinually wanted to talk to me about overcoming adversity, and i'm going tomake an admission: this phrase never sat right with me, and i always felt uneasytrying to answer people's questions about it, and i think i'm starting to figureout why. implicit in this phrase of "overcoming adversity" is the idea thatsuccess, or happiness, is about emerging on the other side of a challenginge_perience unscathed or unmarked by the e_perience, as if my successes in lifehave come about from an ability to sidestep or circumnavigate the presumedpitfalls of a life with prosthetics, or what other people perceive as mydisability. but, in fact, we are changed. we are marked, of course, by achallenge, whether physically, emotionally or both. and i'm going to suggestthat this is a good thing. adversity isn't an obstacle that we need to getaround in order to resume living our life. it's part of our life. and i tend tothink of it like my shadow. sometimes i see a lot of it, sometimes there's verylittle, but it's always with me. and, certainly, i'm not trying to diminish theimpact, the weight, of a person's struggle.

there is adversity and challenge in life, and it's all very real andrelative to every single person, but the question isn't whether or not you'regoing to meet adversity, but how you're going to meet it. so, our responsibilityis not simply shielding those we care for from adversity, but preparing them tomeet it well. and we do a disservice to our kids when we make them feel thatthey're not equipped to adapt. there's an important difference and distinctionbetween the objective medical fact of my being an amputee and the subjectivesocietal opinion of whether or not i'm disabled. and, truthfully, the only realand consistent disability i've had to confront is the world ever thinking that icould be described by those definitions.

in our desire to protect those we care about by giving them the cold, hardtruth about their medical prognosis, or, indeed, a prognosis on the e_pectedquality of their life, we have to make sure that we don't put the first brick ina wall that will actually disable someone. perhaps the e_isting model of onlylooking at what is broken in you and how do we fi_ it, serves to be moredisabling to the inspanidual than the pathology itself.

by not treating the wholeness of a person, by not acknowledging theirpotency, we are creating another ill on top of whatever natural struggle theymight have. we are effectively grading someone's worth to our community. so weneed to see through the pathology and into the range of human capability. and,most importantly, there's a partnership between those perceived deficiencies andour greatest creative ability. so it's not about devaluing, or negating, thesemore trying times as something we want to avoid or sweep under the rug, butinstead to find those opportunities wrapped in the adversity. so maybe the ideai want to put out there is not so much overcoming adversity as it is openingourselves 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 150years ago, when writing about evolution, that darwin illustrated, i think, atruth about the human character. to paraphrase: it's not the strongest of thespecies that survives, nor is it the most intelligent that survives; it is theone that is most adaptable to change. conflict is the genesis of creation. fromdarwin's work, amongst others, we can recognize that the human ability tosurvive and flourish is driven by the struggle of the human spirit throughconflict into transformation. so, again, transformation, adaptation, is ourgreatest human skill. and, perhaps, until we're tested, we don't know what we'remade of. maybe that's what adversity gives us: a sense of self, a sense of ourown power. so, we can give ourselves a gift. we can re-imagine adversity assomething more than just tough times. maybe we can see it as change. adversityis just change that we haven't adapted ourselves to yet.

i think the greatest adversity that we've created for ourselves is thisidea of normalcy. now, who's normal? there's no normal. there's common, there'stypical. there's no normal, and would you want to meet that poor, beige personif they e_isted? (laughter) i don't think so. if we can change this paradigmfrom one of achieving normalcy to one of possibility -- or potency, to be even alittle bit more dangerous -- we can release the power of so many more children,and invite them to engage their rare and valuable abilities with thecommunity.

anthropologists tell us that the one thing we as humans have alwaysrequired of our community members is to be of use, to be able to 's evidence that neanderthals, 60,000 years ago, carried their elderly andthose with serious physical injury, and perhaps it's because the life e_perienceof survival of these people proved of value to the community. they didn't viewthese 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 thatred zone in northeastern pennsylvania, and i was standing over a bushel oftomatoes. it was summertime: i had shorts on. i hear this guy, his voice behindme say, "well, if it isn't aimee mullins." and i turn around, and it's thisolder man. i have no idea who he is.

and i said, "i'm sorry, sir, have we met? i don't remember meetingyou."

he said, "well, you wouldn't remember meeting me. i mean, when we met i wasdelivering you from your mother's womb." (laughter) oh, that guy. and, but ofcourse, actually, it did click.

this man was dr. kean, a man that i had only known about through mymother's stories of that day, because, of course, typical fashion, i arrivedlate for my birthday by two weeks. and so my mother's prenatal physician hadgone on vacation, so the man who delivered me was a complete stranger to myparents. and, because i was born without the fibula bones, and had feet turnedin, 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 wouldnever walk, and you would never have the kind of mobility that other kids haveor any kind of life of independence, and you've been making liar out of me eversince." (laughter) (applause)

the e_traordinary thing is that he said he had saved newspaper clippingsthroughout my whole childhood, whether winning a second grade spelling bee,marching with the girl scouts, you know, the halloween parade, winning mycollege scholarship, or any of my sports victories, and he was using it, andintegrating it into teaching resident students, med students from hahnemannmedical school and hershey medical school. and he called this part of the coursethe _ factor, the potential of the human will. no prognosis can account for howpowerful this could be as a determinant in the quality of someone's life. anddr. kean went on to tell me, he said, "in my e_perience, unless repeatedly toldotherwise, 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 adifference between the medical condition and what someone might do with it. andthere's been a shift in my thinking over time, in that, if you had asked me at15 years old, if i would have traded prosthetics for flesh-and-bone legs, iwouldn't have hesitated for a second. i aspired to that kind of normalcy backthen. but if you ask me today, i'm not so sure. and it's because of thee_periences i've had with them, not in spite of the e_periences i've had withthem. and perhaps this shift in me has happened because i've been e_posed tomore people who have opened doors for me than those who have put lids and castshadows on me.

see, all you really need is one person to show you the epiphany of your ownpower, 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 forsomeone at a crucial moment, you are educating them in the best sense. you'reteaching them to open doors for themselves. in fact, the e_act meaning of theword "educate" comes from the root word "educe." it means "to bring forth whatis within, to bring out potential." so again, which potential do we want tobring out?

there was a case study done in 1960s britain, when they were moving fromgrammar schools to comprehensive schools. it's called the streaming trials. wecall it "tracking" here in the states. it's separating students from a, b, c, dand 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 thema's, told them they were "a's," told them they were bright, and at the end ofthis three-month period, they were performing at a-level.

and, of course, the heartbreaking, flip side of this study, is that theytook the "a students" and told them they were "d's." and that's what happened atthe 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 wasthat the teachers were duped too. the teachers didn't know a switch had beenmade. they were simply told, "these are the 'a-students,' these are the'd-students.'" and that's how they went about teaching them and treatingthem.

so, i think that the only true disability is a crushed spirit, a spiritthat's been crushed doesn't have hope, it doesn't see beauty, it no longer hasour 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 andothers, to be curious and imaginative, then we are truly using our power a spirit has those qualities, we are able to create new realities and newways of being.

i'd like to leave you with a poem by a fourteenth-century persian poetnamed hafiz that my friend, jacques dembois told me about, and the poem iscalled "the god who only knows four words": "every child has known god, not thegod of names, not the god of don'ts, but the god who only knows four words andkeeps repeating them, saying, 'come dance with me. come, dance with me. come,dance with me.'"

thank you. (applause)

ted演讲稿篇二

chinese restaurants have played an important role in american history, as amatter of fact. the cuban missile crisis was resolved in a chinese restaurantcalled 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 boothplanned the assassination of abraham lincoln is actually also now a chineserestaurant called wok 'n roll, on h street in washington.

事实上，中国餐馆在美国历史上发挥了很重要的作用。古巴导弹危机是在华盛顿一家名叫“燕京馆”的中餐馆里解决的。很不幸，这家餐馆现在关门了，即将被改建成沃尔格林连锁药店。而约翰·威尔克斯·布斯刺杀林肯总统的那所房子现在也成了一家中餐馆，就是位于华盛顿的“锅和卷”。

and if you think about it, a lot of the foods that you think of or we thinkof or americans think of as chinese food are barely recognizable to chinese, fore_ample: beef with broccoli, egg rolls, general tso's chicken, fortune cookies,chop suey, the take-out bo_es.

如果你仔细想想，就会发现很多你们所认为或我们所认为，或是美国人所认为的中国食物，中国人并不认识。比如西兰花牛肉、蛋卷、左宗棠鸡、幸运饼干、杂碎、外卖盒子。

so, the interesting question is, how do you go from fortune cookies beingsomething that is japanese to being something that is chinese? well, the shortanswer is, we locked up all the japanese during world war ii, including thosethat made fortune cookies, so that's the time when the chinese moved in, kind ofsaw a market opportunity and took over.

所以有趣的是，幸运饼干是怎么从日本的东西变成中国的东西的呢?简单地说，我们在二战时扣押了所以的日本人，包括那些做幸运饼干的。这时候，中国人来了，看到了商机，自然就据为己有了。

general tso's chicken -- which, by the way, in the us naval academy iscalled admiral tso's chicken. i love this dish. the original name in my book wasactually called the long march of general tso, and he has marched very farindeed, because he is sweet, he is fried, and he is chicken -- all things thatamericans love.

左宗棠鸡，在美国海军军校被称为左司令鸡。我很喜欢这道菜。在我的书里，这道菜实际上叫左将军的长征，它确实在美国很受欢迎，因为它是甜的，油炸的，是鸡肉做的——全部都是美国人的最爱。

so, you know, i realized when i was there, general tso is kind of a lotlike colonel sanders in america, in that he's known for chicken and not war. butin china, this guy's actually known for war and not chicken.

我意识到左宗棠将军有点像美国的桑德斯上校(肯德基创始人)，因为他是因鸡肉而出名的而不是战争。而在中国，左宗棠确实是因为战争而不是鸡肉闻名的。

so it's kind of part of the phenomenon i called spontaneousself-organization, right, where, like in ant colonies, where little decisionsmade by -- on the micro-level actually have a big impact on the macro-level.

这就有点像我所说的自发组织现象。就像在蚂蚁群中，在微观层面上做的小小决定会在宏观层面上产生巨大的影响。

and the great innovation of chicken mcnuggets was not nuggetfying them,because that's kind of an easy concept, but the trick behind chicken mcnuggetswas, they were able to remove the chicken from the bone in a cost-effectivemanner, which is why it took so long for other people to copy them.

