第一篇：TED演講稿《敢于質疑》 精簡標注版 BY JIM

DARE TO DISAGREE

by Margaret HeffernanALICEANDGEORGR

In Oxford in the 1950s, there was a fantastic doctor, who was very unusual, named Alice Stewart.And Alice was unusual partly because, of course, she was a woman, which was pretty rare in the 1950s.And she was brilliant, she was one of the, at the time, the youngest Fellow to be elected to the Royal College of Physicians.She was unusual too because she continued to work after she got married, after she had kids, and even after she got divorced and was a single parent, she continued her medical work.And she was unusual because she was really interested in a new science, the emerging field of epidemiology n.流行病學；傳染病學, the study of patterns in disease.But like every scientist, she appreciated that to make her mark, what she needed to do was find a hard problem and solve it.The hard problem that Alice chose was the rising incidence of childhood cancers.Most disease is correlated with poverty, but in the case of childhood cancers, the children who were dying seemed mostly to come from affluent adj.富裕的 families.So, what, she wanted to know, could explain this anomaly n.異常?

Now, Alice had trouble getting funding for her research.In the end, she got just 1,000 pounds from the Lady Tata Memorial prize.And that meant she knew she only had one shot 一次使用 at collecting her data.Now, she had no idea what to look for.This really was a needle in a haystack sort of search當時很難得到大量數據來做研究, so she asked everything she could think of.Had the children eaten boiled sweets? Had they consumed colored drinks? Did they eat fish and chips? Did they have indoor or outdoor plumbingn.鉛工業；鉛管品制造? What time of life had they started school?

And when her carbon copied questionnaire 調查問卷 started to come back, one thing and one thing only jumped out with the statistical clarity of a kind that most scientists can only dream of.By a rate of two to one 三分之二, the children who had died had had mothers who had been X-rayed when pregnant.Now that finding flew in the face ofvt.公然違反conventional wisdom.Conventional wisdom held that everything was safe up to a point, a threshold門檻.It flew in the face of conventional wisdom, which was huge enthusiasm for the cool new technology of that age, which was the X-ray machine.And it flew in the face of doctors' idea of themselves, which was as people who helped patients, they didn't harm them.Nevertheless, Alice Stewart rushed to publish her preliminary findings in The Lancet in 1956.People got very excited, there was talk of the Nobel Prize, and Alice really was in a big hurry to try to study all the cases of childhood cancer she could find before they disappeared.In fact, she need not have hurried.It was fully 25 years before the British and medical--British

and American medical establishments醫療機構 abandoned the practice of X-raying pregnant women.（it is very difficult to persuade people and organizations to change their existed ideas.It needs time）The data was out there, it was open, it was freely available, but nobody wanted to know.A child a week was dying, but nothing changed.Openness alone can't drive change.So for 25 years Alice Stewart had a very big fight on her hands.So, how did she know that she was right? Well, she had a fantastic model for thinking.She worked with a statistician named George Kneale, and George was pretty much everything that Alice wasn't.So, Alice was very outgoing and sociable, and George was a recluse隱居者.Alice was very warm, very empathetic with her patients.George frankly preferred numbers to people.But he said this fantastic thing about their working relationship.He said, “My job is to prove Dr.Stewart wrong.” He actively sought disconfirmation失驗.Different ways of looking at her models, at her statistics, different ways of crunching壓碎 the data in order to disprove her反駁.He saw his job as creating conflict around her theories.Because it was only by not being able to prove that she was wrong, that George could give Alice the confidence she needed to know that she was right.It's a fantastic model of collaboration--thinking partners who aren't echo chambers.I wonder how many of us have, or dare to have, such collaborators.Alice and George were very good at conflict.They saw it as thinking.JOE

So how do we develop the skills that we need? Because it does take skill and practice, too.If we aren't going to be afraid of conflict, we have to see it as thinking, and then we have to get really good at it.So, recently, I worked with an executive named Joe, and Joe worked for a medical device company.And Joe was very worried about the device that he was working on.He thought that it was too complicated and he thought that its complexity created margins of error that could really hurt people.He was afraid of doing damage to the patients he was trying to help.But when he looked around his organization, nobody else seemed to be at all worried.So, he didn't really want to say anything.After all, maybe they knew something he didn't.Maybe he'd look stupid.But he kept worrying about it, and he worried about it so much that he got to the point where he thought the only thing he could do was leave a job he loved.In the end, Joe and I found a way for him to raise his concerns.And what happened then is what almost always happens in this situation.It turned out everybody had exactly the same questions and doubts.So now Joe had allies.They could think together.And yes, there was a lot of conflict and debate and argument, but that allowed everyone around the table to be creative, to solve the problem, and to change the device.Joe was what a lot of people might think of as a whistle-blower 揭發者, except that like almost all whistle-blowers, he wasn't a crank奇想 at all, he was passionately devoted to the organization and the higher purposes that that organization served.But he had been so afraid of conflict, until finally he became more afraid of the silence.And when he dared to speak, he

discovered much more inside himself and much more give in the system than he had ever imagined.And his colleagues don't think of him as a crank.They think of him as a leader.So, how do we have these conversations more easily and more often? Well, the University of Delft requires that its PhD students have to submit five statements that they're prepared to defend.It doesn't really matter what the statements are about, what matters is that the candidates are willing and able to stand up to authority挑戰權威.I think it's a fantastic system, but I think leaving it to PhD candidates is far too few people, and way too late in life.I think we need to be teaching these skills to kids and adults at every stage of their development, if we want to have thinking organizations and a thinking society.The fact is that most of the biggest catastrophes that we've witnessed rarely come from information that is secret or hidden.It comes from information that is freely available and out there, but that we are willfully blind to, because we can't handle, don't want to handle, the conflict that it provokes煽動；惹起.But when we dare to break that silence, or when we dare to see, and we create conflict, we enable ourselves and the people around us to do our very best thinking.Open information is fantastic, open networks are essential.But the truth won't set us free until we develop the skills and the habit and the talent and the moral courage to use it.Openness isn't the end.It's the beginning.

