TED Community » heather Zhao

Comments

• TEDCred score: +2.00 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +1

  A reply on Talk: Karen Tse: How to stop torture

  Jan 1 2012: As to the grinding poverty in rural communities, education would offer a chance to change the life of those poor children. Things are getting better. Since the 13th amendment to the Civil rights act of 1964, the United States of America used nearly 200 years to solve the problem of racial segregation. Why don't you give China more time?
  
  By the way, a flippant attitude is the best response to an irresponsible detractor, as far as I am concerned.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Karen Tse: How to stop torture

  Jan 1 2012: Our difference lies in that you, like all the radical and irrational criticism to China, make conclusions when you have really insufficient comprehension about what had happened in China. But I can illustrate substantial grounds of argument, which you always fail to address directly. Basically what you were doing is nothing but making exaggerated and ill-based assertions, lacking of evidences.
  
  Just as then Chinese proverb the lady above mentioned,"The person who says the work cannot be done, should never interrupt the person doing it." Also the Speaker mentioned at the end of her speech, they are at least doing something.
  
  More than irrational and irresponsible criticism, what we need essentially is to improve our system and make people live a better life, and to make some insight advises and contributions during the reconstruction and reform of the system.
  
  China has improved a lot. In the economical sense, thirty years ago, before the adoption of reform and open policy, the generation of my parents could hardly enjoy the life as comfortable and diverse as today. In the political sense, ten years ago, the deputy of National People's Congress could hardly be anyone who would disagree with the CCP, and the universal participation of democratic process is not enough. However two months ago in a newly election of a district in Beijing, some outstanding intellectuals and professors, who have the strong wish to improve the system of the whole country were elected as the deputy. In other words, they have become part of the ruling class of the country.
  
  If you examine the "efficiency" of China's democratic process, you would be so ashamed on the same one in your own country. China is a country which is both old and new. In examining the human rights condition, more than discussing what the country is at present, we should pay more attention on what the country has achieved in a short period of time.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Karen Tse: How to stop torture

  Dec 31 2011: I disagree with your point. It seems that you are making a lot of assumptions.
  
  The aiweiwei incident is relatively special, and such an individual case cannot represent the whole judicial system in China is degrading. The concept and condition of human rights are so broad and comprehensive to be evaluated easily, especially in China, a country whose population consists of 1/5 people of the world. You really need more evidences before you attack the current condition and make an ill-based prediction.
  
  As to the judicial system, we are actually improving. Last year we made a new evidence law about excluding the evidences which are acquired in a illegal way, namely , torture, in the process of the litigation. Overall maybe you should do more research or try to experience the condition by yourself before you made the imaginary conclusion.

• A reply on Conversation: What makes a good conversation? What draws you in and engages you? Let's build TED-capacity by sharing what we're learning with each other.

  Nov 21 2011: I understand your point now.
  
  Logical tools are indeed very useful when handling with academic or professional conversations, especially when complicated topics are involved. Sometime when I am trying to get some interesting inference from a conversation, I would ask myself several questions: What is the implict assumption in his logical reasoning? Whether his first sentence is a necessary premise or a sufficient premise to the conclusion? Is there any logical flaw in his reasoning? What kind of inferences can I know for sure from his words?
  
  While since you mention the "normal conversation", I think the word "conversation" has the nature of communication between two people. The more important thing is that if you successfully receive certain information, you are supposed to reflect and give back some other useful information to the other side. That's the core for the smooth progress of a conversation.
  
  In other words, during engaged in a conversation, I think people should concentrate more on how can they efficiently and effectively communicate with each other, instead of drawing a conlusion merely. That's why sometimes gestures, tones, emotions and some other ways to express ideas are more effective to deal with a conversation than the ideas themselves.

• A reply on Conversation: What makes a good conversation? What draws you in and engages you? Let's build TED-capacity by sharing what we're learning with each other.