麦乐鸡块的发明并没有给他们带来切实收益，因为这个想法很简单，但麦乐鸡背后的技巧是如何用一种划算的方式来把鸡肉从骨头上剔出来。这就是为什么过了这么久才有人模仿他们。

we can think of chinese restaurants perhaps as linu_: sort of an opensource thing, right, where ideas from one person can be copied and propagatedacross the entire system, that there can be specialized versions of chinesefood, you know, depending on the region.

我们可以把中餐馆比作linu_：一种开源系统。一个人的想法可以在整个系统中被复制，被普及。在不同的地区，就有特别版本的中国菜。

ted演讲稿篇三

when i was nine years old i went off to summer camp for the first time. andmy mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like aperfectly natural thing to do. because in my family, reading was the primarygroup activity. and this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was reallyjust a different way of being social. you have the animal warmth of your familysitting right ne_t to you, but you are also free to go roaming around theadventureland inside your own mind. and i had this idea that camp was going tobe just like this, but better. (laughter) i had a vision of 10 girls sitting ina cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns.

(laughter)

camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. and on the very firstday our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that shesaid we would be doing every day for the rest of the summer to instill campspirit. and it went like this: "r-o-w-d-i-e, that's the way we spell , rowdie, let's get rowdie." yeah. so i couldn't figure out for the lifeof me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this wordincorrectly. (laughter) but i recited a cheer. i recited a cheer along witheverybody else. i did my best. and i just waited for the time that i could gooff and read my books.

but the first time that i took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girlin 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 secondtime i tried it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned e_pression on herface and she repeated the point about camp spirit and said we should all workvery hard to be outgoing.

and so i put my books away, back in their suitcase, and i put them under mybed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. and i felt kind of guiltyabout this. i felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they were calling outto me and i was forsaking them. but i did forsake them and i didn't open thatsuitcase again until i was back home with my family at the end of thesummer.

now, i tell you this story about summer camp. i could have told you 50others just like it -- all the times that i got the message that somehow myquiet 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 senseddeep down that this was wrong and that introverts were pretty e_cellent just asthey were. but for years i denied this intuition, and so i became a wall streetlawyer, 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 assertivetoo. and i was always going off to crowded bars when i really would havepreferred to just have a nice dinner with friends. and i made theseself-negating choices so refle_ively, that i wasn't even aware that i was makingthem.

now this is what many introverts do, and it's our loss for sure, but it isalso our colleagues' loss and our communities' loss. and at the risk of soundinggrandiose, it is the world's loss. because when it comes to creativity and toleadership, we need introverts doing what they do best. a third to a half of thepopulation are introverts -- a third to a half. so that's one out of every twoor three people you know. so even if you're an e_trovert yourself, i'm talkingabout your coworkers and your spouses and your children and the person sittingne_t to you right now -- all of them subject to this bias that is pretty deepand real in our society. we all internalize it from a very early age withouteven having a language for what we're doing.

now to see the bias clearly you need to understand what introversion 's different from being shy. shyness is about fear of social ersion is more about, how do you respond to stimulation, including socialstimulation. so e_troverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereasintroverts feel at their most alive and their most switched-on and their mostcapable 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 toma_imizing our talents is for us all to put ourselves in the zone of stimulationthat 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 fore_troverts' need for lots of stimulation. and also we have this belief systemright now that i call the new groupthink, which holds that all creativity andall productivity comes from a very oddly gregarious place.

so if you picture the typical classroom nowadays: when i was going toschool, we sat in rows. we sat in rows of desks like this, and we did most ofour work pretty autonomously. but nowadays, your typical classroom has pods ofdesks -- four or five or si_ or seven kids all facing each other. and kids areworking in countless group assignments. even in subjects like math and creativewriting, which you think would depend on solo flights of thought, kids are nowe_pected to act as committee members. and for the kids who prefer to go off bythemselves or just to work alone, those kids are seen as outliers often or,worse, as problem cases. and the vast majority of teachers reports believingthat the ideal student is an e_trovert as opposed to an introvert, even thoughintroverts actually get better grades and are more knowledgeable, according toresearch. (laughter)

okay, same thing is true in our workplaces. now, most of us work in openplan offices, without walls, where we are subject to the constant noise and gazeof our coworkers. and when it comes to leadership, introverts are routinelypassed over for leadership positions, even though introverts tend to be verycareful, much less likely to take outsize risks -- which is something we mightall favor nowadays. and interesting research by adam grant at the wharton schoolhas found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than e_trovertsdo, because when they are managing proactive employees, they're much more likelyto let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an e_trovert can, quiteunwittingly, get so e_cited about things that they're putting their own stamp onthings, and other people's ideas might not as easily then bubble up to thesurface.

now in fact, some of our transformative leaders in history have beenintroverts. i'll give you some e_amples. eleanor roosevelt, rosa parks, gandhi-- all these peopled described themselves as quiet and soft-spoken and even they all took the spotlight, even though every bone in their bodies wastelling 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 theyenjoyed directing others and not out of the pleasure of being looked at; theywere there because they had no choice, because they were driven to do what theythought was right.

now i think at this point it's important for me to say that i actually lovee_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 whofirst popularized these terms, said that there's no such thing as a pureintrovert or a pure e_trovert. he said that such a man would be in a lunaticasylum, if he e_isted at all. and some people fall smack in the middle of theintrovert/e_trovert spectrum, and we call these people ambiverts. and i oftenthink that they have the best of all worlds. but many of us do recognizeourselves as one type or the other.

and what i'm saying is that culturally we need a much better balance. weneed more of a yin and yang between these two types. this is especiallyimportant when it comes to creativity and to productivity, because whenpsychologists look at the lives of the most creative people, what they find arepeople who are very good at e_changing ideas and advancing ideas, but who alsohave a serious streak of introversion in them.

and this is because solitude is a crucial ingredient often to darwin, he took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically turned downdinner party invitations. theodor geisel, better known as dr. seuss, he dreamedup many of his amazing creations in a lonely bell tower office that he had inthe back of his house in la jolla, california. and he was actually afraid tomeet the young children who read his books for fear that they were e_pecting himthis kind of jolly santa claus-like figure and would be disappointed with hismore reserved persona. steve wozniak invented the first apple computer sittingalone in his cubical in hewlett-packard where he was working at the time. and hesays that he never would have become such an e_pert in the first place had henot 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 tostart apple computer -- but it does mean that solitude matters and that for somepeople it is the air that they breathe. and in fact, we have known for centuriesabout the transcendent power of solitude. it's only recently that we'vestrangely begun to forget it. if you look at most of the world's majorreligions, you will find seekers -- moses, jesus, buddha, muhammad -- seekerswho are going off by themselves alone to the wilderness where they then haveprofound epiphanies and revelations that they then bring back to the rest of thecommunity. so no wilderness, no revelations.

this is no surprise though if you look at the insights of contemporarypsychology. it turns out that we can't even be in a group of people withoutinstinctively mirroring, mimicking their opinions. even about seemingly personaland visceral things like who you're attracted to, you will start aping thebeliefs of the people around you without even realizing that that's what you'redoing.

and groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismaticperson in the room, even though there's zero correlation between being the besttalker and having the best ideas -- i mean zero. so ... (laughter) you might befollowing the person with the best ideas, but you might not. and do you reallywant to leave it up to chance? much better for everybody to go off bythemselves, generate their own ideas freed from the distortions of groupdynamics, and then come together as a team to talk them through in awell-managed environment and take it from there.

now if all this is true, then why are we getting it so wrong? why are wesetting up our schools this way and our workplaces? and why are we making theseintroverts feel so guilty about wanting to just go off by themselves some of thetime? one answer lies deep in our cultural history. western societies, and inparticular the u.s., have always favored the man of action over the man ofcontemplation and "man" of contemplation. but in america's early days, we livedin 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 lookat 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 likeabraham lincoln who was praised for being modest and unassuming. ralph waldoemerson called him "a man who does not offend by superiority."

but then we hit the 20th century and we entered a new culture thathistorians call the culture of personality. what happened is we had evolved anagricultural economy to a world of big business. and so suddenly people aremoving from small towns to the cities. and instead of working alongside peoplethey've known all their lives, now they are having to prove themselves in acrowd of strangers. so, quite understandably, qualities like magnetism andcharisma suddenly come to seem really important. and sure enough, the self-helpbooks change to meet these new needs and they start to have names like "how towin friends and influence people." and they feature as their role models reallygreat salesmen. so that's the world we're living in today. that's our culturalinheritance.

now none of this is to say that social skills are unimportant, and i'm alsonot calling for the abolishing of teamwork at all. the same religions who sendtheir sages off to lonely mountain tops also teach us love and trust. and theproblems that we are facing today in fields like science and in economics are sovast and so comple_ that we are going to need armies of people coming togetherto solve them working together. but i am saying that the more freedom that wegive introverts to be themselves, the more likely that they are to come up withtheir 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" bymaimonides. but these are not e_actly my books. i brought these books with mebecause they were written by my grandfather's favorite authors.

my grandfather was a rabbi and he was a widower who lived alone in a smallapartment in brooklyn that was my favorite place in the world when i was growingup, partly because it was filled with his very gentle, very courtly presence andpartly because it was filled with books. i mean literally every table, everychair in this apartment had yielded its original function to now serve as asurface for swaying stacks of books. just like the rest of my family, mygrandfather'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 thesermons that he gave every week for the 62 years that he was a rabbi. he wouldtakes the fruits of each week's reading and he would weave these intricatetapestries of ancient and humanist thought. and people would come from all overto 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 deliveredthese sermons, he had trouble making eye contact with the very same congregationthat he had been speaking to for 62 years. and even away from the podium, whenyou called him to say hello, he would often end the conversation prematurely forfear that he was taking up too much of your time. but when he died at the age of94, the police had to close down the streets of his neighborhood to accommodatethe crowd of people who came out to mourn him. and so these days i try to learnfrom my grandfather's e_ample in my own way.

so i just published a book about introversion, and it took me about sevenyears to write. and for me, that seven years was like total bliss, because i wasreading, i was writing, i was thinking, i was researching. it was my version ofmy grandfather's hours of the day alone in his library. but now all of a suddenmy job is very different, and my job is to be out here talking about it, talkingabout introversion. (laughter) and that's a lot harder for me, because ashonored as i am to be here with all of you right now, this is not my naturalmilieu.

so i prepared for moments like these as best i could. i spent the last yearpracticing public speaking every chance i could get. and i call this my "year ofspeaking dangerously." (laughter) and that actually helped a lot. but i'll tellyou, what helps even more is my sense, my belief, my hope that when it comes toour attitudes to introversion and to quiet and to solitude, we truly are poisedon the brink on dramatic change. i mean, we are. and so i am going to leave younow 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, chattycafe-style types of interactions -- you know, the kind where people cometogether and serendipitously have an e_change of ideas. that is great. it'sgreat for introverts and it's great for e_troverts. but we need much moreprivacy and much more freedom and much more autonomy at work. school, samething. we need to be teaching kids to work together, for sure, but we also needto be teaching them how to work on their own. this is especially important fore_troverted children too. they need to work on their own because that is wheredeep thought comes from in part.

okay, number two: go to the wilderness. be like buddha, have your ownrevelations. i'm not saying that we all have to now go off and build our owncabins in the woods and never talk to each other again, but i am saying that wecould 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 whyyou put it there. so e_troverts, maybe your suitcases are also full of books. ormaybe they're full of champagne glasses or skyspaning equipment. whatever it is,i hope you take these things out every chance you get and grace us with yourenergy and your joy. but introverts, you being you, you probably have theimpulse to guard very carefully what's inside your own suitcase. and that'sokay. but occasionally, just occasionally, i hope you will open up yoursuitcases for other people to see, because the world needs you and it needs thethings you carry.

so i wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speaksoftly.

thank you very much.