第二篇：敢于質疑高中作文1000字

寫寫幫文秘助手(www.tmdps.cn)之敢于質疑高中作文

1000字

（開頭）詩人說：“雪花是通往天堂和人間的信使，連接著天堂和人間。”我說，質疑是通向愚蠢與豁達的階梯，連接著進步與發展。

敢于質疑是向生活發表出不同的見解，是和他人意見相反時的一種溝通。我們要敢于表達出自己的見解，說出自己的心聲。

動物園里來的那位哲學教授，……青蛙正是勇敢地提出了自己的質疑，才讓動物們知道，教授并不全是對的，才讓動物們明白了真正的道理。（結尾）敢于質疑，其實是對自己的一種負責的態度，是讓我們不斷發展的動力。

吾生也有涯，看千峰排戟，萬仞屏開，何不勇敢質疑，收獲無悔人生！敢于質疑，堅持真我——1303袁圣譚

生命如歌，或高昂或低沉，正是有了質疑的精神，才嘹亮動人；生命如畫，或濃淡或素雅，正是有了質疑的精神，才美麗動人；生命如酒，或濃烈或清香，正是有了質疑的精神，才醇厚誘人。體味生命的價值，品味人生的意義，這是有了敢于質疑，堅持真我的人，才推動了社會的發展、歷史的進步。

青蛙的反擊，令教授啞口無言，是呀，即便是井底之蛙，也有自己獨特的見解，何況人類呢！第一位向上帝叫板的人

基督教認為，我們這個世界是由上帝一手創造的。在古代的歐洲，很長一段時間都是教會在控制著人們的思想。但就有這么一位先生寧愿承認自己是猴子變成的，也不愿和上帝攀親戚。為此，他還特意寫了一本叫做《物種起源》的書，教會不樂意了，開始向他施加壓力，在真理面前，他沒有退卻，堅守自己的立場。他就是達爾文，正是他的堅持，才推動了科學的發展，使人們擺脫了上帝的束縛。第一個堅持日心說的人

同樣在歐洲，也教會嚴密禁錮的中世紀，布魯諾，這位杰出的天文學家，竟然大膽宣布——地球并不是宇宙的中心，太陽才是。在當時那個時代，誰敢公然挑戰上帝的呢？連布魯諾的老師哥白尼都保持了沉默。年輕的布魯諾被當做異端活活燒死，他用自己的生命捍衛了真理，用自己的鮮血喚醒無知的世人。

縱觀歷史長河，像達爾文、布魯諾、麥哲倫這樣敢于質疑，不畏強權，堅持真我的人還有很多，正是因為他們的存在，真理和正義才得以戰勝謬誤和邪惡，社會才得以進步和發展。讓我們學習這些勇士和殉道者的精神，高舉敢于質疑的火把，照亮未來的探索之途！實踐出真知——1303姬明珠

紙上得來終覺淺，絕知此事要躬行。——陸游

古希臘有句名言：吃過葡萄的人才知道它的酸甜。只有親自去體驗、去實踐才能得出正確的判斷。動物園請來的哲學教授，只知空談大道理，紙上談兵，熟不知井底之蛙通過實踐得出的結論也是真理。這是一只勇于挑戰，發表自己獨到見解的青蛙，是一只富有探索精神的偉大的青蛙。動物如此，人類亦有這樣的偉人。實踐出真知，真知指引科技前行

天文學家哥白尼通過對行星的不斷觀察，分析計算，得出結論“太陽是宇宙的中心，地球圍繞太陽轉。”日心說的提出和以往科學家所接受的地心說相左，是像常人那樣接受地心說，還是堅持自己？是相信，還是忠于實踐？又經過數年計算，他終于肯定自己，在生命的最后一刻，他將真理公之于眾，引發了一場子讓革命。

達爾文經數年研究發表了《物種起源》，提出“物競天擇，適者生存”，他的進化論有效地抨擊了基督教的“神創論”，推進了社會的前進，解放了思想。

實踐出真知，真知創造輝煌

陶行知原名“陶知行”，取“先知而后行”之意，但在后來的生活中，他發現實踐出真知，遂取“先行而后知”之意，改名“陶行知”，這使他成為教育界的領軍人物。

澳洲服裝制造商克里斯原本是一個噴漆廠員工，但因為著迷于一種前所未有的噴灌服裝，他毅然辭去工作搞研究。很多人都認為他不可能成功，經過幾年的摸索，拜訪各大科學家，他終于成功地研制出了將衣服裝在罐中噴在身上穿的衣服。這使服裝界掀起了又一場風暴，他的名字也被世人銘記。正是實踐，促成他們的輝煌。實踐出真知，真知伴人成長

紙上得來終覺淺，絕知此事要躬行。正如孟德爾的雜交豌豆，袁隆平的高產水稻，只有通過不斷摸索實踐，才能得出真理，千萬不要想趙括那樣紙上談兵。只有時間，我們才能進步，才能更好成長。

