TED Community » Tank General

Comments

• TEDCred score: +0.30 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Conversation: How can we create a more collaborative government? Is E-Government feasible?

  Nov 18 2012: This looks awesome. Thanks for sharing! Will definitely come back with y feedback.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Haha great response! It' s huge question and it could be very well that there is no absolute single answer as you pointed out. A system that supports freedom is great start but then we get back to the inefficiencies that could arise if the agents in the system are acting irrationally. It's a loopy problem!

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Thanks Julian. Good argument. I see your point. There are several things that we still dont know about the brain and why its setup the way that it is.
  
  Agree that education may not be enough. Particularly for addressing deeply ingrained selective biases. Can you expand on what you mean by germinating and improving free thought on all individuals?

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Nice! That's very interesting. Would love to dig into the Egyptian findings. Please share your research and sources if you have available.
  
  Great question. Why don't we have more support for great ideas? Even some of the great ideas that are in TEDTalks or elsewhere online are usually not being discussed in public policy or the news. Sometimes it seems like we have a growing division between an intellectual society that often monetizes these grand visions of the future (which is perfectly fine with me) and the common people. As amazing and popular as TED has grown to be it still seems like a novelty for a niche crowd of intellectuals and aspirants. Wouldn't it be easier and more socially beneficial to have everyone participate in shaping our world? We certainly can't hope to address irrational behavior by ourselves.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Thanks much John. Fully agree. We seem to have not yet fully evolved to our increasingly complex social environment.
  
  Education in logic! That would be great. I feel like we dont have any of this really until college. Or selective biases have been well formed by then. Why couldn't we have this earlier in child education? Would love to see kids debating philosophy...

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: As always Barry thanks much for the great thoughts. I'd agree there could be fallacy in notion the that "rational" is always good and "less than rational" is bad. It wouldn't surprise me at all if some seemingly irrational behavior was still essential to our survival an beneficial for our progression. For the sake of argument let's say we are only focused on irrational behavior that's clearly detrimental to society.
  
  I think you bring up a second great point. You delineate a higher dimension of what seems like social or institutional irrational behavior that's in many ways much more concerning than our personal irrational actions. These seem to be accepted yet illogical constructions in society. Why do we not take action to correct irrational behavior in institutions? Are we too lazy to handle the complexity of these problems? Does the cost/benefit of addressing the issues not make sense? Or do we just not have the answers? Obviously answers to these would be case by case but wondering if there is an underlying consistent theme here.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: "We use reason to justify conclusions we reach subconsciously. There seems to be no way to improve it." - I think this is key! Thanks for pointing it out. But can we change this? As i mentioned earlier to TedLover, emotions seem to be based on some level of presupposed deliberation or contemplation a person has done in the past, but my not consider the appropriate level of deliberation necessary for the current setting. Is the solution simply to stop and think longer before we act as David Ropeik suggests? Even with that there seems there would still be some level of subconscious selective bias towards our emotions.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: I think Dan Ariel's point in drawing the comparison to congnitive process of visual perception was only that our brains can be easily tricked. But feel free to expand on why you disagree.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Fully agree. Education reform is key! And that needs reform on several levels!
  
  Humanity does need a paradigm shift as to what's accepted as logical. I 'd hope logic is universally objective and we could get this right.

• A reply on Conversation: Are humans irrational? If so, how can we build stronger institutions to compensate for human shortcomings in rationality?

  Nov 18 2012: Very interesting. Thank you for sharing your experience and unique standpoint...
  
  I see where you're coming from. Emotions follow thought because emotions have to be based on some level of presupposed deliberation or contemplation a person has done in the past. That makes sense and seems logical. But could one make the argument that emotions do not follow "conscious" thought? Or said differently, our emotions may not consider the deliberation that's needed during that time and purpose of the emption but rather considers the mental deliberation that we've done in the past. The danger here is that the past deliberation that we are basing our emotions off of may not be appropriate for the current setting around that emotion. Let me know if I'm off base here but it seems to capture the underlying realization in your experience.