(applause)

thank you. thank you.

ted演讲稿篇四

拥抱他人，拥抱自己

embracing otherness. when i first heard this theme, i thought, well,embracing otherness is embracing myself. and the journey to that place ofunderstanding and acceptance has been an interesting one for me, and it's givenme an insight into the whole notion of self, which i think is worth sharing withyou today.

拥抱他类。当我第一次听说这个主题时，我心想，拥抱他类不就是拥抱自己吗。我个人懂得理解和接受他类的经历很有趣，让我对于“自己”这个词也有了新的认识，我想今天在这里和你们分享下我的心得体会。

we each have a self, but i don't think that we're born with one. you knowhow 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 likethat initial stage is over -- oneness: infancy, unformed, primitive. it's nolonger valid or real. what is real is separateness, and at some point in earlybabyhood, the idea of self starts to form. our little portion of oneness isgiven a name, is told all kinds of things about itself, and these details,opinions and ideas become facts, which go towards building ourselves, ouridentity. and that self becomes the vehicle for navigating our social world. butthe self is a projection based on other people's projections. is it who wereally are? or who we really want to be, or should be?

我们每个人都有个自我，但并不是生来就如此的。你知道新生的宝宝们觉得他们是任何东西的一部分，而不是分裂的个体。这种本源上的“天人合一”感在我们出生后很快就不见了，就好像我们人生的第一个篇章--和谐统一：婴儿，未成形，原始--结束了。它们似幻似影，而现实的世界是孤独彼此分离的。而在孩童期的某段时间，我们开始形成自我这个观点。宇宙中的小小个体有了自己的名字，有了自己的过去等等各种信息。这些关于自己的细节，看法和观点慢慢变成事实，成为我们身份的一部分。而那个自我，也变成我们人生路上前行的导航仪。然后，这个所谓的自我，是他人自我的映射，还是我们真实的自己呢?我们究竟想成为什么样，应该成为什么样的呢?

so this whole interaction with self and identity was a very difficult onefor me growing up. the self that i attempted to take out into the world wasrejected over and over again. and my panic at not having a self that fit, andthe confusion that came from my self being rejected, created an_iety, shame andhopelessness, which kind of defined me for a long time. but in retrospect, thedestruction of my self was so repetitive that i started to see a pattern. theself changed, got affected, broken, destroyed, but another one would evolve --sometimes stronger, sometimes hateful, sometimes not wanting to be there at self was not constant. and how many times would my self have to die before irealized that it was never alive in the first place?

这个和自我打交道，寻找自己身份的过程在我的成长记忆中一点都不容易。我想成为的那些“自我”不断被否定再否定，而我害怕自己无法融入周遭的环境，因被否定而引起的困惑让我变得更加忧虑，感到羞耻和无望，在很长一段时间就是我存在状态。然而回头看，对自我的解构是那么频繁，以至于我发现了这样一种规律。自我是变化的，受他人影响，分裂或被打败，而另一个自我会产生，这个自我可能更坚强，可能更可憎，有时你也不想变成那样。所谓自我不是固定不变的。而我需要经历多少次自我的破碎重生才会明白其实自我从来没有存在过?

i grew up on the coast of england in the '70s. my dad is white fromcornwall, and my mom is black from zimbabwe. even the idea of us as a family waschallenging to most people. but nature had its wicked way, and brown babies wereborn. but from about the age of five, i was aware that i didn't fit. i was theblack atheist kid in the all-white catholic school run by nuns. i was ananomaly, and my self was rooting around for definition and trying to plug e the self likes to fit, to see itself replicated, to belong. thatconfirms its e_istence and its importance. and it is important. it has ane_tremely important function. without it, we literally can't interface withothers. we can't hatch plans and climb that stairway of popularity, of my skin color wasn't right. my hair wasn't right. my history wasn't self became defined by otherness, which meant that, in that social world, ididn't really e_ist. and i was "other" before being anything else -- even beforebeing a girl. i was a noticeable nobody.

我在70年代英格兰海边长大，我的父亲是康沃尔的白人，母亲是津巴布韦的黑人。而想象我和父母是一家人对于其他人来说总是不太自然。自然有它自己的魔术，棕色皮肤的宝宝诞生了。但从我五岁开始，我就有种感觉我不是这个群体的。我是一个全白人天主教会学校里面黑皮肤无神论小孩。我与他人是不同的，而那个热衷于归属的自我却到处寻找方式寻找归属感。这种认同感让自我感受到存在感和重要性，因此十分重要。这点是如此重要，如果没有自我，我们根本无法与他人沟通。没有它，我们无所适从，无法获取成功或变得受人欢迎。但我的肤色不对，我的头发不对，我的过去不对，我的一切都是另类定义的，在这个社会里，我其实并不真实存在。我首先是个异类，其次才是个女孩。我是可见却毫无意义的人。

another world was opening up around this time: performance and nagging dread of self-hood didn't e_ist when i was dancing. i'd literallylose myself. and i was a really good dancer. i would put all my emotionale_pression into my dancing. i could be in the movement in a way that i wasn'table to be in my real life, in myself.

这时候，另一个世界向我敞开了大门：舞蹈表演。那种关于自我的唠叨恐惧在舞蹈时消失了，我放开四肢，也成为了一位不错的舞者。我将所有的情绪都融入到舞蹈的动作中去，我可以在舞蹈中与自己相溶，尽管在现实生活中却无法做到。

and at 16, i stumbled across another opportunity, and i earned my firstacting role in a film. i can hardly find the words to describe the peace i feltwhen 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 afully-functioning self -- one that i controlled, that i steered, that i gavelife to. but the shooting day would end, and i'd return to my gnarly, awkwardself.

16岁的时候，我遇到了另一个机会，第一部参演的电影。我无法用语言来表达在演戏的时候我所感受到的平和，我无处着落的自我可以与那个角色融为一体，而不是我自己。那感觉真棒。这是第一次我感觉到我拥有一个自我，我可以驾驭，令其富有盛名的自我。然而当拍摄结束，我又会回到自己粗糙不明，笨拙的自我。

by 19, i was a fully-fledged movie actor, but still searching fordefinition. i applied to read anthropology at university. dr. phyllis lee gaveme my interview, and she asked me, "how would you define race?" well, i thoughti 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 moregenetic difference between a black kenyan and a black ugandan than there isbetween a black kenyan and, say, a white norwegian. because we all stem fromafrica. so in africa, there's been more time to create genetic spanersity." inother words, race has no basis in biological or scientific fact. on the onehand, result. right? on the other hand, my definition of self just lost a hugechunk of its credibility. but what was credible, what is biological andscientific fact, is that we all stem from africa -- in fact, from a woman calledmitochondrial eve who lived 160,000 years ago. and race is an illegitimateconcept which our selves have created based on fear and ignorance.

19岁的时候，我已经是富有经验的专业电影演员，而我还是在寻找自我的定义。我申请了大学的人类学专业。phyllislee博士面试了我，她问我：“你怎么定义种族?”我觉得我很了解这个话题，我说：“肤色。”“那么生物上来说呢，例如遗传基因?”她说，“thandie肤色并不全面，其实一个肯尼亚黑人和乌干达黑人之间基因差异比一个肯尼亚黑人和挪威白人之间差异要更多。因为我们都是从非洲来的，所以在非洲，基因变异演化的时间是最久的。”换句话说，种族在生物学或任何科学上都没有事实根据。另一方面，我对于自我的定义瞬时失去了一大片基础。但那就是生物学事实，我们都是非洲后裔，一位在160 0__年前的伟大女性mitochondrialeve的后人。而种族这个无效的概念是我们基于恐惧和无知自己捏造出来的。

strangely, these revelations didn't cure my low self-esteem, that feelingof otherness. my desire to disappear was still very powerful. i had a degreefrom cambridge; i had a thriving career, but my self was a car crash, and iwound up with bulimia and on a therapist's couch. and of course i did. i stillbelieved 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 anda physical reality to support the worth of self. look at the industry forself-image and the jobs it creates, the revenue it turns over. we'd be right inassuming that the self is an actual living thing. but it's not. it's aprojection which our clever brains create in order to cheat ourselves from thereality of death.

奇怪的是，这个发现并没有治好我的自卑，那种被排挤的感觉。我还是那么强烈地想要离开消失。我从剑桥拿到了学位，我有份充满发展的工作，然而我的自我还是一团糟，我得了催吐病不得不接受治疗师的帮助。我还是相信自我是我的全部。我还是坚信“自我”的价值甚过一切。而且我们身处的世界就是如此，我们的整个价值系统和现实环境都是在服务“自我”的价值。看看不同行业里面对于自我的塑造，看看它们创造的那些工作，产出的那些利润。我们甚至必须相信自我是真实存在的。但它们不是，自我不过是我们聪明的脑袋假想出来骗自己不去思考死亡这个话题的幌子。

but there is something that can give the self ultimate and infiniteconnection -- and that thing is oneness, our essence. the self's struggle forauthenticity 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 thereality of oneness and the projection of self-hood. for a start, we can thinkabout all the times when we do lose ourselves. it happens when i dance, when i'macting. 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 fromthe audience. all my senses are alert and alive in much the same way as aninfant might feel -- that feeling of oneness.

