TED Conversations

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed.

How to determine ideas worth spreading...

Ted talks center on the notion of 'ideas worth spreading' and this interchange seeks to focus attention on the practice of choosing the ideas to spread, how individuals and groups determine what to share and cultivate and what to eradicate. This also includes the best practices to ensure ideas are sheared and which ideas get spread. I once read that there are more good stories than bad one, yet more of the latter get told and reported. So how to determine and choose ideas worth spreading?

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Nov 12 2013: The touchstone is: do they wotk in the objective?
    • Nov 12 2013: That was a bit to cryptic for me to decipher what you meant...please elaborate a bit more...
      • thumb
        Nov 12 2013: Do the ideas work or not. Can they be tested or not. The world suffers from adopting unworkable ideas. For example Keynesian economics or the idea that man is an animal as per psychology or some one else is responsible for you as per government. All of these ideas are designed to enslave.
        • Nov 12 2013: pat,

          Thanks that helps me to better understand your comment above.

          Here is the thing, with using the notion of ideas 'objectively' working ... as a touchstone.

          Some ideas may not work because of the actions of other ideas, who refuse to employ them and even seek to interfere with the ideas that work working with others. This given the fact that the ideas that do work would quickly force the ideas that do not work into working (and the ideas that don't work act to keep this from happening to ensure that even the ideas that work end up not working).

          The question is how to employ the ideas that work (but may seem not to work) and 'layoff' the ideas that don't work (but may seem to work)?

          I agree that we ought to test things out... then agains testing things out may be a way to lures us into an enslaving addiction practically impossible to escape... thus I also agree that we ought abstain from carrying out certain tests on certain stuff... The thing is how to determine that a priory and do what ought to be done without doing what ought not be done?

          Of course there are also the "accompanying parasitic 'symbiot' ideas" which piggyback and tag along. How do we identify them and deal with them effectively? Then there are the ones that masquerade as good while being something else, often going unnoticed. Take for example the following notions, "suffering" "the unworkable" "some one else is responsible for you " "design to enslave"... are those ideas worth spreading? Evidently I too have contributed even in this response to those ideas spreading... Personally I would rather choose and have other ideas to spread. Still I wanted to draw attention to them to expose them because that may help to deal with them once and for all as we choose to move on and focus on better ideas to cultivate...

          So how do we promote ideas designed to responsibly liberate individuals to do what ought to be done (and keep the other ideas and options bound within a possibility?
      • thumb
        Nov 12 2013: The problem is that ideas that benefit the few are spread around to be fact which are specious ideas. The opposite can also occur as it did with Thomas Paine and his book "Common Sense" was one of, if not the, the seminal event that created the republic of the US. This leads me to say that the important tool is logic or common sense.

        You don't have this problem with things as they fall into the objective category whose workability is easily checked. Ideas are not as easily checked, without some education.

        The problem is that your chances of getting false ideas are geometrically more common than true ideas. The number one source of these false ideas are politicians fighting to continue their career. As they will say anything to get reelected. So the puppet masters are cronies who pass the laws to their benefit.
        • Nov 12 2013: Note how the specious ideas depend on the crowd to spread them around! The core issue of this conversation seeks to determine how can an individual determine which ideas to spread and support and which to block, especially when confronted with an ideological stampede initiated by a few that seeks to promote and drive ideas into the crowd and push the crowd to move.

          Of course the to promote and drive ideas into the crowd and the individual can seek benefits or detriments... the things is how to ensure that the good righteous ideas spread easily independent of the dissenting vociferations that seek to overcrowd and/or emotionally active certain reflexes...

          Even in things that fall into the objective category can defy logic and common sense and some individuals will continue to embrace what they think regardless of the evidence presented to them.

          Indeed the chances of getting false ideas are geometrically contrasted to getting the true ones which is overcompensated with the fact that for those who knowing the truth its easy to know if a statement about such thing is true or false... someone who only knows the lie has a bit more of a challenge determining if some other statement about such matter is true or false... In other words its possible to know the truth by knowing the truth (and those who know the lie may not even know the truth about such a lie). this all brings us back to the core question how to determine ideas worth spreading...
      • thumb
        Nov 12 2013: Examples please.
        • Nov 12 2013: I assume you mean examples of knowing the truth about something facilitating determining if some other statements are true or false. As well as knowing the lie about something not facilitating determining is some other statements are true or false

          Lets say :
          A - One knows Pat baked that cake on the table...
          B- One knows Joshua didn't baked the cake on the table...

          Now lets consider the statement:
          C- Gilbert backed the cake on the table...
          D- Esteban backed the cake on the table...

          Thus those who know 'A' can determine if C and/or D are true or false and those who know "B" can't.
      • thumb
        Nov 12 2013: No, something real. E.G. government spending grows the economy at a rate of $1.50 for every $1.00 spent. Or anti depressant drugs fixes people who are depressed. Or Abraham Lincoln was a hero. Or big evil business is the core of our problems. Or we need government or we could not function.
        • Nov 13 2013: Pat,

          if anti depressant drugs fixes people who are depressed
          they why do they need to keep taking anti depressant drugs?

          To focus on something real... the core of our problems resides in individuals thoughts, feelings, stores, actions. ... and incidentally the core of our solutions reside in individuals thoughts, feelings, stores, actions. ... thus back to the core question of this conversation

          How to determine ideas worth spreading...
      • thumb
        Nov 13 2013: No, I'm talking about something real and in your face, again how about something real, not feelings WTF?
        • Nov 13 2013: Pat,

          From your response I gather you failed to understand the significance of how "the core issue resides in individuals thoughts, feelings, stories*, actions". I also wonder about the 'tone' of your message. How do you determine which ideas are worth sharing?

          +edited 'stores' had intended it to be 'stories'
      • thumb
        Nov 13 2013: I understand as far as I care to (this has NOTHING to do with" feelings"), have a nice day.
        • Nov 13 2013: Maybe tomorrow you will care to respond to :
          How do you determine which ideas are worth sharing?

          Have a nice day...

          btw in my previous post I provided some observations for you to consider

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.