questions well posed.
20:27 Posted: Apr 2011
Views: 848,960 | Comments: 244
10:05 Posted: Dec 2010
Views: 632,661 | Comments: 261
24:08 Posted: Jul 2010
Views: 1,139,711 | Comments: 927
10:04 Posted: Jul 2010
Views: 1,348,211 | Comments: 516
23:06 Posted: Mar 2010
Views: 1,356,911 | Comments: 2646
TEDCred score: +16.30 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Talk: Michael Norton: How to buy happiness
It would be an even stronger result if people are still happier spending it prosocially than for private use if the amount they get for both uses is exactly the same. Would be important to make sure people are not simply happy because they clearly made more out of the donation.
A comment on Talk: Frans de Waal: Moral behavior in animals
A reply on Talk: John Hunter: Teaching with the World Peace Game
A comment on Talk: Diana Laufenberg: How to learn? From mistakes
A comment on Talk: Diana Laufenberg: How to learn? From mistakes
A comment on Talk: Joseph Nye on global power shifts
1) I cannot bring along using power and cooperative behavior. I cannot think of any situation that works with power used, just because using it always fears some people. Can you?
2) I think it is natural to fear a situation in which you will have to get along without what you were used to possess and that might also apply to (economic) power.
3) I liked that he really applied what he was saying: Declaring fear as a psychological enemy, he tries hard to calm listeners down, although I am not able to say whether he is convincing after all, do you think so?
A reply on Talk: Hans Rosling: The good news of the decade?
A reply on Talk: Hans Rosling: The good news of the decade?
meaning, a highly cultured person is worth more, and please substitute the "pig" by a new-born for your argument - and note one major difference: a new-born could (potentially) become even more sophisticated whereas (say) a pig cannot.
I agree, though, that there is no sense in judging some lives higher than others - but lets judge potentials, higher and lower potentials - just to be realistic.
A comment on Talk: Maz Jobrani: Did you hear the one about the Iranian-American?
A comment on Talk: Jacqueline Novogratz on escaping poverty
I think, the talk asks whether Jane is indeed poor, even though no longer falling below the $1/day earnings level) or not. Pecuniary I would still say yes and claim that the $1-a-day-rule is of no use for her - she still is not able to buy what she essentially needs as it seems, has no option to move away. So yes, she is poor. Especially as I was once told: Luxury means having an option, outside-options let's say. She does not really have such - however, and that is what is so enriching: She still is able to find her own options - within her range - changed her life to one she always wanted to live and thus herself enriched her life by truly living her dreams. So: No, she is not poor, not at all (in her heart).