  Nov 20 2011: I agree with your first point. Sometimes when people are not really concerned about a topic, or they don't know well about the topic, they will choose the extent to which they receive the information in the conversation according to the manner the othe side express his own ideas. When I was attending the compulsory courses which I don't really interested in, I would choose whether to concentrated on the professor or not according to whether he was persuasive or eloquent enough to arouse my interests in the topic. I think it's the same way for a bilateral conversation between two people. Whether one part receive or engaed in to conversation depends a lot on how the other side convey their ideas.
  
  I don't really understand your second point. Recently I read the book the History of Western Phiolosophy by Russel, and I was quite interested in the syllogisms from Aristotle. However how do you transfer that logic into the conversation skills? Just wondering...
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Fill in the blank: I would like ________ (a living expert) to give me a 5 minute lesson on ________ (a creative topic).

  Nov 20 2011: I would like Henry Thoreau to give me a five minute lesson on How Can We Stop Moving Forward and Comtemplate in this Impetuous Modern Societly.

• A comment on Conversation: What knowledge changes your perception of whether or not something is beautiful?

  Oct 20 2011: I think the reason is that beauty is kind of value system to judge or evaluate things around you. People have various standards to evaluate beauty, and generally speaking the standards are from subjective mood. I do agree with that there are indeed some universal standards to judge beauty, while as to specific things, such as the painting in the speech from the girl suffering cancer, people's subjective emotions actually are in the dominant positions.
  That's why the recognition of beauty will be changed by the extrinsic interpretation. People will change their minds, their emotions, and their reflections toward certain events when the circumstance of those events are changed. So that's why children find beauty is colorful paintings, boys in 20s find beauty is those tall, slim and sexy ladies, and environmentalist may find beauty is the purity of nature. They have different subjective emotions!
  As to what kind of knowledge changes the perception of beauty. I think every possible kind of knowledge which may change people's subjective value system will achieve that. If I learn architecture, I may perceive the beauty of symmetry; If I learn legal knowledge, I may perceive the beauty of strict logic in words; If I learn photography, I may perceive the beauty in the contrast of light and shadow.
  All in all, if one kind of knowledge can change our subjective minds or emotions toward the world, it does change the perception of beauty.
• +2

  A reply on Talk: Yang Lan: The generation that's remaking China

  Oct 6 2011: Plus, rarely citizens in China are restricted by the ideas of "strong sense of community" or "having one government and being ruled". Most people have tried to make changes and they failed. Their voices are censored and their actions are oppressed. They can do nothing. They can say nothing. At least at present.
• +2

  A reply on Talk: Yang Lan: The generation that's remaking China

  Oct 6 2011: I do partly agree with your perspectives to the current situation of China. While I don't know whether you have actually live in a Chinese community and share their opinions, such as work places, or universities. The voices from the normal Chinese citizens are different from what you hear about from the propaganda or what you observe in a superficial level.
  Most people are right that Chinese situation is complex and hard to explain explicitly, especially general citizens' views for their own situation. I can simply divided Chinese citizens into two classes according to the degree of concern about the political or social situation, the older generation who accept the truth and the younger generation who want a big change.
  Chinese citizens of older generation were born in 1950s or 60s, and most of them are college students when Chinese endured the 1989 accident, which is a painful suffering for Chinese. This generation felt confused and mad when they found the future of communist was not as bright as what the party had described to them. Then these college students wanted to make some big changes in their own strengths. However their struggle were immature and unprepared ones, only from the spontaneous reflection to the serious condition. They did not find a best way to initiate a social revolution.
  20 years later, people of the "older generation" become the upper class of the society. Some of them have owned the power to make some big changes, and some of them possess great personal wealth. While they would never like to do some changes. They have accepted all the unfair things they may consider. They maybe feel annoyed or upset towards the accidents around the country but they do not want to do anything.
  This point is to rebut your "feudalism" opinion. It's none of the business of feudalism. Over the past 150 years since Opium War, Chinese people have endured sufficient revolutions about their ideologies.