This conversation is closed.

I watched a brilliant TED talk (I think) relating to psychology and cognitive and cultural drivers behind religious thought. where is it?!!

For the life of me I can't find the talk. I may have seen it through a different portal. Please someone help!

  • Aug 10 2013: I think the guy who wrote this has a TEDtalk scheduled for next year. He's been all over the web and I found this there. I am still trying to go back and find the specific reference and the specific name. This may be from a TEDtalk already given and is still in the 'edit' stage. They do a lot of post-production work on these apparently before they publish them on TED.com.



    We all share a "God Vulnerability." We are all, at some point, willing to believe! And we all choose to 'believe together' at some point. Entire civilizations/cultures have been built upon just this.

    I theorize here that we all share a "God Vulnerability." Specifically, our brains come to us pre-programmed to explore & understand our environment. Imagination fills in the gaps when & where our ability to experiment & understand breaks down. Scientists do this all the time! That's where "Theories" come from: the Imagination. Based upon what they know already, scientists 'can-only-imagine' what undiscovered forces and relationships might lie beneath & beyond the limits of our present understanding. Experimentation follows theory. Theory follows the imagination. Richard Feynman said that!

    God is present at TED in the Questing Imagination; in the Psychological associative processes present in our deepest neuro-linguistic programming. This is the part of our brain where scientists go to construct their theories. This is why they get excited about that. This is why Carl Sagan evidenced transcendent enrapturement when he spoke about "billions & billions" of stars in the cosmos.

    All the rest of us saw that, and we recognized that for what it was: "That's God!" "He's talking to God!" "Or at least I thought so when I was age seven
  • thumb
    Aug 6 2013: maybe it was too controversial pointing out religious belief is based on cognativeweaknesses and cultural indoctrination rather than logic abnd evidence.
  • thumb
    Aug 3 2013: Here are the talks about religion: http://www.ted.com/topics/religion

    Is it the Jonathan Haidt?

    Not a TED talk, but you might like Joseph Campbell.
    • Aug 4 2013: Thanks for the tip Fritzie,

      Unfortunately it's not Jonathan Haidt. It was a female speaker. It may be that it's a Youtube video.

      The search continues.
  • Aug 10 2013: Hello Angus,

    Your question made me think of a conversation we had not too long ago.
    TED member B. White linked a lot of talks to his conversation.

    Perhaps one of the links will be the talk you are looking for?

    http://www.ted.com/conversations/18230/what_theological_implications.html
    • thumb
      Aug 10 2013: Hey Mary,
      Please don't be intimidated by the new picture. I'm losing the beard w/other improvements on the way.
      Thanks for the 'thumbs up' on Jaen Wirefly's TEDconversation. I appreciated the support. Dr. Raj left with Jaen.

      Here is something you might wish to review. I submitted this as a conversation to TED. We certainly need a set of rules something like these! http://www.ted.com/profiles/1979740

      The other people on this thread might want to look at them as well. TED might NOT want to sponsor all of this as a conversation. On the other hand, there are some things we can do ourselves to keep things civil. So maybe we should try.
      The other people on this conversation might want to take a look at that as well.
      • thumb
        Aug 10 2013: Julio, are any of these rules not pretty well understood as components of civil conversation? I mention this because rules for civil conversation are discussed often here. I don't know that those discussions affect anyone's behavior, though.
        • thumb
          Aug 10 2013: Thanks Fritzie -

          This conversation is now 2 hours away from ending. So I think I can leave this for you here w/o giving any offense.

          My answer is in two parts. We all know the rules, but any lawyer will tell you: Never take the rules for granted. Never just assume that: "Everyone Knows!" Because everyone needs reminding from time to time.

          So, two parts:

          A 'civil conversation' is face-to-face. I have those kinds of conversations. And some of those I've had over the last ten years or so really can result in somebody throwing a fist. Some places, physical fights are a reality. In construction, in long-shoring, in trucking, in bars, in Union halls, and especially among kids who have to defend themselves in the school-yard. Things can get physical. The rules of civil conversation just don't apply.

          We do have school age youth on TED. Age 13 & up are able to join. We can't expect them to abide by the rules all the time. How will you know if it's only a youngster making an offensive comment out of ignorance? All you have is a name and maybe a photo in the upper left of the post. But that photo may not reflect the youth of the one who posts.

