TED Community » Nate Wilson

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Music, Philosophy, How things Relate, Beauty,

Talk to me about

How things are the way they are and why. How things could have been and why. Nano-, Bio-, Info-, AI related technology.

People don't know that I'm good at

Drumming my fingers on the desk while I'm at the computer. Wearing comfy hippy-pants.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +11.80 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +2

  A reply on Talk: Sherry Turkle: Connected, but alone?

  Apr 5 2012: Agreed. Scary correlations. I've noticed that about myself, as well.
  I also think that there will be so much for kids of coming generations to learn and worry about. Oh man.

• A reply on Conversation: What does a good idea feel like to you?

  Dec 15 2011: I also love it when things fit into the big picture. I think it's the reason why I live, to see how everything connects or relates.
  
  Systems theory stuff, Michael. I've been trying to learn about it lately, but I've been noticing, as I learn more and more about it, that it has been with me for a while. I can't help but feel extreme excitement when seeing how different systems have similar underlying themes and structures. Atoms, Molecules, Cells, human organizations, the Earth, the solar system. Of course different systems aren't *exactly* the same, and it might be coincidence, but they are similar enough, often enough to make a person tingle.
  
  It's all about metaphors and analogies. Once you have the basic themes of structures and organization between different systems, you can learn anything, understand anything.

• A reply on Conversation: What does a good idea feel like to you?

  Dec 15 2011: Yes! I feel very much the same way.
• +4

  A reply on Talk: Stanley McChrystal: Listen, learn ... then lead

  Apr 6 2011: I think it's useful to acknowledge the fact that people do things to avoid punishment while also doing things because they feel that it's the right thing to do.
  
  I don't think it's useful to hold the opinion that people never do things to avoid punishment and only do things because they think it's the right thing to do.
  
  And there's a difference between giving choosing to give back that extra change and choosing to go on a mission that you might not return from alive. A big difference. So in those situations where most people are having second thoughts about going into combat, the privilege of choice of removed. You either go or are punished. (If a soldier is having cold feet about combat, the leadership requires them to at least show up, even if the soldier doesn't fire their weapon, the addition to the number of soldiers on the battle field is helpful.)
  I'm pretty sure that's how the military gets most of its soldiers to go to combat, but I welcome any corrections from those in the know.
  Again, this is not to imply that there are no soldiers who willingly go into combat, as many posters on video can personally attest to.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Stanley McChrystal: Listen, learn ... then lead

  Apr 6 2011: I feel that I must put in that it is a mixture of both fear of punishment and a desire to positively contribute. One can often significantly overshadow the other in any organization, military or civilian, especially if the process through which people need to go to reach the objective isn't an enjoyable one. Not all missions are fun. Ideally, though, the motivating factor behind any soldier should be a desire to contribute, not a fear of being thrown in the brig should they disobey.
• +3

  A comment on Talk: Salman Khan: Let's use video to reinvent education

  Mar 16 2011: This video made me cry in a good way.
• +2

  A reply on Talk: Jim Fallon: Exploring the mind of a killer

  Sep 25 2010: And to return to the question of what the motivations of a person are for committing or not committing actions considered by that society to be hurtful, bad, wrong, or actions considered to be good or beneficial, and even further, purely unselfish or altruistic:
  
  I said in my first of these three comments so far that I feel the motivations for the actions that we commit are complicated because, for instance we do not yet really know -or even *cannot* know- whether or not it is possible to help someone *without* getting a good, positive feeling from it; a self-esteem boost. We can say that helping someone who'll never find out is a very unselfish thing to do, but the person doing the anonymous helping is probably getting a very significant, if sometimes subtle, boost to their self-esteem/worth and pride.
• +3

  A reply on Talk: Jim Fallon: Exploring the mind of a killer

  Sep 25 2010: then...we may have very little to talk about. Because if you think that there is one morality that is applicable to ALL of existence, I must candidly disagree. I think the key difference between the two kinds of morality I described is the term "RELATIVE.* It is evident from the existence of different cultures throughout the earth that there are differences (it could be said superficial/non-vital differences) between values amongst different peoples (what and how to eat, what/how to worship, how to dress, what's attractive, etc.), and thus different moral values. Some matters that come to mind first on which moral values contrast are contraception and promiscuity, murder and killing for a cause, caring for or abandoning elders, the requirement of male children in a family (in china a family is not considered "complete" without a male to carry on the name, and females are often abandoned or even killed.)
• +3

  A reply on Talk: Jim Fallon: Exploring the mind of a killer

  Sep 25 2010: Those of you above me who are so strikingly critiquing Mr. Damien Browne's thoughts within his comment are, I believe, not looking deep enough into the deep, dark ugliness that is human nature.
  
  Yes, it is a widespread hope that humans are capable of possessing altruism; true unselfishness; care for others; a wish for their well-being. I also hope this, but I think that the reality may be less simple and more complicated.
  
  If by morality you mean a set of rules or guidelines followed by a particular group of individuals in a particular culture during a particular time that *CHANGE* over time that help to ensure the survival and average well-being of these individuals, then we're getting somewhere.
  
  But if by morality you mean an *UNCHANGEABLE* set of rules or guidelines determined by a a supernatural, or more likely divine, entity that clearly states what is wrong/evil and what is right/good in no uncertain terms and violation of any of these terms means damnation, then....

• A reply on Talk: Jan Chipchase: The anthropology of mobile phones

  Sep 25 2010: And also, the need of immediate response has risen greatly over the years, versus the time when horse-back messengers and carrier pigeons were used. Our world changes very quickly now and a day or even an hour can make a very big difference, especially within nations/regions with widespread use of the newest communications technology, IE the usa, europe, china, japan.