Members Pierfranco Fasola

Jan 27 2012: Well, that's the myth our time. The idea that brain chemistry and advanced technologies are the key to understanding ourselves and solve our deepest human problems. I wish it were that easy.

This talk mixes pieces of ancient wisdom with the most trivial modern ideas in a really remarkable manner. Do we really need a machine to know our feelings? To tell us when we're relaxed or when we love something or someone? If we do, I think there is no hope for us. No "humanizing technology" can save us. To me this talk is a good example of the madness of our time and of how screwed up we really are. But what scares me most is when she uses the word "children". If we bring them into this kind of thinking, we're really doomed.

Jul 20 2011: That's a very beautiful talk, very true and wise. From my perspective this is a truly 21st century speech. It shows the way, in a world in which cracks have started to show, and are widening day by day.

I think, in the end, it all starts with experiencing the reality of oneness, which is more real than our constructed world. Then it becomes natural to give not that much authority to yourself. As she says, "over time and with practice I tried to live more and more from my essence, and if you can do that incredible things happen". She's right. "Simple awareness is where it begins".

May 6 2011: Wonderful footage, it brings to our attention the little things that we don't notice, and shows us how beautiful and interconnected is the world around us. And I think this is a great thing because, as he says, "we'll protect what we fall in love with". Thank you Louie, great work indeed.

Mar 27 2011: There have been a few replies to my seemingly controversial comment and I would like to clarify a couple of points. First of all, nobody denies the importance of technology. Technology has improved our standard of living in many ways and digital technologies, in particular, have provided us with amazing opportunities. No question about that.

What I am saying is that the idea we can simply "augment reality" by technology, is naive. There is equilibrium in sensibility and when one area of experience is expanded or intensified another is numbed. And what is numbed is not necessarily less important or less valuable. There is a raft of research on that, so no need to articulate it here. For those interested, the latest book by Nicholas Carr provides a good starting point.

But the point I was also trying to make is that not all technological change is progress. Some is not, and this happens not only because sometimes the drawbacks outweigh the benefits, but also because technological change nowadays is driven more by commercial reasons rather than actual needs and real usefulness. And as technology has an enormous impact on society and on our lives, embracing it uncritically, blissfully unaware of its effects, is unwise. As Carl Sagan once said "We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology".

However, with regard to new technologies, I find it interesting that when a less than overly enthusiastic viewpoint is expressed fierce opposition is encountered. To me, when this happens, it means that technology is becoming an ideology. And that's not a step forward. When everybody is thinking alike nobody is really thinking.

Mar 23 2011: That's a nice exercise. It made me think for a while. Here's my list:

1. Not everything that is true to a human being can be said, shown or proven.
2. When you see things in their interconnectedness, beauty arises.
3. Often we get ill because of unexpressed potentialities.
4. On personal matters, while your head can only suppose, your heart knows.
5. Great sorrows open the door to beauty of some kind.
6. The real problem of modern man is how to live or become sane within the asylum.
7. A good way to get the best out of others is to give the best of yourself.
8. Progress without spirit is a form of barbarism.
9. What others think of you is their business, not yours.
10. You need to find who you are. If you fail this, it doesn't matter what else you find.

Jan 11 2011: I guess I'm not in the cheering crowd on this topic but my point is this. If there is something that we have learnt about technology, especially from McLuhan onward, is that technological change is not additive, it's ecological: a new medium does not add something, it changes everything. The culture always pays a price for technology, and we do as well. But we don't realize it because we think the price we pay is just the purchasing cost. We focus only on what technology can do for us, not on what it will undo. The result is that we don't even know what we're loosing. To me, all technological change is a trade-off and the more I look into it the more it seems a kind of "Faustian bargain". Not to mention that the consequences of these changes are vast, often unpredictable and largely irreversible. I'm not against innovation, not at all, but I think we'd better pay attention to what technology undoes in our lives, if we want to make sure we are not losing what we value most.

Nov 18 2010: Wow, what a beautiful school! And what a beautiful building. I think we don't reflect enough on the importance of architecture, and the environment we create, for our mental well-being. It seems to me this talk is not just about sustainability, but also about creating a place for living and learning both functional and beautiful. A place where the holistic vision is put into practice through a sustainable approach to life. Thank you very much John, wonderful talk.

Nov 12 2010: Interesting talk, although too brief for such an interesting topic. It reminds me of the Pareto principle: 80 percent of the effects come from 20 percent of the causes. In other words, most of the result comes from a small part of the effort. I found this to be true with complex problems but also with ordinary problems in real life. In my experience the time you spend finding out what that 20 percent is, meaning what matter most, is always time well spent.

Oct 5 2010: Excellent talk. He explained in plain English what the real problem is, with our economy and our way of living. This debt/credit expansion is insanity, but it's also a sad story about us, as he says, "about people being persuaded to spend money we don't have on things we don't need to create impressions that won't last on people we don't care about".
But the important point he makes, to me, is this: it all revolves around a certain idea of what we are as human beings and what a meaningful life is. It revolves around the question: "Who are we?" And I think we've answered that question way too poorly. As a result we've created economies that systematically privilege and encourage one narrow aspect of the human soul.

He's right when he says that we need "a more credible, more robust and more realistic vision of what it means to be human". We're still a long way from that and I suspect we'll have to learn the lesson the hard way first.

Jun 7 2010: "One thing the world needs is a better way of conducting our political debates. We need to rediscover the lost art of democratic argument". What a great statement. I would subscribe to that anytime. Michael Sandel is a brilliant lecturer and a wonderful teacher. He's really a pioneer of open education and the idea to extend this kind of conversations worldwide, to explore cultural differences and promote a richer kind of democratic debate, is an awesome project. I hope he finds the means to realize it.