讓我們為真知去實踐吧！我們寧愿當那“井底之蛙”去實踐，也不要想哲學教授那樣夸夸其談。我實踐，我快樂！

第三篇：ted演講稿

Brian Cox: CERN's supercollider This is the Large Hadron Collider.It's 27 kilometers in circumference.It's the biggest scientific experiment ever attempted.Over 10,000 physicists and engineers from 85 countries around the world have come together over several decades to build this machine.What we do is we accelerate protons--so, hydrogen nuclei--around 99.999999 percent the speed of light.Right? At that speed, they go around that 27 kilometers 11,000 times a second.And we collide them with another beam of protons going in the opposite direction.We collide them inside giant detectors.They're essentially digital cameras.And this is the one that I work on, ATLAS.You get some sense of the size--you can just see these EU standard-size people underneath.(Laughter)You get some sense of the size: 44 meters wide, 22 meters in diameter, 7,000 tons.And we re-create the conditions that were present less than a billionth of a second after the universe began up to 600 million times a second inside that detector--immense numbers.And if you see those metal bits there--those are huge magnets that bend electrically charged particles, so it can measure how fast they're traveling.This is a picture about a year ago.Those magnets are in there.And, again, a EU standard-size, real person, so you get some sense of the scale.And it's in there that those mini-Big Bangs will be created, sometime in the summer this year.And actually, this morning, I got an email saying that we've just finished, today, building the last piece of ATLAS.So as of today, it's finished.I'd like to say that I planned that for TED, but I didn't.So it's been completed as of today.(Applause)Yeah, it's a wonderful achievement.So, you might be asking, “Why? Why create the conditions that were present less than a billionth of a second after the universe began?” Well, particle physicists are nothing if not ambitious.And the aim of particle physics is to understand what everything's made of, and how everything sticks together.And by everything I mean, of course, me and you, the Earth, the Sun, the 100 billion suns in our galaxy and the 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe.Absolutely everything.Now you might say, “Well, OK, but why not just look at it? You know? If you want to know what I'm made of, let's look at me.” Well, we found that as you look back in time, the universe gets hotter and hotter, denser and denser, and simpler and simpler.Now, there's no real reason I'm aware of for that, but that seems to be the case.So, way back in the early times of the universe, we believe it was very simple and understandable.All this complexity, all the way to these wonderful things--human brains--are a property of an old and cold and complicated universe.Back at the start, in the first billionth of a second, we believe, or we've observed, it was very simple.It's almost like...imagine a snowflake in your hand, and you look at it, and it's an incredibly complicated, beautiful object.But as you heat it up, it'll melt into a pool of water, and you would be able to see that, actually, it was just made of H20, water.So it's in that same sense that we look back in time to understand what the universe is made of.And, as of today, it's made of these things.Just 12 particles of matter, stuck together by four forces of nature.The quarks, these pink things, are the things that make up protons and neutrons that make up the atomic nuclei in your body.The electron--the thing that goes around the atomic nucleus--held around in orbit, by the way, by the electromagnetic force that's carried by this thing, the photon.The quarks are stuck together by other things called gluons.And these guys, here, they're the weak nuclear force, probably the least familiar.But, without it, the sun wouldn't shine.And when the sun shines, you get copious quantities of these things, called neutrinos, pouring out.Actually, if you just look at your thumbnail--about a square centimeter--there are something like 60 billion neutrinos per second from the sun, passing through every square centimeter of your body.But you don't feel them, because the weak force is correctly named--very short range and very weak, so they just fly through you.And these particles have been discovered over the last century, pretty much.The first one, the electron, was discovered in 1897, and the last one, this thing called the tau neutrino, in the year 2000.Actually just--I was going to say, just up the road in Chicago.I know it's a big country, America, isn't it? Just up the road.Relative to the universe, it's just up the road.(Laughter)So, this thing was discovered in the year 2000, so it's a relatively recent picture.One of the wonderful things, actually, I find, is that we've discovered any of them, when you realize how tiny they are.You know, they're a step in size from the entire observable universe.So, 100 billion galaxies, 13.7 billion light years away--a step in size from that to Monterey, actually, is about the same as from Monterey to these things.Absolutely, exquisitely minute, and yet we've discovered pretty much the full set.So, one of my most illustrious forebears at Manchester University, Ernest Rutherford, discoverer of the atomic nucleus, once said, “All science is either physics or stamp collecting.” Now, I don't think he meant to insult the rest of science, although he was from New Zealand, so it's possible.(Laughter)But what he meant was that what we've done, really, is stamp collect there.OK, we've discovered the particles, but unless you understand the underlying reason for that pattern--you know, why it's built the way it is--really you've done stamp collecting.You haven't done science.Fortunately, we have probably one of the greatest scientific achievements of the twentieth century that underpins that pattern.It's the Newton's laws, if you want, of particle physics.It's called the standard model--beautifully simple mathematical equation.You could stick it on the front of a T-shirt, which is always the sign of elegance.This is it.(Laughter)I've been a little disingenuous, because I've expanded it out in all its gory detail.This equation, though, allows you to calculate everything--other than gravity--that happens in the universe.So, you want to know why the sky is blue, why atomic nuclei stick together--in principle, you've got a big enough computer--why DNA is the shape it is.In principle, you should be able to calculate it from that equation.But there's a problem.Can anyone see what it is? A bottle of champagne for anyone that tells me.I'll make it easier, actually, by blowing one of the lines up.Basically, each of these terms refers to some of the particles.So those Ws there refer to the Ws, and how they stick together.These carriers of the weak force, the Zs, the same.But there's an extra symbol in this equation: H.Right, H.H stands for Higgs particle.Higgs particles have not been discovered.But they're necessary: they're necessary to make that mathematics work.So all the exquisitely detailed calculations we can do with that wonderful equation wouldn't be possible without an extra bit.So it's a prediction: a prediction of a new particle.What does it do? Well, we had a long time to come up with good