TED Community » Stephen Collins

More About Me

I'm passionate about

Let's change education to focus on context, not facts. In a connected world, facts are trivial to discover; it's placing them in a nuanced understanding of the globe that's the key.

An idea worth spreading

I want organisations of all sizes to switch their focus to valuing knowledge work rather than assuming it just is. Business needs to provide employees interesting and meaningful work, a workplace where staff can enjoy what they do, adopt a culture and philosophy that treats people as humans and work as having meaning and most importantly provide managers who will lead staff on a journey to something better rather than just put ducks in a row.

Talk to me about

Design thinking
Going paleo
Working at a think tank

People don't know that I'm good at

Ballroom dancing (but I'm out of practice) and cooking.

My TED Story

Ideas are the heart of everything human. Making them bear fruit and become things is what excites me. My involvement in TED as an attendee and TEDx organiser lets me be a part of that.

Comments

• TEDCred score: +4759.50 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• +1

  A comment on Talk: Stewart Brand: The dawn of de-extinction. Are you ready?

  Mar 21 2013: There's a very long way to go on Brand's aims here, and, at least in some cases, I hope he and his collaborators are successful. There are many species humans are directly responsible for destroying that might otherwise still hold a place in our ecosystems.
  
  However, I can't help but think a de-extinction biologist with a sense of grandeur might create a Jurassic Park of their own somewhere.
• +2

  A comment on Talk: Bono: The good news on poverty (Yes, there's good news)

  Mar 21 2013: Bono has grand aims, I hope he can use the power he has to achieve them, or at least give it, what we'd call in Australia, "a red-hot go".
  
  Being present at TED 2013 for this talk was quite surprising; Bono is rather more self-deprecating than you expect. That someone who's achieved what he has across disciplines is prepared to make fun of himself while talking about something so important bodes well for his plans and what they might achieve.

• A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 21 2013: Lewis, the TED attendee and TEDx organiser community is pretty broad. Not everyone within it is happy with this decision, and I certainly believe it could have been handled MUCH better. My hope is that TED learn from it.
  
  There's a number of private forums where TED attendees and TEDx organisers speak directly to TED (though no less directly than here, just on a smaller scale). Let me assure you, there's plenty of upset and a diversity of views in those as well.

• A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 20 2013: Gail, I don't feel at all conflicted. I'm certainly aware others disagree with me, you included, and that neither bothers me, nor do I feel any compulsion to try to change your mind.
  
  Others here share both your view and mine. As it should be.
  
  Yes, I am (at least in part) defending TED's stance. I think they're within their rights to do what they've done. Could they have handled this situation better? Very much so.
• +1

  A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 20 2013: I'm not sure what power I have here... nor what power you (or others) don't have. I certainly have little influence with TED; I've attended a few times, and I run a small TEDx event far away over here in Australia.
  
  I fully understand the nuances of censorship and what they mean; I'm a former board member of the Australian equivalent of the EFF where one of my campaigning platforms was internet censorship and limiting government control. I've been in the trenches, so to speak.
  
  I've thought long and hard about this. My positions aren't reached without consideration.

• A comment on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 20 2013: So, I'm not "TED people"; I'm not employed by them in any way, nor do I generate income from them. I am a volunteer organiser for a TEDx event 10,000 miles (I checked) from TED HQ.
  
  As I noted in my answer to your other comment, we disagree on what makes for censorship. In the West, we're a long way from being actually censored on very much at all.

• A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 20 2013: We certainly disagree on what censorship is. Here in the West, it's pretty hard to argue we suffer censorship in any true sense of the word.
  
  I'm also going to disagree with you that TED is both anti-science and militantly atheist. I think neither is the case. And I'm okay with us disagreeing.

• A reply on Conversation: The debate about Graham Hancock's talk

  Mar 19 2013: Bart, I'm well across the several processes that have taken place. TEDx organisers as a group (and not all of them agree with TED's actions) have been briefed several times as TED has taken each step.
  
  I certainly take a different view as to what, in aggregate or in specificity, amounts to censorship. I don't see it here, but I understand and accept others do (though I disagree with them).
  
  As to the matter of pseudoscience, TED is using an understood and accepted definition. Again, some (like me) accept that the talks in question fall within that definition, and others will not. I don't have a problem with that.

• A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 19 2013: John, I think you'll find the organiser community is pretty diverse. Many of us, me included, don't always agree with the mother ship, and we often make it known (there's an active community of organisers in contact with TED and it's there where these things get thrashed out).
  
  In this case, I agree with their reasoning behind moving the talks (pseudoscience, etc.) though I'd argue (and imagine they'd admit) their handling of it will be no small learning experience for them.
• +2

  A reply on Conversation: The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk

  Mar 19 2013: Well said, Sebastian. A solution agreeable to all, or an agreement to disagree (both are acceptable outcomes to my mind) is what's needed, not an ongoing semantic argument on what the definition of censorship is.