但其实我们的终极自我其实是我们的本源，合一。挣扎自我是否真实，究竟是什么永远没有终结，除非它和赋予它意义的创造者合一，就是你和我。而这点当我们意识到现实是你中有我，我中有你，和谐统一，而自我是种假象时就会体会到了。我们可以想想，什么时候我们是身心统一的，例如说我跳舞，表演的时候，我和我的本源连结，而我的自我被抛在一边。那时，我和身边的一切--空气，大地，声音，观众的反馈都连结在一起。我的知觉是敏锐和鲜活的，就像初生的婴儿那样，合一。

and when i'm acting a role, i inhabit another self, and i give it life forawhile, because when the self is suspended so is spanisiveness and judgment. andi've played everything from a vengeful ghost in the time of slavery to secretaryof state in __. and no matter how other these selves might be, they're allrelated in me. and i honestly believe the key to my success as an actor and myprogress as a person has been the very lack of self that used to make me feel soan_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 aself to get in the way. i thought i lacked substance, and the fact that i couldfeel others' meant that i had nothing of myself to feel. the thing that was asource of shame was actually a source of enlightenment.

当我在演戏的时候，我让另一个自我住在我体内，我代表它行动。当我的自我被抛开，紧随的分歧和主观判断也消失了。我曾经扮演过奴隶时代的复仇鬼魂，也扮演过__年的国务卿。不管他们这些自我是怎样的，他们都在那时与我相连。而我也深信作为演员，我的成功，或是作为个体，我的成长都是源于我缺乏“自我”，那种缺乏曾经让我非常忧虑和不安。我总是不明白为什么我会那么深地感受到他人的痛苦，为什么我可以从不知名的人身上看出他人的印痕。是因为我没有所谓的自我来左右我感受的信息吧。我以为我缺少些什么，我以为我对他人的理解是因为我缺乏自我。那个曾经是我深感羞耻的东西其实是种启示。

and when i realized and really understood that my self is a projection andthat it has a function, a funny thing happened. i stopped giving it so muchauthority. i give it its due. i take it to therapy. i've become very familiarwith its dysfunctional behavior. but i'm not ashamed of my self. in fact, irespect my self and its function. and over time and with practice, i've tried tolive more and more from my essence. and if you can do that, incredible thingshappen.

当我真的理解我的自我不过是种映射，是种工具，一件奇怪的事情发生了。我不再让它过多控制我的生活。我学习管理它，像把它带去看医生一样，我很熟悉那些因自我而失调的举动。我不因自我而羞耻，事实上，我很尊敬我的自我和它的功能。而随着时间过去，我的技术也更加熟练，我可以更多的和我的本源共存。如果你愿意尝试，不可以思议的事情也会发生在你身上。

i was in congo in february, dancing and celebrating with women who'vesurvived the destruction of their selves in literally unthinkable ways --destroyed because other brutalized, psychopathic selves all over that beautifulland are fueling our selves' addiction to ipods, pads, and bling, which furtherdisconnect ourselves from ever feeling their pain, their suffering, their e, hey, if we're all living in ourselves and mistaking it for life, thenwe're devaluing and desensitizing life. and in that disconnected state, yeah, wecan build factory farms with no windows, destroy marine life and use rape as aweapon of war. so here's a note to self: the cracks have started to show in ourconstructed world, and oceans will continue to surge through the cracks, and oiland blood, rivers of it.

今年二月，我在刚果和一群女性一起跳舞和庆祝，她们都是经历过各种无法想象事情“自我”遍体鳞伤的人们，那些备受摧残，心理变态的自我充斥在这片美丽的土地，而我们仍痴迷地追逐着ipod，pad等各种闪亮的东西，将我们与他们的痛苦，死亡隔得更远。如果我们各自生活在自我中，并无以为这就是生活，那么我们是在贬低和远离生命的意义。在这种脱节的状态中，我们是可以建设没有窗户的工厂，破坏海洋生态，将__作为战争的工具。为我们的自我做个解释：这是看似完善的世界里的裂痕，海洋，河流，石油和鲜血正不断地从缝中涌出。

crucially, we haven't been figuring out how to live in oneness with theearth and every other living thing. we've just been insanely trying to figureout how to live with each other -- billions of each other. only we're not livingwith each other; our crazy selves are living with each other and perpetuating anepidemic of disconnection.

关键的是，我们还没有明白如何和自然以及其他所有生物和谐地共处。我们只是疯狂地想和其他人沟通，几十亿其他人。只有当我们不在和世界合一的时候，我们疯狂的自我却互相怜惜，并永远继续这场相互隔绝的疫症。

let's live with each other and take it a breath at a time. if we can getunder that heavy self, light a torch of awareness, and find our essence, ourconnection to the infinite and every other living thing. we knew it from the daywe were born. let's not be freaked out by our bountiful nothingness. it's more areality than the ones our selves have created. imagine what kind of e_istence wecan have if we honor inevitable death of self, appreciate the privilege of lifeand marvel at what comes ne_t. simple awareness is where it begins.

让我们共生共荣，并不要太过激进着急。试着放下沉重的自我，点亮知觉的火把，寻找我们的本源，我们与万事万物之间的联系。我们初生时就懂得这个道理的。不要被我们内心丰富的空白吓到，这比我们虚构的自我要真实。想象如果你能接受自我并不存在，你想要如何生活，感恩生命的可贵和未来的惊奇。简单的觉醒就是开始。

thank you for listening.

(applause) 谢谢。

ted演讲稿篇五

when i was seven years old and my sister was just five years old, we wereplaying 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 hadto do everything that i wanted to do, and i wanted to play war. so we were up ontop of our bunk beds. and on one side of the bunk bed, i had put out all of myg.i. joe soldiers and weaponry. and on the other side were all my sister's mylittle ponies ready for a cavalry charge.

there are differing accounts of what actually happened that afternoon, butsince 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 disappearedoff of the top of the bunk bed and landed with this crash on the floor. now inervously peered over the side of the bed to see what had befallen my fallensister and saw that she had landed painfully on her hands and knees on all fourson the ground.

i was nervous because my parents had charged me with making sure that mysister and i played as safely and as quietly as possible. and seeing as how ihad 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 mybest behavior.

and i saw my sister's face, this wail of pain and suffering and surprisethreatening to erupt from her mouth and threatening to wake my parents from thelong winter's nap for which they had settled. so i did the only thing my littlefrantic seven year-old brain could think to do to avert this tragedy. and if youhave 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 allfours like that. amy, i think this means you're a unicorn."

(laughter)

now that was cheating, because there was nothing in the world my sisterwould want more than not to be amy the hurt five year-old little sister, but amythe special unicorn. of course, this was an option that was open to her brain atno point in the past. and you could see how my poor, manipulated sister facedconflict, as her little brain attempted to devote resources to feeling the painand suffering and surprise she just e_perienced, or contemplating her new-foundidentity as a unicorn. and the latter won out. instead of crying, instead ofceasing our play, instead of waking my parents, with all the negativeconsequences that would have ensued for me, instead a smile spread across herface and she scrambled right back up onto the bunk bed with all the grace of ababy unicorn ... (laughter) ... with one broken leg.

what we stumbled across at this tender age of just five and seven -- we hadno idea at the time -- was something that was going be at the vanguard of ascientific revolution occurring two decades later in the way that we look at thehuman brain. what we had stumbled across is something called positivepsychology, which is the reason that i'm here today and the reason that i wakeup every morning.

when i first started talking about this research outside of academia, outwith companies and schools, the very first thing they said to never do is tostart your talk with a graph. the very first thing i want to do is start my talkwith a graph. this graph looks boring, but this graph is the reason i gete_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 thati can get published, which is all that really matters. the fact that there's oneweird red dot that's up above the curve, there's one weirdo in the room -- iknow who you are, i saw you earlier -- that's no problem. that's no problem, asmost of you know, because i can just delete that dot. i can delete that dotbecause that's clearly a measurement error. and we know that's a measurementerror because it's messing up my data.

so one of the very first things we teach people in economics and statisticsand business and psychology courses is how, in a statistically valid way, do weeliminate the weirdos. how do we eliminate the outliers so we can find the lineof best fit? which is fantastic if i'm trying to find out how many advil theaverage person should be taking -- two. but if i'm interested in potential, ifi'm interested in your potential, or for happiness or productivity or energy orcreativity, what we're doing is we're creating the cult of the average withscience.

if i asked a question like, "how fast can a child learn how to read in aclassroom?" scientists change the answer to "how fast does the average childlearn how to read in that classroom?" and then we tailor the class right towardsthe average. now if you fall below the average on this curve, then psychologistsget 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 youcome into a therapy session with one problem, we want to make sure you leaveknowing you have 10, so you keep coming back over and over again. we'll go backinto your childhood if necessary, but eventually what we want to do is make younormal again. but normal is merely average.

and what i posit and what positive psychology posits is that if we studywhat is merely average, we will remain merely average. then instead of deletingthose positive outliers, what i intentionally do is come into a population likethis one and say, why? why is it that some of you are so high above the curve interms of your intellectual ability, athletic ability, musical ability,creativity, energy levels, your resiliency in the face of challenge, your senseof humor? whatever it is, instead of deleting you, what i want to do is studyyou. because maybe we can glean information -- not just how to move people up tothe average, but how we can move the entire average up in our companies andschools worldwide.

the reason this graph is important to me is, when i turn on the news, itseems like the majority of the information is not positive, in fact it'snegative. most of it's about murder, corruption, diseases, natural very quickly, my brain starts to think that's the accurate ratio of negativeto positive in the world. what that's doing is creating something called themedical school syndrome -- which, if you know people who've been to medicalschool, during the first year of medical training, as you read through a list ofall the symptoms and diseases that could happen, suddenly you realize you haveall of them.