analogies.And back in the 1980s, when we wanted the money for the LHC from the U.K.government, Margaret Thatcher, at the time, said, “If you guys can explain, in language a politician can understand, what the hell it is that you're doing, you can have the money.I want to know what this Higgs particle does.” And we came up with this analogy, and it seemed to work.Well, what the Higgs does is, it gives mass to the fundamental particles.And the picture is that the whole universe--and that doesn't mean just space, it means me as well, and inside you--the whole universe is full of something called a Higgs field.Higgs particles, if you will.The analogy is that these people in a room are the Higgs particles.Now when a particle moves through the universe, it can interact with these Higgs particles.But imagine someone who's not very popular moves through the room.Then everyone ignores them.They can just pass through the room very quickly, essentially at the speed of light.They're massless.And imagine someone incredibly important and popular and intelligent walks into the room.They're surrounded by people, and their passage through the room is impeded.It's almost like they get heavy.They get massive.And that's exactly the way the Higgs mechanism works.The picture is that the electrons and the quarks in your body and in the universe that we see around us are heavy, in a sense, and massive, because they're surrounded by Higgs particles.They're interacting with the Higgs field.If that picture's true, then we have to discover those Higgs particles at the LHC.If it's not true--because it's quite a convoluted mechanism, although it's the simplest we've been able to think of--then whatever does the job of the Higgs particles we know have to turn up at the LHC.So, that's one of the prime reasons we built this giant machine.I'm glad you recognize Margaret Thatcher.Actually, I thought about making it more culturally relevant, but--(Laughter)anyway.So that's one thing.That's essentially a guarantee of what the LHC will find.There are many other things.You've heard many of the big problems in particle physics.One of them you heard about: dark matter, dark energy.There's another issue, which is that the forces in nature--it's quite beautiful, actually--seem, as you go back in time, they seem to change in strength.Well, they do change in strength.So, the electromagnetic force, the force that holds us together, gets stronger as you go to higher temperatures.The strong force, the strong nuclear force, which sticks nuclei together, gets weaker.And what you see is the standard model--you can calculate how these change--is the forces, the three forces, other than gravity, almost seem to come together at one point.It's almost as if there was one beautiful kind of super-force, back at the beginning of time.But they just miss.Now there's a theory called super-symmetry, which doubles the number of particles in the standard model, which, at first sight, doesn't sound like a simplification.But actually, with this theory, we find that the forces of nature do seem to unify together, back at the Big Bang--absolutely beautiful prophecy.The model wasn't built to do that, but it seems to do it.Also, those super-symmetric particles are very strong candidates for the dark matter.So a very compelling theory that's really mainstream physics.And if I was to put money on it, I would put money on--in a very unscientific way--that that these things would also crop up at the LHC.Many other things that the LHC could discover.But in the last few minutes, I just want to give you a different perspective of what I think--what particle physics really means to me--particle physics and cosmology.And that's that I think it's given us a wonderful narrative--almost a creation story, if you'd like--about the universe, from modern science over the last few decades.And I'd say that it deserves, in the spirit of Wade Davis' talk, to be at least put up there with these wonderful creation stories of the peoples of the high Andes and the frozen north.This is a creation story, I think, equally as wonderful.The story goes like this: we know that the universe began 13.7 billion years ago, in an immensely hot, dense state, much smaller than a single atom.It began to expand about a million, billion, billion, billion billionth of a second--I think I got that right--after the Big Bang.Gravity separated away from the other forces.The universe then underwent an exponential expansion called inflation.In about the first billionth of a second or so, the Higgs field kicked in, and the quarks and the gluons and the electrons that make us up got mass.The universe continued to expand and cool.After about a few minutes, there was hydrogen and helium in the universe.That's all.The universe was about 75 percent hydrogen, 25 percent helium.It still is today.It continued to expand about 300 million years.Then light began to travel through the universe.It was big enough to be transparent to light, and that's what we see in the cosmic microwave background that George Smoot described as looking at the face of God.After about 400 million years, the first stars formed, and that hydrogen, that helium, then began to cook into the heavier elements.So the elements of life--carbon, and oxygen and iron, all the elements that we need to make us up--were cooked in those first generations of stars, which then ran out of fuel, exploded, threw those elements back into the universe.They then re-collapsed into another generation of stars and planets.And on some of those planets, the oxygen, which had been created in that first generation of stars, could fuse with hydrogen to form water, liquid water on the surface.On at least one, and maybe only one of those planets, primitive life evolved, which evolved over millions of years into things that walked upright and left footprints about three and a half million years ago in the mud flats of Tanzania, and eventually left a footprint on another world.And built this civilization, this wonderful picture, that turned the darkness into light, and you can see the civilization from space.As one of my great heroes, Carl Sagan, said, these are the things--and actually, not only these, but I was looking around--these are the things, like Saturn V rockets, and Sputnik, and DNA, and literature and science--these are the things that hydrogen atoms do when given 13.7 billion years.Absolutely remarkable.And, the laws of physics.Right? So, the right laws of physics--they're beautifully balanced.If the weak force had been a little bit different, then carbon and oxygen wouldn't be stable inside the hearts of stars, and there would be none of that in the universe.And I think that's a wonderful and significant story.50 years ago, I couldn't have told that story, because we didn't know it.It makes me really feel that that civilization--which, as I say, if you believe the scientific creation story, has emerged purely as a result of the laws of physics, and a few hydrogen atoms--then I think, to me anyway, it makes me feel incredibly valuable.So that's the LHC.The LHC is certainly, when it turns on in summer, going to write the next chapter of that book.And I'm certainly looking forward with immense excitement to it being turned on.Thanks.(Applause)

