TED Community » Safoora Yousefi

More About Me

An idea worth spreading

Global Communication can lead to Global Ethics and Global Peace.

Talk to me about

Environment, Information Technology, Linguistics, Algorithm Design, Ethics, Globalization, Social Network Analysis

People don't know that I'm good at

Painting, Success coaching

Comments

• TEDCred score: +26.40 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A comment on Conversation: Should there be such a thing as global ethics?

  Jul 12 2011: So what you two want to conclude is that we cannot lay down the law based on a global ethical system, right?

• A reply on Conversation: Should there be such a thing as global ethics?

  Jun 16 2011: Well, you know Salim, dealing with a basic question like this, it's not important how many examples you put forward to prove a theory. You must prove it theoretically once and forever.
  So, the fact that in many or even all countries lying is considered bad doesn't prove that lying is basically bad independent of circumstances, because you can't guarantee that there "will" never be such circumstances that lying is appropriate under them.
  I hope I've made myself clear.

• A reply on Conversation: Where did OUR marvelous processing unit come from? What does science have to say about its origin?

  Jun 15 2011: What do you know about evolution and how does it convince you?

• A comment on Conversation: Which TED or TEDx talk moved you to take action?

  Jun 12 2011: Al Gore; he made me believe I could take my environmental concerns seriously.
  Gordon Brown; he gave me the idea of using my knowledge of networks to bring about global peace.

• A comment on Conversation: What motivates you?

  Jun 10 2011: Reminding myself that nearly ALL the people are in some sort of pain, and the world needs a CHANGE.

• A comment on Conversation: What would the world be like without borders?

  Jun 10 2011: I think borders are there to make governing possible.
  I know they are now more that what they were intended to be, they declare whether people must be killed or not! This is ridiculous, that today governments invade other countries with military equipment and kill the inhabitants for the simple reason that they are living within a specific border.
  I think borders are doing more harm than good nowadays, but I have no idea how to substitute them.

• A comment on Talk: Shirin Neshat: Art in exile

  Jun 10 2011: I must add, that I don't think such a talk is appropriate for TED. It's mainly about politics. not art. Allowing such a talk in TED as an "Idea Worth Spreading" is like allowing Al Gore to present his political views in TED and adding briefly that he's doing things for the environment.
  I believe so because the problem of Iran is not just the problem of "people and the government" but it's the problem of "a group of people and another".
• +1

  A comment on Talk: Shirin Neshat: Art in exile

  Jun 10 2011: I totally agree with her, Iran is now ruled by a powerful corrupt government which has nothing to do with democracy. Living in Iran, I 'm really suffering from absence of a coherent law and the commitment of government to it.
  But I also think that Ms. Neshat is depicting only part of the truth. The Islamic Republic is what people really wanted 30 years ago, and their sacrificed their lives for it. But in these 30 years the revolution has gone straightly into corruption because of incapability of the people in power and the censorship of media. Now, the Islamic revolution is not what we can tolerate a for a second!
  But as Ms. Neshat also ignored, there are still many educated/uneducated people here who fight in favor of the Islamic revolution. And because of their presence, the big change that Saman mentioned is delayed. These people exist and ignoring them in your talk doesn't change anything:( I wish Ms. Neshat's talk was a bit closer to truth. That way it would have been a better help.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Shirin Neshat: Art in exile

  Jun 10 2011: I totally agree with her, Iran is now ruled by a powerful corrupt government which has nothing to do with democracy. Living in Iran, I 'm really suffering from absence of a coherent law and it's commitment of government to it.
  But I also think that Ms. Neshat is depicting only part of the truth. The Islamic Republic is what people really wanted 30 years ago, and their sacrificed their lives for it. But in these 30 years the revolution has gone straightly into corruption because of incapability of the people in power and the censorship of media. Now, the Islamic revolution is not what we can tolerate a for a second!
  But as Ms. Neshat also ignored, there are still many educated/uneducated people here who fight in favor of the Islamic revolution. And because of their presence, the big change that Saman mentioned is delayed. These people exist and ignoring them in your talk doesn't change anything:( I wish Ms. Neshat's talk was a bit closer to truth. That way it would have been a better help.
• +1

  A comment on Conversation: Why dont we enjoy the movie as much as the book ?

  Apr 25 2011: Hi Kapil;
  I think of this question very often (including whenever a new part of Harry Potter is released!). I don't think that's a general rule, but there are really rare exceptions. For example The Lord of the Rings -I enjoyed the movie more than the book!
  
  I think the main reason for this is that when you are writing a book, to make it interesting you consider different parameters than you do when making a movie.
  For example, I recently watched "Veronika decides to die" based on Paulo Coelho's book. That sure was a nightmare! they really had it changed. There was this schizophrenic patient who never talked during the book and this fact made his relation with Veronika special, but in the movie, I couldn't believe him standing in the middle of the hospital shouting "Veronikaaaa!! Let me go..." (or something like that).
  Later on I thought to myself that maybe there was no better way to make a movie out of such a spiritual context.
  Maybe that's the answer. That some contexts can't be communicated via visual media, and trying to push them into a movie makes the movie weird and unpopular. That really depends on what most of the movie makers regard as movie-evaluating-criteria.