i have a brother in-law named bobo -- which is a whole other story. bobomarried 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, ise_traordinarily rare. but i had no idea how to console poor bobo because he hadjust 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 if we can change the lens, not only can we change your happiness, we canchange 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 twoweeks later, they allowed me to go. suddenly, something that wasn't even apossibility became a reality. when i went there, i assumed everyone else wouldsee it as a privilege as well, that they'd be e_cited to be there. even ifyou're in a classroom full of people smarter than you, you'd be happy just to bein that classroom, which is what i felt. but what i found there is, while somepeople e_perience that, when i graduated after my four years and then spent thene_t eight years living in the dorms with the students -- harvard asked me to; iwasn't that guy. (laughter) i was an officer of harvard to counsel studentsthrough the difficult four years. and what i found in my research and myteaching is that these students, no matter how happy they were with theiroriginal success of getting into the school, two weeks later their brains werefocused, not on the privilege of being there, nor on their philosophy or theirphysics. 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, whichis where my friends from waco, te_as, which is where i grew up -- i know some ofyou have heard of it. when they'd come to visit me, they'd look around, they'dsay, "this freshman dining hall looks like something out of hogwart's from themovie "harry potter," which it does. this is hogwart's from the movie "harrypotter" and that's harvard. and when they see this, they say, "shawn, why do youwaste your time studying happiness at harvard? seriously, what does a harvardstudent possibly have to be unhappy about?"

embedded within that question is the key to understanding the science ofhappiness. because what that question assumes is that our e_ternal world ispredictive of our happiness levels, when in reality, if i know everything aboutyour 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 changeour formula for happiness and success, what we can do is change the way that wecan then affect reality. what we found is that only 25 percent of job successesare predicted by i.q. 75 percent of job successes are predicted by your optimismlevels, your social support and your ability to see stress as a challengeinstead of as a threat.

i talked to a boarding school up in new england, probably the mostprestigious boarding school, and they said, "we already know that. so everyyear, instead of just teaching our students, we also have a wellness week. andwe're so e_cited. monday night we have the world's leading e_pert coming in tospeak about adolescent depression. tuesday night it's school violence andbullying. wednesday night is eating disorders. thursday night is elicit druguse. 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 thephone. and into the silence, i said, "i'd be happy to speak at your school, butjust so you know, that's not a wellness week, that's a sickness week. whatyou've done is you've outlined all the negative things that can happen, but nottalked about the positive."

the absence of disease is not health. here's how we get to health: we needto reverse the formula for happiness and success. in the last three years, i'vetraveled to 45 different countries, working with schools and companies in themidst of an economic downturn. and what i found is that most companies andschools follow a formula for success, which is this: if i work harder, i'll bemore successful. and if i'm more successful, then i'll be happier. thatundergirds most of our parenting styles, our managing styles, the way that wemotivate our behavior.

and the problem is it's scientifically broken and backwards for tworeasons. first, every time your brain has a success, you just changed thegoalpost of what success looked like. you got good grades, now you have to getbetter grades, you got into a good school and after you get into a betterschool, you got a good job, now you have to get a better job, you hit your salestarget, we're going to change your sales target. and if happiness is on theopposite side of success, your brain never gets there. what we've done is we'vepushed happiness over the cognitive horizon as a society. and that's because wethink we have to be successful, then we'll be happier.

but the real problem is our brains work in the opposite order. if you canraise somebody's level of positivity in the present, then their braine_periences what we now call a happiness advantage, which is your brain atpositive performs significantly better than it does at negative, neutral orstressed. your intelligence rises, your creativity rises, your energy levelsrise. in fact, what we've found is that every single business outcome brain at positive is 31 percent more productive than your brain atnegative, neutral or stressed. you're 37 percent better at sales. doctors are 19percent faster, more accurate at coming up with the correct diagnosis whenpositive instead of negative, neutral or stressed. which means we can reversethe formula. if we can find a way of becoming positive in the present, then ourbrains work even more successfully as we're able to work harder, faster and moreintelligently.

what we need to be able to do is to reverse this formula so we can start tosee what our brains are actually capable of. because dopamine, which floods intoyour system when you're positive, has two functions. not only does it make youhappier, it turns on all of the learning centers in your brain allowing you toadapt to the world in a different way.

we've found that there are ways that you can train your brain to be able tobecome more positive. in just a two-minute span of time done for 21 days in arow, we can actually rewire your brain, allowing your brain to actually workmore optimistically and more successfully. we've done these things in researchnow in every single company that i've worked with, getting them to write downthree new things that they're grateful for for 21 days in a row, three newthings each day. and at the end of that, their brain starts to retain a patternof 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 hoursallows your brain to relive it. e_ercise teaches your brain that your behaviormatters. we find that meditation allows your brain to get over the cultural adhdthat we've been creating by trying to do multiple tasks at once and allows ourbrains to focus on the task at hand. and finally, random acts of kindness areconscious acts of kindness. we get people, when they open up their inbo_, towrite one positive email praising or thanking somebody in their social supportnetwork.

and by doing these activities and by training your brain just like we trainour bodies, what we've found is we can reverse the formula for happiness andsuccess, and in doing so, not only create ripples of positivity, but create areal revolution.

thank you very much.

(applause)

ted演讲稿篇六

when i was nine years old i went off to summer camp for the first time. andmy mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like aperfectly natural thing to do. because in my family, reading was the primarygroup activity. and this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was reallyjust a different way of being social. you have the animal warmth of your familysitting right ne_t to you, but you are also free to go roaming around theadventureland inside your own mind. and i had this idea that camp was going tobe just like this, but better. (laughter) i had a vision of 10 girls sitting ina cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns.

当我九岁的时候 我第一次去参加夏令营 我妈妈帮我整理好了我的行李箱 里面塞满了书 这对于我来说是一件极为自然的事情 因为在我的家庭里阅读是主要的家庭活动 听上去你们可能觉得我们是不爱交际的 但是对于我的家庭来说这真的只是接触社会的另一种途径 你们有自己家庭接触时的温暖亲情 家人静坐在你身边但是你也可以自由地漫游 在你思维深处的冒险乐园里我有一个想法 野营会变得像这样子，当然要更好些 (笑声) 我想象到十个女孩坐在一个小屋里都穿着合身的女式睡衣惬意地享受着读书的过程

(laughter)

(笑声)

camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. and on the very firstday our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that shesaid we would be doing every day for the rest of the summer to instill campspirit. and it went like this: "r-o-w-d-i-e, that's the way we spell , rowdie, let's get rowdie." yeah. so i couldn't figure out for the lifeof me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this wordincorrectly. (laughter) but i recited a cheer. i recited a cheer along witheverybody else. i did my best. and i just waited for the time that i could gooff and read my books.

野营这时更像是一个不提供酒水的派对聚会 在第一天的时候呢 我们的顾问把我们都集合在一起 并且她教会了我们一种今后要用到的庆祝方式在余下夏令营的每一天中 让“露营精神”浸润我们 之后它就像这样继续着 r-o-w-d-i-e 这是我们拼写“吵闹"的口号我们唱着“噪音，喧闹，我们要变得吵一点” 对，就是这样 可我就是弄不明白我的生活会是什么样的 为什么我们变得这么吵闹粗暴 或者为什么我们非要把这个单词错误地拼写(笑声) 但是我可没有忘记庆祝。我与每个人都互相欢呼庆祝了 我尽了我最大的努力 我只是想等待那一刻 我可以离开吵闹的聚会去捧起我挚爱的书

but the first time that i took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girlin 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 secondtime i tried it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned e_pression on herface and she repeated the point about camp spirit and said we should all workvery hard to be outgoing.

但是当我第一次把书从行李箱中拿出来的时候 床铺中最酷的那个女孩向我走了过来 并且她问我：“为什么你要这么安静?”安静，当然，是r-o-w-d-i-e的反义词 “喧闹”的反义词 而当我第二次拿书的时候 我们的顾问满脸忧虑的向我走了过来接着她重复了关于“露营精神”的要点并且说我们都应当努力 去变得外向些

and so i put my books away, back in their suitcase, and i put them under mybed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. and i felt kind of guiltyabout this. i felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they were calling outto me and i was forsaking i did forsake them and i didn't open thatsuitcase again until i was back home with my family at the end of thesummer.

于是我放好我的书 放回了属于它们的行李箱中 并且我把它们放到了床底下 在那里它们度过了暑假余下的每一天 我对这样做感到很愧疚不知为什么我感觉这些书是需要我的 它们在呼唤我，但是我却放弃了它们 我确实放下了它们，并且我再也没有打开那个箱子 直到我和我的家人一起回到家中在夏末的时候

now, i tell you this story about summer camp. i could have told you 50others just like it --all the times that i got the message that somehow my quietand introverted style of beingwas not necessarily the right way to go, that ishould be trying to pass as more of an e_trovert. and i always sensed deep downthat this was wrong and that introverts were pretty e_cellent just as they for years i denied this intuition, and so i became a wall street lawyer, ofall things, instead of the writer that i had always longed to be -- partlybecause i needed to prove to myself that i could be bold and assertive too. andi was always going off to crowded bars when i really would have preferred tojust have a nice dinner with friends. and i made these self-negating choices sorefle_ively, that i wasn't even aware that i was making them.

现在，我向你们讲述这个夏令营的故事 我完全可以给你们讲出其他50种版本就像这个一样的故事-- 每当我感觉到这样的时候它告诉我出于某种原因，我的宁静和内向的风格 并不是正确道路上的必需品 我应该更多地尝试一个外向者的角色而在我内心深处感觉得到，这是错误的内向的人们都是非常优秀的，确实是这样 但是许多年来我都否认了这种直觉 于是我首先成为了华尔街的一名律师而不是我长久以来想要成为的一名作家 一部分原因是因为我想要证明自己 也可以变得勇敢而坚定 并且我总是去那些拥挤的酒吧 当我只是想要和朋友们吃一顿愉快的晚餐时我做出了这些自我否认的抉择 如条件反射一般 甚至我都不清楚我做出了这些决定

now this is what many introverts do, and it's our loss for sure, but it isalso our colleagues' loss and our communities' loss. and at the risk of soundinggrandiose, it is the world's loss. because when it comes to creativity and toleadership, we need introverts doing what they do best. a third to a half of thepopulation are introverts -- a third to a half. so that's one out of every twoor three people you know. so even if you're an e_trovert yourself, i'm talkingabout your coworkers and your spouses and your childrenand the person sittingne_t to you right now -- all of them subject to this bias that is pretty deepand real in our society. we all internalize it from a very early age withouteven having a language for what we're doing.