第四篇：TED演講稿

ted精彩演講：墜機讓我學到的三件事 imagine a big explosion as you climb through 3,000 ft.imagine a plane full of smoke.imagine an engine going clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack.it sounds scary.想像一個大爆炸，當你在三千多英尺的高空；想像機艙內布滿黑煙，想像引擎發出喀啦、喀啦、喀啦、喀啦、喀啦的聲響，聽起來很可怕。well i had a unique seat that day.i was sitting in 1d.i was the only one who can talk to the flight attendants.so i looked at them right away, and they said, no problem.we probably hit some birds.the pilot had already turned the plane around, and we werent that far.you could see manhattan.那天我的位置很特別，我坐在1d，我是唯一可以和空服員說話的人，于是我立刻看著他們，他們說，“沒問題，我們可能撞上鳥了。” 機長已經把機頭轉向，我們離目的地很近，已經可以看到曼哈頓了。two minutes later, 3 things happened at the same time.the pilot lines up the plane with the hudson river.thats usually not the route.he turns off the engines.now imagine being in a plane with no sound.and then he says 3 words-the most unemotional 3 words ive ever heard.he says, brace for impact.兩分鐘以后，三件事情同時發生：機長把飛機對齊哈德遜河，一般的航道可不是這樣。他關上引擎。想像坐在一架沒有聲音的飛機上。然后他說了幾個字，我聽過最不帶情緒的幾個字，他說，“即將迫降，小心沖擊。” i didnt have to talk to the flight attendant anymore.i could see in her eyes, it was terror.life was over.我不用再問空服員什么了。我可以在她眼神里看到恐懼，人生結束了。now i want to share with you 3 things i learned about myself that day.現在我想和你們分享那天我所學到的三件事。i leant that it all changes in an instant.we have this bucket list, we have these things we want to do in life, and i thought about all the people i wanted to reach out to that i didnt, all the fences i wanted to mend, all the experiences i wanted to have and i never did.as i thought about that later on, i came up with a saying, which is, collect bad wines.because if the wine is ready and the person is there, im opening it.i no longer want to postpone anything in life.and that urgency, that purpose, has really changed my life.在那一瞬間內，一切都改變了。我們的人生目標清單，那些我們想做的事，所有那些我想聯絡卻沒有聯絡的人，那些我想修補的圍墻，人際關系，所有我想經歷卻沒有經歷的事。之后我回想那些事，我想到一句話，那就是，“我收藏的酒都很差。” 因為如果酒已成熟，分享對象也有，我早就把把酒打開了。我不想再把生命中的任何事延后，這種緊迫感、目標性改變了我的生命。the second thing i learnt that dayi thought about, wow, i really feel one real regret, ive lived a good life.in my own humanity and mistaked, ive tired to get better at everything i tried.but in my humanity, i also allow my ego to get in.and i regretted the time i wasted on things that did not matter with people that matter.and i thought about my relationship with my wife, my friends, with people.and after, as i reflected on that, i decided to eliminate negative energy from my life.its not perfect, but its a lot better.ive not had a fight with my wife in 2 years.it feels great.i no longer try to be right;i choose to be happy.那天我學到的第二件事是，正當我們通過喬治華盛頓大橋，那也沒過多久，我想，哇，我有一件真正后悔的事。雖然我有人性缺點，也犯了些錯，但我生活得其實不錯。我試著把每件事做得更好。但因為人性，我難免有些自我中心，我后悔竟然花了許多時間，和生命中重要的人討論那些不重要的事。我想到我和妻子、朋友及人們的關系，之后，回想這件事時，我決定除掉我人生中的負面情緒。還沒完全做到，但確實好多了。過去兩年我從未和妻子吵架，感覺很好，我不再嘗試爭論對錯，我選擇快樂。that sadness really framed in one thought, which is, i only wish for one thing.i only wish i could see my kids grow up.我所學到的第三件事是，當你腦中的始終開始倒數“15，14，13”，看到水開始涌入，心想，“拜托爆炸吧！” 我不希望這東西碎成20片，就像紀錄片中看到的那樣。當我們逐漸下沉，我突然感覺到，哇，死亡并不可怕，就像是我們一生一直在為此做準備，但很令人悲傷。我不想就這樣離開，我熱愛我的生命。這個悲傷的主要來源是，我只期待一件事，我只希望能看到孩子長大。

about a month later, i was at a performance by my daugterand please dont-but imagine, and how would you change? what would you get done that youre waiting to get done because you think youll be here forever? how would you change your relationtships and the negative energy in them? and more than anything, are you being the best parent you can? 我鼓勵今天要坐飛機的各位，想像如果你坐的飛機出了同樣的事，最好不要－但想像一下，你會如何改變？有什么是你想做卻沒做的，因為你覺得你有其它機會做它？你會如何改變你的人際關系，不再如此負面？最重要的是，你是否盡力成為一個好父母？ thank you.篇二：你不必沉迷英語 ted演講稿

我知道你們在想什么，你們覺得我迷路了，馬上就會有人走上臺溫和地把我帶回我的座位上。（掌聲）。我在迪拜總會遇上這種事。“來這里度假的嗎，親愛的？”（笑聲）“來探望孩子的嗎？這次要待多久呢？