Other great lectures from Michael Sandel: www.justiceharvard.org

May 24 2010: Wonderful talk. What I find interesting here is that he brings the concept of talent back to its proper meaning: it's not about special people and special disciplines, but in the end it's about discovering what you're made of, your own specificity, and finding the means to express it in the world. So, he's right in taking as an example a fireman and not someone in a so-called "creative profession". Because it's about everybody.
But it's also about a different conception of human growth, rooted in the realization that "human flourishing is not a mechanical process but an organic process". It's a natural process, often constrained by society, which has other plans for you. But it's essential for the community as it is for the individual itself. Because in the end the real message, I think, is this: not knowing what your talents are means not knowing what you're really capable of and, in a sense, who you really are.

May 17 2010: Beautiful lesson, he couldn't have said it more clearly: "If we take man as he is we'll make him worse. But if we take man as he should be we make him capable of becoming what he can be". And he's right. There is indeed light in the darkness of the soul, the ancients knew this very well. If you want to get to the truest nature of a human being you have to aim very high. In these matters being an idealist is the only way to be a realist.

Apr 2 2010: Wow, what a talk. Very entertaining but also interesting and wise. There are many passages that deserve to be pointed out but one in particular: "Adults often underestimate kid's ability. We love challenges but when expectations are low, trust me, we will sink to them". True, very true. Thank you Adora for reminding us of this.

Mar 4 2010: An interesting talk about curiosity and the power of imagination. But what I like most is what he has learned about leadership, doing the diving expeditions between movies. Projects, as he says, that you know they won't make much money. No fame, no glory. So why are you doing it: "You are doing it for the task itself, for the challenge […] and for that strange bond that happens when a small group of people form a team. And in that bond you realize that the most important thing is the respect that you have for them and they have for you". I think this is very true. To me, this is the essential. It's when the work you do becomes the reward itself. Leadership is also about creating the conditions for that to happen.

Feb 25 2010: What a brisk talk! Clear, direct and right on target. I enjoyed it very much.
She made many great points. For example, the importance of having good teachers, that can enthuse the children: "It doesn't matter if what they teach them is old, because what you're doing is lighting the spark. You get that kid turned on and then he'll learn all the new stuff". Great point.
But there is one in particular that really stood out: we need all kind of minds, not only those that fit the prevailing model of what is "normal". I think we really do. Now more than ever. I find a lot of similarities with what Ken Robinson says about creativity and what is unique in a person. This is where the greatness come from and where the richness of a community lies. She is a living proof of that.

Many thanks to Dr. Grandin for this very interesting talk, but also to TED for bringing on stage these amazing speakers. Perfectly appropriate for the 2010 theme "What the World Needs Now".

Feb 1 2010: Wonderful talk and brilliant author. There are so many great "ideas worth spreading" in this talk that I really hope we can find a way to make it available in other languages as well, even if it's not a TED talk. In our Western culture we're so focused on personal success and outer achievements that we forget that failure not only brings its own gifts but also the most precious ones, for all that is painfully won. It's a great lesson about the value of imagination and what really matters.

Jan 19 2010: Arnon, very good point, I agree on all fronts. I think the mirror neuron system may well provide some insights in the social cognition field, and might have some interesting parallels even with unrelated fields (think of the puzzling quantum entanglement phenomenon, for example). Not to mention the implications in philosophy. These "Gandhi neurons" actually remind me of Schopenhauer, when he asked himself how is it possible that suffering that is neither our own nor of our concern should immediately affect us as though it were our own? His answer is that our own true inner being actually exists in every living creature, and this realization is the basis of compassion. So, round and round, we're back to Karen Armstrong and the Golden Rule.

Jan 8 2010: What I find interesting about this talk is the idea to reverse the approach we have towards computer interfaces: instead of finding a way for us to adapt to the digital world we look for a way to adapt the digital world to us. To some extent, this is the opposite of what has been done with Virtual Reality. I'm not a fan of virtual worlds, and it seems to me that this approach somehow restates the importance of the physical reality, without giving up the benefits of digital technologies. We are moving very fast towards a world of increasing virtualization (including of ourselves) and the need for us to keep in touch with the physical reality, from my perspective, could not be overstated. And Pranav did a great work, not just expanding the way we think about interfaces, but also creating a piece of technology to make this idea real and available to everybody.

Nov 1 2009: She is a great storyteller. I enjoyed both parts of her talk, but in particular the first one. I find the Lincoln story inspiring: it shows, once more, that moral fiber and determination alone can take you very far. He started from humble origins, with little or no schooling. His childhood was crippled by losses. No powerful friends or money. And yet, he eventually became one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history, and one of the most respected political figures of all time, known for refusing to compromise on important issues and for expressing his ideas in amazing speeches that had a profound impact at home and abroad.
It's a compelling story and an encouraging one as well. As Thoreau said, "I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of man to elevate his life by a conscious endeavor".

Oct 30 2009: I find it interesting when she says, "the playful search for beauty was called the first activity of Man". I think Joseph Campbell once said something along these lines. There is a point in the history of humanity, around 500,000 years ago - I think - in which you start finding stone tools that are not just useful but also very well crafted. Tools with excellent symmetry, shape and proportion. It's what Robinson Jeffers called the "divinely superfluous beauty". The British Museum in London has some of these stones on display, and there you see very clearly that whoever cut those stones was making not just a tool but also a very nice object. Campbell says that no animal would do things like that. So, may be, this is what defines us as human beings: the search for beauty, in objects, in words and in what we do. I think this is why we care about design. Usefulness alone is not enough.