TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Should TED be more discerning?

TED would appear to have the aim of disseminating scientific ideas in the areas of Technology, Entertainment and Design, and also promoting conversations about these issues.

One of the rules of conversations on TED is to avoid 'pseudo science' which would seem to reinforce the idea that TED has the aim of promoting scientific principles and scientific discussion.

Keeping this in mind, is TED breaking it's own 'rules' by promoting speakers such as 'Pastor' Rick Warren, 'His Holiness' the Karmapa, etc.? Should TED be more discerning about who it invites to speak?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jan 13 2014: Many of the conversations wax very philosophically and topics often cover humanities. If you want to be circumspect you need to be open to consider varying opinions. What I like about TED is that is is a forum to provoke thought, not a platform to promote ideologies. So no, I think the opposite, it is necessary to get speakers from varying backgrounds. What kind of scientist does not explore the converse of a theory?
    • Jan 13 2014: So, what you're saying is, there are no topics unsuitable for TED, and scientists should explore the opposite views in any argument?

      So, maybe some scientists or other speakers should talk on how racism, sexism, slavery, etc are actually good for society and we should promote those ideologies? I can't say that I'm convinced that it's always necessary to explore the opposite side of an argument. I'm not sure that it's always helpful. Some arguments have run their course.

      Should we discuss whether the sun revolves round the earth? Maybe we should consider that there is no gravity... the earth sucks? Maybe after the discussion about chemistry we can explore alchemy and what it has to offer modern society? Maybe after the talk on astrophysics you'd like to stick around for the next speaker who will give a talk on astrology in the modern world?

      Whilst I agree that scientists should in general explore converses to theories, there are a multitude of exceptions. I don't mean to belittle your point, but it really makes very little sense to me... almost none.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.