恩，事實上，我希望能再待久一點。我在波斯灣這邊生活和教書已經超過30年了。（掌聲）這段時間里，我看到了很多變化。現在這份數據是挺嚇人的，而我今天要和你們說的是有關語言的消失和英語的全球化。我想和你們談談我的朋友，她在阿布達比教成人英語。在一個晴朗的日子里，她決定帶她的學生到花園去教他們一些大自然的詞匯。但最后卻變成是她在學習所有當地植物在阿拉伯語中是怎么說的。還有這些植物是如何被用作藥材，化妝品，烹飪，香草。這些學生是怎么得到這些知識的呢？當然是從他們的祖父母，甚至曾祖父母那里得來的。不需要我來告訴你們能夠跨代溝通是多么重要。but sadly, today, languages are dying at an unprecedented rate.a language dies every 14 days.now, at the same time, english is the undisputed global language.could there be a connection? well i dont know.but i do know that ive seen a lot of changes.when i first came out to the gulf, i came to kuwait in the days when it was still a hardship post.actually, not that long ago.that is a little bit too early.but nevertheless, i was recruited by the british council along with about 25 other teachers.and we were the first non-muslims to teach in the state schools there in kuwait.we were brought to teach english because the government wanted to modernize the country and empower the citizens through education.and of course, the u.k.benefited from some of that lovely oil wealth.但遺憾的是，今天很多語言正在以前所未有的速度消失。每14天就有一種語言消失，而與此同時，英語卻無庸置疑地成為全球性的語言。這其中有關聯嗎？我不知道。但我知道的是，我見證過許多改變。初次來到海灣地區時，我去了科威特。當時教英文仍然是個困難的工作。其實，沒有那么久啦，這有點太久以前了。總之，我和其他25位老師一起被英國文化協會聘用。我們是第一批非穆斯林的老師，在科威特的國立學校任教。我們被派到那里教英語，是因為當地政府希望國家可以現代化并透過教育提升公民的水平。當然，英國也能得到些好處，產油國可是很有錢的。okay.now this is the major change that ive seen--how teaching english has morphed from being a mutually english-speaking nation on earth.and why not? after all, the best education--according to the latest world university rankings--is to be found in the universities of the u.k.and the u.s.so everybody wants to have an english education, naturally.but if youre not a native speaker, you have to pass a test.言歸正傳，我見過最大的改變，就是英語教學的蛻變如何從一個互惠互利的行為變成今天這種大規模的國際產業。英語不再是學校課程里的外語學科，也不再只是英國的專利。英語（教學）已經成為所有英語系國家追逐的潮流。何樂而不為呢？畢竟，最好的教育來自于最好的大學，而根據最新的世界大學排名，那些名列前茅的都是英國和美國的大學。所以自然每個人都想接受英語教育，但如果你不是以英文為母語，你就要通過考試。now can it be right to reject a student on linguistic ability well, i dont think so.we english teachers reject them all the time.we put a stop sign, and we stop them in their tracks.they cant pursue their dream any longer, till they get english.now let me put it this way, if i met a dutch speaker who had the cure for cancer, would i stop him from entering my british university? i dont think so.but indeed, that is exactly what we do.we english teachers are the gatekeepers.and you have to satisfy us first that your english is good enough.now it can be dangerous to give too much power to a narrow segment of society.maybe the barrier would be too universal.但僅憑語言能力就拒絕學生這樣對嗎？譬如如果你碰到一位天才計算機科學家，但他會需要有和律師一樣的語言能力嗎？我不這么認為。但身為英語老師的我們，卻總是拒絕他們。我們處處設限，將學生擋在路上，使他們無法再追求自己的夢想，直到他們通過考試。現在容我換一個方式說，如果我遇到了一位只會說荷蘭話的人，而這個人能治愈癌癥，我會阻止他進入我的英國大學嗎？我想不會。但事實上，我們的確在做這種事。我們這些英語老師就是把關的。你必須先讓我們滿意，使我們認定你的英文夠好。但這可能是危險的。把太多的權力交由這么小的一群人把持，也許會令這種障礙太過普及。okay.but, i hear you say, what about the research? its all in english.so the books are in english, the journals are done in english, but that is a self-fulfilling.it feeds the english requirement.and so it goes on.i ask you, what happened to translation? if you think about the islamic golden age, there was lots of translation then.they translated from latin and greek into arabic, into persian, and then it was translated on into the germanic languages of europe and the romance languages.and so light shone upon the dark ages of europe.now dont get me wrong;i am not against teaching english, all you english teachers out there.i love it that we have a global language.we need one today more than ever.but i am against using it as a barrier.do we really want to end up with 600 languages and the main one being english, or chinese? we need more than that.where do we draw the line? this system equates intelligence with a knowledge of english which is quite.于是，我聽到你們問但是研究呢?研究報告都要用英文。”的確，研究論著和期刊都要用英文發表，但這只是一種理所當然的現象。有英語要求，自然就有英語供給，然后就這么循環下去。我倒想問問大家，為什么不用翻譯呢？想想伊斯蘭的黃金時代，當時翻譯盛行，人們把拉丁文和希臘文翻譯成阿拉伯文或波斯文，然后再由拉伯文或波斯文翻譯為歐洲的日耳曼語言以及羅曼語言。于是文明照亮了歐洲的黑暗時代。但不要誤會我的意思，我不是反對英語教學或是在座所有的英語老師。我很高興我們有一個全球性的語言，這在今日尤為重要。但我反對用英語設立障礙。難道我們真希望世界上只剩下600種語言，其中又以英文或中文為主流嗎？我們需要的不只如此。那么我們該如何拿捏呢？這個體制把智能和英語能力畫上等號這是相當武斷的。