          I list the rules I care most about below. Conflict avoidance is the thing.
        • thumb
          Aug 10 2013: This is how to avoid conflict and keep a civil web-conversation going. Especially where age 13-18 are concerned. Those kids may just go do what they've seen others doing on the web.

          13) Ideas are valuable on TED. Have them. Share them. Expand them. But most of all Save them to share on TED.

          7) Don't destroy someone on TED just because they just don't get it or might not have done their homework that day. The TEDster you destroy might be another 15 y/o future Albert Einstein. We want those kids on TED. And we've already lost too many of those!

          8) Flag Offer: If someone makes an immature comment on TED, offer to flag it. Report to the offender that you may yet flag their comment "pending resolution." That's what a "Flag offer" is. That means you have not hit the flag yet, but you will if things don't get fixed. When you offer-to-flag, take the time to courteously explain how & why you offered to use the flag. The offender might just be someone willing to learn or explain. These asides are generally off-topic, so certainly delete them once the conflict has been resolved. That's a good way of signaling resolution.

          12) The Edit feature on TED specifically exists for purposes of conflict resolution. If you discover you have said something offensive to another person - Edit it. Save the original, un-edited post on your own computer for another day or another conversation.

          14) The Delete feature on TED specifically exists for purposes of conflict resolution. Delete to avoid conflict, but always save important ideas to share elsewhere on TED.

          15) The Delete feature on TED is a tool of last resort. Ideas are valuable. Yes -even BAD ideas are valuable. Something has to happen to us to get us motivated to learn something! Our own silly, stupid or otherwise really BAD ideas are part of that process. Never flag something that is just a BAD idea. Correct it. Teach! Avoid conflict, Say 'Please." Ask to Teach and do so. Be aware that TED is a place for ideas. Even bad ideas
  • thumb
    Aug 8 2013: I was going to say this one until I read below that its a female.

    http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_humanity_s_stairway_to_self_transcendence.html

    Could it be Karen Armstrong?
    http://www.ted.com/speakers/karen_armstrong.html

    There are not that many talks about religion by women on TED
    • Aug 8 2013: Thanks Theodore.

      I'd have to say after all my efforts I still can't find it. I'm leaning more towards believing it wasn't a TED talk after all and was instead something I stumbled upon.

      Thanks for the tips though. The talks from Jonathan Haidt and Karen Armstrong look interesting. Will have to watch.
  • thumb
    Aug 6 2013: As a random guess, try this one: http://www.ted.com/talks/alain_de_botton_atheism_2_0.html

    Alain de Botton does an excellent job of spelling it all out here. I'll gather more if this one doesn't hit the mark.
    • Aug 8 2013: Thanks Juan. I haven't seen this one yet. Will have to watch it asap.
  • thumb
    Aug 5 2013: Not all the TEDtalks make it to the web site. Apparently, there is a lot of post-production work that goes into getting these videos ready for publication on TED.com. I have no direct knowledge of that, but there seem to be many more TED talks on Youtube - and many of those are not to be found on TED. I am not sure why that happens, but I am sure that there are legal issues of some sort that relegate some video from TED to Youtube. Some TEDx talks in a University setting run up against copyright issues reserved to the University or College sponsoring the TEDx event. If it is a state university, there may be state law or state regulations that prevent direct dissemination of a TEDx event video filmed under certain circumstances.

    Also, there is the issue of quality. Videos meeting a certain standard are suitable for TED.com. And some simply go 'away' (or to the trash heap). Some speakers really nail it & get standing ovations. Some are, to be honest, boring. I've never seen a TEDtalk in person. But boring-happens. Even@TED.

    I've never attended a TED conference (too expensive for me!). And I probably never will. But the issue seems to be that - (for lack of a better description) - Some TEDtalks don't work? And some TED talks are way too BAD! Some material just doesn't work. Some presenters do a lousy job?

    Why do you think they have to film each scene in a movie ten times before they get all they need on film to make a really good movie! TED presenters are not professional actors. (But if Tom Hanks gave a TED talk I think it would be really good - but then again, he'd need a script.)