这就是很多内向的人正在做的事情 这当然是我们的损失 但这同样也是同事们的损失 我们所在团队集体的损失当然，冒着被指为夸大其词的风险我想说，更是世界的损失 因为当涉及创造和领导的时候 我们需要内向的人做到最好 三分之一到二分之一的人都是内向的--三分之一到二分之一 你要知道这可意味着每两到三个人中就有一个内向的 所以即使你自己是一个外向的人 我正在说你的同事 和你的配偶和你的孩子还有现在正坐在你旁边的那个家伙-- 他们都要屈从于这样的偏见 一种在我们的社会中已经扎根的现实偏见 我们从很小的时候就把它藏在内心最深处甚至都不说几句话，关于我们正在做的事情。

now to see the bias clearly you need to understand what introversion 's different from being shy. shyness is about fear of social ersion is more about, how do you respond to stimulation, including socialstimulation. so e_troverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereasintroverts feel at their most alive and their most switched-on and their mostcapable 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 toma_imizing our talents is for us all to put ourselves in the zone of stimulationthat is right for us.

现在让我们来清楚地看待这种偏见 我们需要真正了解“内向”到底指什么 它和害羞是不同的 害羞是对于社会评论的恐惧 内向更多的是 你怎样对于刺激作出回应包括来自社会的刺激 其实内向的人是很渴求大量的鼓舞和激励的 反之内向者最感觉到他们的存在 这是他们精力最充足的时候，最具有能力的时候当他们存在于更安静的，更低调的环境中 并不是所有时候--这些事情都不是绝对的-- 但是存在于很多时候 所以说，关键在于 把我们的天赋发挥到最大化这对于我们来说就足够把我们自己 放到对于我们正确又合适的激励的区域中去

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 fore_troverts' need for lots of stimulation. and also we have this belief systemright now that i call the new groupthink,which holds that all creativity and allproductivity comes from a very oddly gregarious place.

但是现在偏见出现了 我们最重要的那些体系 我们的学校和工作单位 它们都是为性格外向者设计的 并且有适合他们需要的刺激和鼓励当然我们现在也有这样一种信用机制 我称它为新型的“团队思考” 这是一种包含所有创造力和生产力的思考方式 从一个社交非常零散的地方产生的

so if you picture the typical classroom nowadays: when i was going toschool, we sat in rows. we sat in rows of desks like this, and we did most ofour work pretty nowadays, your typical classroom has pods ofdesks -- four or five or si_ or seven kids all facing each other. and kids areworking in countless group assignments. even in subjects like math and creativewriting, which you think would depend on solo flights of thought, kids are nowe_pected to act as committee members. and for the kids who preferto go off bythemselves or just to work alone, those kids are seen as outliers often or,worse, as problem cases. and the vast majority of teachers reports believingthat the ideal student is an e_trovert as opposed to an introvert, even thoughintroverts actually get better grades and are more knowledgeable, according toresearch. (laughter)

当你描绘今天典型教室的图案时 当我还上学的时候 我们一排排地坐着 我们靠着桌子一排排坐着就像这样 并且我们大多数工作都是自觉完成的但是在现代社会，所谓典型的教室 是些圈起来并排的桌子-- 四个或是五个或是六、七个孩子坐在一起，面对面 孩子们要完成无数个小组任务 甚至像数学和创意写作这些课程这些你们认为需要依靠个人闪光想法的课程 孩子们现在却被期待成为小组会的成员 对于那些喜欢 独处，或者自己一个人工作的孩子来说 这些孩子常常被视为局外人或者更糟，被视为问题孩子 并且很大一部分老师的报告中都相信 最理想的学生应该是外向的 相对于内向的学生而言 甚至说外向的学生能够取得更好的成绩更加博学多识据研究报道 (笑声)

okay, same thing is true in our workplaces. now, most of us work in openplan offices,without walls, where we are subject to the constant noise and gazeof our coworkers. and when it comes to leadership, introverts are routinelypassed over for leadership positions,even though introverts tend to be verycareful, much less likely to take outsize risks --which is something we mightall favor nowadays. and interesting research by adam grant at the wharton schoolhas found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than e_trovertsdo, because when they are managing proactive employees, they're much more likelyto let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an e_trovert can, quiteunwittingly, get so e_cited about things that they're putting their own stamp onthings, and other people's ideas might not as easily then bubble up to thesurface.

好了。同样的事情也发生在我们工作的地方 现在呢，我们中的绝大多数都工作在宽阔没有隔间的办公室里 甚至没有墙 在这里，我们暴露在不断的噪音和我们同事的凝视目光下工作 而当谈及领袖气质的时候 内向的人总是按照惯例从领导的位置被忽视了 尽管内向的人是非常小心仔细的 很少去冒特大的风险--这些风险是今天我们可能都喜欢的 宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院的亚当·格兰特教授做了一项很有意思的研究 这项研究表明内向的领导们相对于外向领导而言总是会生产更大的效益 因为当他们管理主动积极的雇员的时候 他们更倾向于让有主见的雇员去自由发挥 反之外向的领导就可能，当然是不经意的对于事情变得十分激动 他们在事务上有了自己想法的印迹 这使其他人的想法可能就不会很容易地 在舞台上发光了

now in fact, some of our transformative leaders in history have beenintroverts. i'll give you some e_amples. eleanor roosevelt, rosa parks, gandhi-- all these peopled described themselves as quiet and soft-spoken and even they all took the spotlight, even though every bone in their bodies wastelling 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 theyenjoyed directing others and not out of the pleasure of being looked at;theywere there because they had no choice, because they were driven to do what theythought was right.

事实上，历史上一些有改革能力的领袖都是内向的人 我会举一些例子给你们 埃莉诺·罗斯福，罗沙·帕克斯，甘地 -- 所有这些人都把自己描述成内向，说话温柔甚至是害羞的人 他们仍然站在了聚光灯下 即使他们浑身上下 都感知他们说不要这证明是一种属于它自身的特殊的力量因为人们都会感觉这些领导者同时是掌舵者 并不是因为他们喜欢指挥别人 抑或是享受众人目光的聚焦 他们处在那个位置因为他们没有选择因为他们行驶在他们认为正确的道路上

now i think at this point it's important for me to say that i actually lovee_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 whofirst popularized these terms, said that there's no such thing as a pureintrovert or a pure e_trovert. he said that such a man would be in a lunaticasylum, if he e_isted at all. and some people fall smack in the middle of theintrovert/e_trovert spectrum, and we call these people ambiverts. and i oftenthink that they have the best of all worlds. but many of us do recognizeourselves as one type or the other.

现在我觉得对于这点我有必要说 那就是我真的喜爱外向的人 我总是喜欢说我最好的几个朋友都是外向的人 包括我亲爱的丈夫 当然了我们都会在不同点时偏向内向者/外向者的范围 甚至是卡尔·荣格，这个让这些名词为大众所熟知的心理学家，说道 世上绝没有一个纯粹的内向的人 或者一个纯粹的外向的人他说这样的人会在精神病院里 如果他存在的话 还有一些人处在中间的迹象 在内向与外向之间 我们称这些人为“中向性格者” 并且我总是认为他们拥有世界最美好的一切但是我们中的大多数总是认为自己属于内向或者外向，其中一类

and what i'm saying is that culturally we need a much better balance. weneed more of a yin and yang between these two types. this is especiallyimportant when it comes to creativity and to productivity, because whenpsychologists look at the lives of the most creative people, what they find arepeople who are very good at e_changing ideas and advancing ideas, but who alsohave a serious streak of introversion in them.

同时我想说从文化意义上讲我们需要一种更好的平衡 我们需要更多的阴阳的平衡 在这两种类型的人之间 这点是极为重要的 当涉及创造力和生产力的时候因为当心理学家们看待 最有创造力的人的生命的时候 他们寻找到的 是那些擅长变换思维的人 提出想法的人 但是他们同时也有着极为显著的偏内向的痕迹

and this is because solitude is a crucial ingredient often to darwin, he took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically turned downdinner party r geisel, better known as dr. seuss, he dreamedup many of his amazing creations in a lonely bell tower office that he had inthe back of his house in la jolla, california. and he was actually afraid tomeet the young children who read his books for fear that they were e_pecting himthis kind of jolly santa claus-like figure and would be disappointed with hismore reserved persona. steve wozniak invented the first apple computer sittingalone in his cubical in hewlett-packard where he was working at the time. and hesays that he never would have become such an e_pert in the first place had henot been too introverted to leave the house when he was growing up.

这是因为独处是非常关键的因素 对于创造力来说 所以达尔文 自己一个人漫步在小树林里 并且断然拒绝了晚餐派对的邀约西奥多·盖索，更多时候以苏索博士的名号知名 他梦想过很多的惊人的创作 在他在加利福尼亚州拉霍亚市房子的后面的 一座孤独的束层的塔形办公室中 而且其实他很害怕见面见那些读过他的书的年轻的孩子们 害怕他们会期待他 这样一位令人愉快的，圣诞老人形象的人物 同时又会因发现他含蓄缄默的性格而失望史蒂夫·沃兹尼亚克发明了第一台苹果电脑 一个人独自坐在他的机柜旁 在他当时工作的惠普公司 并且他说他永远不会在那方面成为一号专家 但他还没因太内向到要离开那里那个他成长起来的地方

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 tostart apple computer -- but it does mean that solitude matters and that for somepeople it is the air that they breathe. and in fact, we have known for centuriesabout the transcendent power of solitude. it's only recently that we'vestrangely begun to forget it. if you look at most of the world's majorreligions, you will find seekers -- moses, jesus, buddha, muhammad --seekers whoare going off by themselves alone to the wilderness where they then haveprofound epiphanies and revelations that they then bring back to the rest of thecommunity. so no wilderness, no revelations.

当然了 这并不意味着我们都应该停止合作-- 恰当的例子呢，是史蒂夫·沃兹尼亚克和史蒂夫·乔布斯的著名联手 创建苹果电脑公司--但是这并不意味着和独处有重大关系 并且对于一些人来说 这是他们赖以呼吸生存的空气 事实上，几个世纪以来我们已经非常明白独处的卓越力量只是到了最近，非常奇怪，我们开始遗忘它了 如果你看看世界上主要的宗教 你会发现探寻者-- 摩西，耶稣，佛祖，穆罕默德 -- 那些独身去探寻的人们在大自然的旷野中独处，思索 在那里，他们有了深刻的顿悟和对于奥义的揭示 之后他们把这些思想带回到社会的其他地方去没有旷原，没有启示

this is no surprise though if you look at the insights of contemporarypsychology. it turns out that we can't even be in a group of people withoutinstinctively mirroring, mimicking their opinions. even about seemingly personaland visceral things like who you're attracted to, you will start aping thebeliefs of the people around you without even realizing that that's what you'redoing.