and i want to remind you that the giants upon whose shoulders todays stand did not have to have english, they didnt have to pass an english test.case in point, einstein.he, by the way, was considered remedial at school because he was, in fact, dyslexic.but fortunately for the world, he did not have to pass an english test.because they didnt start until 1964 with toefl, the american test of english.now its exploded.there are lots and lots of tests of english.and millions and millions of students take these tests every year.now you might think, you and me, those fees arent bad, theyre okay, but they are prohibitive to so many millions of poor people.so immediately, were rejecting them.我想要提醒你們，扶持當代知識分子的這些“巨人肩膀不必非得具有英文能力，他們不需要通過英語考試。愛因斯坦就是典型的例子。順便說一下，他在學校還曾被認為需要課外補習，因為他其實有閱讀障礙。但對整個世界來說,很幸運的當時他不需要通過英語考試，因為他們直到1964年才開始使用托福。現在英語測驗太泛濫了，有太多太多的英語測驗，以及成千上萬的學生每年都在參加這些考試。現在你會認為，你和我都這么想，這些費用不貴，價錢滿合理的。但是對數百萬的窮人來說，這些費用高不可攀。所以，當下我們又拒絕了他們。it brings to mind a headline i saw recently: education: the great divide.now i get it, i understand why people would focus on english.they want to give their children the best chance in life.and to do that, they need a western education.because, of course, the best jobs go to people out of the western universities, that i put on earlier.its a circular thing.這使我想起最近看到的一個新聞標題：“教育：大鴻溝”現在我懂了。我了解為什么大家都重視英語，因為他們希望給孩子最好的人生機會。為了達成這目的，他們需要西方教育。畢竟，不可否認，最好的工作都留給那些西方大學畢業出來的人。就像我之前說的，這是一種循環。

okay.let me tell you a story about two scientists, two english scientists.they were doing an experiment to do with genetics and the forelimbs and the hind limbs of animals.but they couldnt get the results they wanted.they really didnt know what to do, until along came a german scientist who realized that they were using two words for forelimb and hind limb, whereas genetics does not differentiate and neither does german.so bingo, problem solved.if you cant think a thought, you are stuck.but if another language can think that thought, then, by cooperating, we can achieve and learn so much more.好，我跟你們說一個關于兩位科學家的故事：有兩位英國科學家在做一項實驗，是關于遺傳學的，以及動物的前、后肢。但他們無法得到他們想要的結果。他們真的不知道該怎么辦，直到來了一位德國的科學家。他發現在英文里前肢和后肢是不同的二個字，但在遺傳學上沒有區別。在德語也是同一個字。所以，叮！問題解決了。如果你不能想到一個念頭，你會卡在那里。但如果另一個語言能想到那念頭，然后通過合作我們可以達成目的，也學到更多。

我的女兒從科威特來到英格蘭，她在阿拉伯的學校學習科學和數學。那是所阿拉伯中學。在學校里，她得把這些知識翻譯成英文，而她在班上卻能在這些學科上拿到最好的成績。這告訴我們，當外籍學生來找我們，我們可能無法針對他們所知道的給予贊賞，因為那是來自于他們母語的知識。當一個語言消失時，我們不知道還有什么也會一并失去。this is--i dont know if you saw it on cnn recently--they gave the heroes award to a young kenyan shepherd boy who couldnt study at night in his village like all the village children,篇三：世上最好的演講：ted演講吸引人的秘密 why ted talks are better than the last speech you sat through 世上最好的演講：ted演講吸引人的秘密 think about the last time you heard someone give a speech, or any formal presentation.maybe it was so long that you were either overwhelmed with data, or you just tuned the speaker out.if powerpoint was involved, each slide was probably loaded with at least 40 words or figures, and odds are that you dont remember more than a tiny bit of what they were supposed to show.回想一下你上次聆聽某人發表演講或任何正式陳述的情形。它也許太長了，以至于你被各種數據搞得頭昏腦脹，甚或干脆不理會演講者。如果演講者使用了ppt文檔，那么每張幻燈片很可能塞入了至少40個單詞或數字，但你現在或許只記得一丁點內容。pretty uninspiring, huh? talk like ted: 9 public-speaking secrets of the worlds best mindsexamines why in prose thats as lively and appealing as, well, a ted talk.timed to coincide with the 30th anniversary in march of those now-legendary ted conferences, the book draws on current brain science to explain what wins over, and fires up, an audience--and what doesnt.author carmine gallo also studied more than 500 of the most popular ted speeches(there have been about 1,500 so far)and interviewed scores of the people who gave them.相當平淡，是吧？《像ted那樣演講：全球頂級人才九大演講秘訣》(talk like ted: 9 public-speaking secrets of the worlds best minds)一書以流暢的文筆審視了為什么ted演講如此生動，如此引人入勝。出版方有意安排在今年3月份發行此書，以慶賀如今已成為經典的ted大會成立30周年。這部著作借鑒

當代腦科學解釋了什么樣的演講能夠說服聽眾、鼓舞聽眾，什么樣的演講無法產生這種效果。

much of what he found out is surprising.consider, for instance, the fact that each ted talk is limited to 18 minutes.that might sound too short to convey much.yet ted curator chris anderson imposed the time limit, he told gallo, because its long enough to be serious and short enough to hold peoples attention...by forcing speakers who are used to going on for 45 minutes to bring it down to 18, you get them to think about what they really want to say.its also the perfect length if you want your message to go viral, anderson says.他挖出了不少令人吃驚的演講策略。例如，每場ted演講都被限制在18分鐘以內。聽起來太過短暫，似乎無法傳達足夠多訊息。然而，ted大會策辦人克里斯?安德森決議推行這項時間限制規則，因為“這個時間長度足夠莊重，同時又足夠短，能夠吸引人們的注意力。通過迫使那些習慣于滔滔不絕講上45分鐘的嘉賓把演講時間壓縮至18分鐘，你就可以讓他們認真思考他們真正想說的話，”他對加洛說。此外，安德森說，如果你希望你的訊息像病毒般擴散，這也是一個完美的時間長度。recent neuroscience shows why the time limit works so well: people listening to a presentation are storing data for retrieval in the future, and too much information leads to cognitive overload, which gives rise to elevated levels of anxiety--meaning that, if you go on and on, your audience will start to resist you.even worse, they wont recall a single point you were trying to make.最近的神經科學研究說明了為什么這項時間限制產生如此好的效果：聆聽陳述的人們往往會存儲相關數據，以備未來檢索之用，而太多的信息會導致“認知超負荷”，進而推升聽眾的焦慮度。它意味著，如果你說個沒完沒了，聽眾就會開始抗拒你。更糟糕的是，他們不會記得你努力希望傳遞的信息點，甚至可能一個都記不住。

