TED Conversations

Sunnah Follower

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Why these talks are utterly one sided. Why don't we be allowed to hear the other side of the story.

All the talks of these kind are utterly one sided and there is no room for the answer or opinion of other side. Examples are not from the mainstream but the from the extremes.
Opinion are based on the media trials or propaganda from the opponents of wars. Why there is no effort of finding the truth and balancing the facts.
For example we always hear about the harsh laws ans punishments of different countries as compare to others but we never relate to effects and crime statistics to the same countries.
If one country has banned alcohol and one dis not then what are the effects on the domestic abuse or accidents due to drunk driving?
How many people are in prison in the country which impose some moral restrictions and one which does not?
What constitute healthy society? We talk about the healthy and self sustain environment but we never talk about the healthy and self sustain society.
It will be refreshing to hear some apposing ideas instead of one sided conversation which more look like propaganda.

0
Share:
progress indicator
  • thumb
    Apr 11 2011: 1, basically there is no other side of the story. but rick warren tried to present it anyway.
    2, there is no need to be balanced within one media entity. go to youtube to find dozens of debates.
    3, preaching religion is neither innovative nor interesting. TED is about new thoughts.
  • thumb
    Apr 15 2011: Still confused about this topic, what is an example for you to feel this way?

    Having facts, statistics, opinions, AND an open mind is how you debate. Otherwise opinions create more opinions that stay open-ended and non-foundational.

    Perhaps you are upset with the elitist system that people tend to work within when having a debate? Then yes, it is a problem.
  • P C

    • 0
    Apr 14 2011: "Not the mainstream" of what?

    What constitutes a healthy society is the central part of the debate. Starting about 300 years, the west went through a cultural period of change. Some would call it revolution, others would call it evolution. It was a period when our morals and ethics improved dramatically. Ever since people have been treated with more respect, dignity, and our society has experienced fewer deaths.

    Even though I think I know what society you are speaking about, all I can say is that it is an enormous ethical leap to reveal our own failures to the people and the world. Many countries do not publish their crime statistics, say how many people are poor, how many people are murdered or how many women are raped. Western cultures share their failures with everyone. We do so because we believe that when a society reveals its problems, only then will it be possible to start the path to fixing them.

    In terms of justice, most western cultures have embraced the criminal justice philosophy of Cesare Beccaria in his book "On Crimes and Punishments," written in 1764 CE. To paraphrase: "instead of giving people the maximum possible punishment for a crime to deter others, give them only enough punishment to deter a criminal act from occurring again." Imagine a society with a strict dress code where a person cannot show any portion of his or her collarbone. Then imagine if someone robs another person, tears his or her clothing to reveal the collarbone, then the police catch the victim but instead of showing mercy, severely whips the person. Even if such a person tried to be good, he or she would be a victim from both the criminal and the society itself. This is a double injustice.
  • thumb
    Apr 13 2011: To be on the losing side of any debate always seem one sided to the loser, but it is hardly unfair. When one debates in a forum or topic that deals in facts or data then one has to be equipped with the relevant information to effectively debate. Emotional responses and gut feelings are hardly the weapons of choice when debating someone armed with the necessary data to support a point of view.
    When dealing with opinions it is only required that your points of view be reasoned and based on some personal experience or well thought out and articulated position. The position that is readily accepted by the majority in such a debate is usually the de facto winner. But we all gain from each expression or point of view, so in the end there are no real losers when every position is presented.
    TED in my humble opinion has been a place for excellent debate and learning if one wishes to become a student of presenting a view point effectively.
    So chose the topic of interest that you feel compelled to share your thoughtful and impassioned point of view, and let-er-rip.
    BMG - http://brians-say.blogspot.com/
  • thumb
    Apr 12 2011: In listening to Sam Harris, I gathered that human flourishing lies inbetween extremes. Would you consider this refreshing?
  • thumb
    Apr 12 2011: Sunnah ,i would ask the same question here and i noticed that in some of the Ted talks too.it seems to me that sometimes we preconcieve a specific point and then try to collect infomation to prove it to be true and when you stand on the opposite of that point and you can prove it as well.i think it is bucuz in our mindset things look like this.
    if A is opposite to B
    and if i prove A to be ture
    and then B must be untrue .
    that logic dosent apply to everything.and that's why i always feel hesitate to have a debate cuz you might end up arguing hard out of defense rather than revealing the truth behind it.
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Apr 13 2011: no ,they cant. even the preconcieved point is based on experiences.i dont mean debets themselves , i mean in the process of a debate what could happen to people's thinking. and i still believe in the worth of debates and critical thinking.
      • thumb
        Apr 13 2011: i think debates can either change or reinforce their perspectives/mind.
        will they get rid of the "shackles"completely?
        i dont know .i am happy to keep it open-ended.you only kown it untile you do it.and i believe it takes far more efforts than debates or changing of the mind for women to get rid of their "shackles"especially when you use "completely".

        just out of curious ,what you mean "shackles" of women in middle east?
      • thumb
        Apr 14 2011: that's so horrible!! ! i read about it some time ago on newspaper . i feel so bad to look at the video.Birdia,thank you .i think i am going to explore more about that.
      • thumb
        Apr 14 2011: yep . understand that;)
    • thumb
      Apr 13 2011: II agree Amy..truth can't speak or be revealed when we ask questions that are full of ego and opinion
  • thumb
    Apr 11 2011: I think you have to consider the mandate of TED and the fact that it is a FREE service online for anyone who wishes to join. As others have said there are many other places to get the 'other' side. To turn it around- I am not sure that the normal sources you have considered would ever have featured someone like Sam Harris.
  • Apr 11 2011: He has a viewpoint, he is not presenting both sides, you are correct. That is what a viewpoint is. Are you saying that nowhere can you find the opposite viewpoint? the opposite viewpoint is everywhere, on Saturdays, Sundays, TV, 5 times a day toward Mecca, everywhere.
    • thumb
      Apr 11 2011: Larry.............Do you think that people should punish one another ?