尽管这并不令人惊讶 如果你注意到现代心理学的思想理论 它反映出来我们甚至不能和一组人待在一起 而不去本能地模仿他们的意见与想法甚至是看上去私人的，发自内心的事情 像是你被谁所吸引 你会开始模仿你周围的人的信仰 甚至都觉察不到你自己在做什么

and groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismaticperson in the room, even though there's zero correlation between being the besttalker and having the best ideas -- i mean zero. so ... (laughter) you might befollowing the person with the best ideas, but you might not. and do you reallywant to leave it up to chance? much better for everybody to go off bythemselves, generate their own ideas freed from the distortions of groupdynamics, and then come together as a team to talk them through in awell-managed environment and take it from there.

还曾跟随群体的意见 跟随着房间里最具有统治力的，最有领袖气质的人的思路 虽然这真的没什么关系 在成为一个卓越的演讲家还是拥有最好的主意之间--我的意思是“零相关” 那么...(笑声) 你们或许会跟随有最好头脑的人 但是你们也许不会 可你们真的想把这机会扔掉吗?如果每个人都自己行动或许好得多发掘他们自己的想法 没有群体动力学的曲解 接着来到一起组成一个团队 在一个良好管理的环境中互相交流 并且在那里学习别的思想

now if all this is true, then why are we getting it so wrong? why are wesetting up our schools this way and our workplaces? and why are we making theseintroverts feel so guilty about wanting to just go off by themselves some of thetime? one answer lies deep in our cultural history. western societies, and inparticular the u.s., have always favored the man of action over the man ofcontemplation and "man" of contemplation. but in america's early days, we livedin 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 lookat 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 likeabraham lincoln who was praised for being modest and unassuming. ralph waldoemerson called him "a man who does not offend by superiority."

如果说现在这一切都是真的 那么为什么我们还得到这样错误的结论? 为什么我们要这样创立我们的学校，还有我们的工作单位?为什么我们要让这些内向的人觉得那么愧疚 。对于他们只是想要离开，一个人独处一段时间的事实? 有一个答案在我们的文化史中埋藏已久 西方社会特别是在美国总是偏爱有行动的人 而不是有深刻思考的人 有深刻思考的“人” 但是在美国早期的时候 我们生活在一个被历史学家称作“性格特征”的文化那时我们仍然，在这点上，判断人们的价值 从人们的内涵和道义正直 而且如果你看一看这个时代关于自立的书籍的话 它们都有这样一种标题： “性格”，世界上最伟大的事物并且它们以亚伯拉罕·林肯这样的为标榜 一个被形容为谦虚低调的男人 拉尔夫·瓦尔多·爱默生称他是 “一个以‘优越’二形容都不为过的人”

but then we hit the 20th century and we entered a new culture thathistorians call the culture of personality. what happened is we had evolved anagricultural economy to a world of big business. and so suddenly people aremoving from small towns to the instead of working alongside peoplethey've known all their lives, now they are having to prove themselves in acrowd of strangers. so, quite understandably, qualities like magnetism andcharisma suddenly come to seem really important. and sure enough, the self-helpbooks change to meet these new needs and they start to have names like "how towin friends and influence people." and they feature as their role models reallygreat salesmen. so that's the world we're living in today. that's our culturalinheritance.

但是接着我们来到了二十世纪 并且我们融入了一种新的文化 一种被历史学家称作“个性”的文化 所发生的改变就是我们从农业经济发展为 一个大商业经济的世界而且人们突然开始搬迁从小的城镇搬向城市 并且一改他们之前的在生活中和所熟识的人们一起工作的方式 现在他们在一群陌生人中间有必要去证明自己 这样做是非常可以理解的像领袖气质和个人魅力这样的品质 突然间似乎变得极为重要 那么可以肯定的是，自助自立的书的内容变更了以适应这些新的需求 并且它们开始拥有名称像是《如何赢得朋友和影响他人》(戴尔?卡耐基所著《人性的弱点》) 他们的特点是做自己的榜样 不得不说确实是好的推销员 所以这就是我们今天生活的世界这是我们的文化遗产

now none of this is to say that social skills are unimportant, and i'm alsonot calling for the abolishing of teamwork at all. the same religions who sendtheir sages off to lonely mountain tops also teach us love and trust. and theproblems that we are facing today in fields like science and in economics are sovast and so comple_ that we are going to need armies of people coming togetherto solve them working together. but i am saying that the more freedom that wegive introverts to be themselves, the more likely that they are to come up withtheir own unique solutions to these problems.

现在没有谁能够说 社交技能是不重要的 并且我也不是想呼吁 大家废除团队合作模式 但仍是相同的宗教，却把他们的圣人送到了孤独的山顶上仍然教导我们爱与信任 还有我们今天所要面对的问题 像是在科学和经济领域 是如此的巨大和复杂 以至于我们需要人们强有力地团结起来 共同解决这些问题但是我想说，越给内向者自由让他们做自己 他们就做得越好 去想出他们独特的关于问题的解决办法

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" bymaimonides. but these are not e_actly my books. i brought these books with mebecause they were written by my grandfather's favorite authors.

所以现在我很高兴同你们分享 我手提箱中的东西 猜猜是什么? 书 我有一个手提箱里面装满了书 这是玛格丽特·阿特伍德的《猫的眼睛》这是一本米兰·昆德拉的书 这是一本《迷途指津》 是迈蒙尼德写的 但这些实际上都不是我的书 我还是带着它们，陪伴着我 因为它们都是我祖父最喜爱的作家所写

my grandfather was a rabbi and he was a widower who lived alone in a smallapartment in brooklyn that was my favorite place in the world when i was growingup, partly because it was filled with his very gentle, very courtly presence andpartly because it was filled with books. i mean literally every table, everychair in this apartment had yielded its original function to now serve as asurface for swaying stacks of books. just like the rest of my family, mygrandfather's favorite thing to do in the whole world was to read.

我的祖父是一名犹太教祭司 他独身一人 在布鲁克林的一间小公寓中居住 那里是我从小到大在这个世界上最喜爱的地方部分原因是他有着非常温和亲切的，温文尔雅的举止 部分原因是那里充满了书 我的意思是，毫不夸张地说，公寓中的每张桌子，每张椅子 都充分应用着它原有的功能就是现在作为承载一大堆都在摇曳的书的表面 就像我其他的家庭成员一样 我祖父在这个世界上最喜欢做的事情就是阅读

but he also loved his congregation, and you could feel this love in thesermons that he gave every week for the 62 years that he was a rabbi. he wouldtakes the fruits of each week's reading and he would weave these intricatetapestries of ancient and humanist thought. and people would come from all overto hear him speak.

但是他同样也热爱他的宗教 并且你们可以从他的讲述中感觉到他这种爱 这62年来每周他都作为一名犹太教的祭司 他会从每周的阅读中汲取养分并且他会编织这些错综复杂的古代和人文主义的思想的挂毯 并且人们会从各个地方前来 听他的讲话

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 deliveredthese sermons, he had trouble making eye contact with the very same congregationthat he had been speaking to for 62 years. and even away from the podium, whenyou called him to say hello, he would often end the conversation prematurely forfear that he was taking up too much of your time. but when he died at the age of94, the police had to close down the streets of his neighborhood to accommodatethe crowd of people who came out to mourn him. and so these days i try to learnfrom my grandfather's e_ample in my own way.

但是有这么一件关于我祖父的事情 在这个正式的角色下隐藏着 他是一个非常谦虚的非常内向的人 是那么的谦虚内向以至于当他在向人们讲述的时候他都不敢有视线上的接触 和同样的教堂会众 他已经发言有62年了 甚至都还远离领奖台 当你们让他说“你好”的时候 他总会提早结束这对话 担心他会占用你太多的时间但是当他94岁去世的时候 警察们需要封锁他所居住的街道邻里 来容纳拥挤的人们 前来哀悼他的人们 这些天来我都试着从我祖父的事例中学习 以我自己的方式

so i just published a book about introversion, and it took me about sevenyears to for me, that seven years was like total bliss, because i wasreading, i was writing, i was thinking, i was researching. it was my version ofmy grandfather's hours of the day alone in his library. but now all of a suddenmy job is very different, and my job is to be out here talking about it, talkingabout introversion. (laughter) and that's a lot harder for me,because as honoredas 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关于内向性格的书 它花了我7年的时间完成它 而对我来说，这七年像是一种极大的喜悦 因为我在阅读，我在写作 我在思考，我在探寻这是我的版本 对于爷爷一天中几个小时都要独自待在图书馆这件事 但是现在突然间我的工作变得很不同了 我的工作变成了站在这里讲述它 讲述内向的性格 (笑声)而且这对于我来说是有一点困难的 因为我很荣幸 在现在被你们所有人所倾听 这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 yearpracticing public speaking every chance i could get. and i call this my "year ofspeaking dangerously." (laughter) and that actually helped a lot. but i'll tellyou, what helps even more is my sense, my belief, my hope that when it comes toour attitudes to introversion and to quiet and to solitude, we truly are poisedon the brink on dramatic change. i mean, we are. and so i am going to leave younow with three calls for action for those who share this vision.

所以我准备了一会就像这样 以我所能做到的最好的方式 我花了最近一年的时间练习在公共场合发言 在我能得到的每一个机会中我把这一年称作我的“危险地发言的一年” (笑声) 而且它的确帮了我很大的忙 但是我要告诉你们一个帮我更大的忙的事情 那就是我的感觉，我的信仰，我的希望当谈及我们态度的时候 对于内向性格的，对于安静，对于独处的态度时 我们确实是在急剧变化的边缘上保持微妙的平衡 我的意思是，我们在保持平衡现在我将要给你们留下一些东西 三件对于你们的行动有帮助的事情 献给那些观看我的演讲的人

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, chattycafe-style types of interactions -- you know, the kind where people cometogether and serendipitously have an e_change of is great. it's greatfor introverts and it's great for e_troverts. but we need much more privacy andmuch more freedom and much more autonomy at work. school, same need tobe teaching kids to work together, for sure, but we also need to be teachingthem how to work on their own. this is especially important for e_trovertedchildren need to work on their own because that is where deep thoughtcomes from in part.

第一： 停止对于经常要团队协作的执迷与疯狂 停止它就好了 (笑声) 谢谢你们 (掌声) 我想让我所说的事情变得清晰一些 因为我对于我们的办公深信不疑应该鼓励它们 那种休闲随意的，聊天似的咖啡厅式的相互作用-- 你们知道的，道不同不相为谋，人们聚到一起 并且互相交换着宝贵的意见 这是很棒的这对于内向者很好，同样对于外向者也好 但是我们需要更多的隐私和更多的自由 还有更多对于我们本身工作的自主权 对于学校，也是同样的。我们当然需要教会孩子们要一起学习工作 但是我们同样需要教会孩子们怎么样独立完成任务 这对于外向的孩子们来说同样是极为重要的 他们需要独立完成工作因为从某种程度上，这是他们深刻思考的来源

okay, number two: go to the wilderness. be like buddha, have your ownrevelations. i'm not saying that we all have to now go off and build our owncabins in the woods and never talk to each other again, but i am saying that wecould all stand to unplug and get inside our own heads a little more often.

好了，第二个：去到野外(打开思维) 就像佛祖一样，拥有你们自己对于事物的揭示启迪 我并不是说 我们都要跑去小树林里建造我们自己的小屋并且之后就永远不和别人说话了 但是我要说我们都可以坚持去去除一些障碍物 然后深入我们自己的大脑思想 时不时得再深入一点

number three: take a good look at what's inside your own suitcase and whyyou put it there. so e_troverts, maybe your suitcases are also full of books. ormaybe they're full of champagne glasses or skyspaning equipment. whatever it is,i hope you take these things out every chance you get and grace us with yourenergy and your joy. but introverts, you being you, you probably have theimpulse to guard very carefully what's inside your own suitcase. and that'sokay. but occasionally, just occasionally, i hope you will open up yoursuitcases for other people to see, because the world needs you and it needs thethings you carry.

第三点： 好好看一眼你的旅行箱内有什么东西 还有你为什么把它放进去 所以外向者们 也许你们的箱子内同样堆满了书 或者它们装满了香槟的玻璃酒杯或者是跳伞运动的设备 不管它是什么，我希望每当你们有机会你们就把它拿出来 用你的能量和你的快乐让我们感受到美和享受 但是内向者们，你们作为内向者你们很可能有仔细保护一切的冲动 在你箱子里的东西 这没有问题 但是偶尔地，只是说偶尔地 我希望你们可以打开你们的手提箱，让别人看一看因为这个世界需要你们，同样需要你们身上所携带的你们特有的事物

so i wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speaksoftly.

所以对于你们即将走上的所有旅程，我都给予你们我最美好的祝愿 还有温柔地说话的勇气

thank you. thank you.

非常感谢你们!

ted演讲稿篇七

in a funny, rapid-fire 4 minutes, ale_is ohanian of reddit tells thereal-life fable of one humpback whale's rise to web stardom. the lesson ofmister splashy pants is a shoo-in classic for meme-makers and marketers in thefacebook age.

这段有趣的4分钟演讲，来自 reddit 网站创始人 ale_isohanian。他讲了一个座头鲸在网上一夜成名的真实故事。“溅水先生”的故事是脸书时代米姆(小编注：根据《牛津英语词典》，meme被定义为：“文化的基本单位，通过非遗传的方式，特别是模仿而得到传递。”)制造者和传播者共同创造的经典案例。

演讲的开头，ale_is ohanian介绍了“溅水先生”的故事。“绿色和平”环保组织为了阻止日本的捕鲸行为，在一只鲸鱼体内植入新片，并发起一个为这只座头鲸起名的活动。“绿色和平”组织希望起低调奢华有内涵的名字，但经过reddit的宣传和推动，票数最多的却是非常不高大上的“溅水先生”这个名字。经过几番折腾，“绿色和平”接受了这个名字，并且这一行动成功阻止了日本捕鲸活动。

演讲内容节选(ale_ ohanian 从社交网络的角度分析这个事件)

and actually, redditors in the internet community were happy toparticipate, but they weren't whale lovers. a few of them certainly were. butwe're talking about a lot of people who were just really interested and reallycaught up in this great meme, and in fact someone from greenpeace came back onthe site and thanked reddit for its participation. but this wasn't really out ofaltruism. this was just out of interest in doing something cool.

事实上，reddit的社区用户们很高兴参与其中，但他们并非是鲸鱼爱好者。当然，他们中的一小部分或许是。我们看到的是一群人积极地去参与到这个米姆(社会活动)中，实际上“绿色和平”中的人登陆 ，感谢大家的参与。网友们这么做并非是完全的利他主义。他们只是觉得做这件事很酷。

and this is kind of how the internet works. this is that great big e the internet provides this level playing field. your link is just asgood as your link, which is just as good as my link. as long as we have abrowser, anyone can get to any website no matter how big a budget you have.

这就是互联网的运作方式。这就是我说的秘密。因为互联网提供的是一个机会均等平台。你分享的链接跟他分享的链接一样有趣，我分享的链接也不赖。只要我们有一个浏览器，不论你的财富几何，你都可以去到想浏览的页面。

the other important thing is that it costs nothing to get that contentonline now. there are so many great publishing tools that are available, it onlytakes a few minutes of your time now to actually produce something. and the costof iteration is so cheap that you might as well give it a go.

另外，从互联网获取内容不需要任何成本。如今，互联网有各种各样的发布工具，你只需要几分钟就可以成为内容的提供者。这种行为的成本非常低，你也可以试试。

and if you do, be genuine about it. be honest. be up front. and one of thegreat lessons that greenpeace actually learned was that it's okay to losecontrol. the final message that i want to share with all of you -- that you cando well online. if you want to succeed you've got to be okay to just losecontrol. thank you.

如果你真的决定试试，那么请真挚、诚实、坦率地去做。“绿色和平”在这个故事中获得的教训是，有时候失控并不一定是坏事。最后我想告诉你们的是——你可以在网络上做得很好。如果你想在网络上成功，你得经得起一点失控。谢谢。

ted演讲稿篇八

try something new for 30 days 小计划帮你实现大目标

a few years ago, i felt like i was stuck in a rut, so i decided to followin the footsteps of the great american philosopher, morgan spurlock, and trysomething new for 30 days. the idea is actually pretty simple. think aboutsomething you’ve always wanted to add to your life and try it for the ne_t 30days. it turns out, 30 days is just about the right amount of time to add a newhabit or subtract a habit — like watching the news — from your life.

几年前， 我感觉对老一套感到枯燥乏味，所以我决定追随伟大的美国哲学家摩根·斯普尔洛克的脚步，尝试做新事情30天。这个想法的确是非常简单。考虑下，你常想在你生命中做的一些事情 接下来30天尝试做这些。这就是，30天刚好是这么一段合适的时间 去养成一个新的习惯或者改掉一个习惯——例如看新闻——在你生活中。

there’s a few things i learned while doing these 30-day challenges. thefirst was, instead of the months flying by, forgotten, the time was much morememorable. this was part of a challenge i did to take a picture everyday for amonth. and i remember e_actly where i was and what i was doing that day. i alsonoticed that as i started to do more and harder 30-day challenges, myself-confidence grew. i went from desk-dwelling computer nerd to the kind of guywho bikes to work — for fun. even last year, i ended up hiking up njaro, the highest mountain in africa. i would never have been thatadventurous before i started my 30-day challenges.

当我在30天做这些挑战性事情时，我学到以下一些事。第一件事是，取代了飞逝而过易被遗忘的岁月的是这段时间非常的更加令人难忘。挑战的一部分是要一个月内每天我要去拍摄一张照片。我清楚地记得那一天我所处的位置我都在干什么。我也注意到随着我开始做更多的，更难的30天里具有挑战性的事时，我自信心也增强了。我从一个台式计算机宅男极客变成了一个爱骑自行车去工作的人——为了玩乐。甚至去年，我完成了在非洲最高山峰乞力马扎罗山的远足。在我开始这30天做挑战性的事之前我从来没有这样热爱冒险过。

i also figured out that if you really want something badly enough, you cando 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 fromscratch in 30 days. it turns out, all you have to do is write 1,667 words a dayfor a month. so i did. by the way, the secret is not to go to sleep until you’vewritten your words for the day. you might be sleep-deprived, but you’ll finishyour novel. now is my book the ne_t great american novel? no. i wrote it in amonth. it’s awful. but for the rest of my life, if i meet john hodgman at a tedparty, i don’t have to say, “i’m a computer scientist.” no, no, if i want to ican say, “i’m a novelist.”

我也认识到如果你真想一些槽糕透顶的事，你可以在30天里做这些事。你曾想写小说吗?每年11月，数以万计的人们在30天里，从零起点尝试写他们自己的5万字小说。这结果就是，你所要去做的事就是每天写1667个字要写一个月。所以我做到了。顺便说一下，秘密在于除非在一天里你已经写完了1667个字，要不你就甭想睡觉。你可能被剥夺睡眠，但你将会完成你的小说。那么我写的书会是下一部伟大的美国小说吗?不是的。我在一个月内写完它。它看上去太可怕了。但在我的余生，如果我在一个ted聚会上遇见约翰·霍奇曼，我不必开口说，“我是一个电脑科学家。”不，不会的，如果我愿意我可以说，“我是一个小说家。”

(laughter)

(笑声)

so here’s one last thing i’d like to mention. i learned that when i madesmall, sustainable changes, things i could keep doing, they were more likely tostick. there’s nothing wrong with big, crazy challenges. in fact, they’re a tonof fun. but they’re less likely to stick. when i gave up sugar for 30 days, day31 looked like this.

我这儿想提的最后一件事。当我做些小的、持续性的变化，我可以不断尝试做的事时，我学到我可以把它们更容易地坚持做下来。这和又大又疯狂的具有挑战性的事情无关。事实上，它们的乐趣无穷。但是，它们就不太可能坚持做下来。当我在30天里拒绝吃糖果，31天后看上去就像这样。

(laughter)

(笑声)

so here’s my question to you: what are you waiting for? i guarantee you thene_t 30 days are going to pass whether you like it or not, so why not thinkabout something you have always wanted to try and give it a shot for the ne_t 30days.

所以我给大家提的问题是：大家还在等什么呀?我保准大家在未来的30天定会经历你喜欢或者不喜欢的事，那么为什么不考虑一些你常想做的尝试并在未来30天里试试给自己一个机会。

thanks.

谢谢。

(applause)

(掌声)