如何把一個復雜的陳述壓縮至18分鐘左右？加洛就這個問題提供了一些小建議，其中包括他所稱的“三的法則”。具體說就是，把大量觀點高度濃縮為三大要點。ted大會上的許多演講高手就是這樣做的。他還指出，即使一篇演講無法提煉到這樣的程度，單是這番努力也一定能改善演講的效果：“僅僅通過這番提煉，你就可以大大增強陳述的創造性和影響力。” then theres powerpoint.ted represents the end of powerpoint as we know it, writes gallo.he hastens to add that theres nothing wrong with powerpoint as a tool, but that most speakers unwittingly make it work against them by cluttering up their slides with way too many words(40, on average)and numbers.另一個建議與ppt文檔有關。“ted大會象征著我們所知的ppt文檔正走向終結，”加洛寫道。他隨后又馬上補充說，作為工具的powerpoint本身并沒有什么錯，但大多數演講者為他們的幻燈片塞進了太多的單詞（平均40個）和數字，讓這種工具不經意間帶來了消極影響。the remedy for that, based on the most riveting ted talks: if you must use slides, fill them with a lot more images.once again, research backs this up, with something academics call the picture superiority effect: three days after hearing or reading a set of facts, most people will remember about 10% of the information.add a photo or a drawing, and recall jumps to 65%.最吸引人的ted演講為我們提供了一個補救策略：如果你必須使用幻燈片，務必記得要大量運用圖像資源。這種做法同樣有科學依據，它就是研究人員所稱的“圖優效應”(picture superiority effect)：聽到或讀到一組事實三天后，大多數人會記得大約10%的信息。而添加一張照片或圖片后，記憶率將躍升至65%。one study, by molecular biologist john medina at the university of washington school of medicine, found that not only could people recall more than 2,500 pictures with at least 90% accuracy several days later, but accuracy a whole year afterward was still at about 63%.華盛頓大學醫學院(university of washington school of medicine)分子生物學家約翰?梅迪納主持的研究發現，幾天后，人們能夠回想起超過2,500張圖片，準確率至少達到90%；一年后的準確率依然保持在63%左右。that result demolishes print and speech, both of which were tested on the same group of subjects, medinas study indicated, which is something worth bearing in mind for anybody hoping that his or her ideas will be remembered.梅迪納的研究表明，這個結果“完勝”印刷品和演講的記憶效果（由同一組受試者測試）。任何一位希望自己的思想被聽眾銘記在心的演講者或許都應該記住這一點。篇四：ted演講稿

我是個說書之人。在這里，我想和大家分享一些我本人的故事。一些關于所謂的“單一故事的危險性”的經歷。我成長在尼日利亞東部的一所大學校園里。我母親常說我從兩歲起就開始讀書。不過我認為“四歲起”比較接近事實。所以我從小就開始讀書，讀的是英國和美國的兒童書籍。

我也是從小就開始寫作，當我在七歲那年，開始強迫我可憐的母親閱讀我用鉛筆寫好的故事，外加上蠟筆描繪的插圖時，我所寫的故事正如我所讀的故事那般，我故事里的人物們都是白皮膚、藍眼睛的。常在雪中嬉戲，吃著蘋果。而且他們經常討論天氣，討論太陽出來時，一切都多么美好。我一直寫著這樣故事，雖然說我當時住在尼日利亞，并且從來沒有出過國。雖然說我們從來沒見過雪，雖然說我們實際上只能吃到芒果；雖然說我們從不討論天氣，因為根本沒這個必要。

我故事里的人物們也常喝姜汁啤酒，因為我所讀的那些英國書中的人物們常喝姜汁啤酒。雖然說我當時完全不知道姜汁啤酒是什么東西。時隔多年，我一直都懷揣著一個深切的渴望，想嘗嘗姜汁啤酒的味道。不過這要另當別論了。這一切所表明的，正是在一個個的故事面前，我們是何等的脆弱，何等的易受影響，尤其當我們還是孩子的時候，因為我當時讀的所有書中只有外國人物，我因而堅信：書要想被稱為書，就必須有外國人在里面，就必須是關于我無法親身體驗的事情，而這一切都在我接觸了非洲書籍之后發生了改變。當時非洲書并不多，而且他們也不像國外書籍那樣好找。不過因為！和！之類的作家，我思維中對于文學的概念，產生了質的改變。我意識到像我這樣的人---有著巧克力般的膚色和永遠無法梳成馬尾辮的卷曲頭發的女孩們，也可以出現在文學作品中。

我開始撰寫我所熟知的事物，但這并不是說我不喜愛那些美國和英國書籍，恰恰相反，那些書籍激發了我的想象力，為我開啟了新的世界。但隨之而來的后果就是，我不知道原來像我這樣的人，也是可以存在于文學作品中的，而與非洲作家的結緣，則是將我從對于書籍的單一故事中拯救了出來。

我來自一個傳統的尼日利亞中產家庭，我的父親是一名教授，我的母親是一名大學管理員。因此我們和很多其他家庭一樣，都會從附近的村莊中雇傭一些幫手來打理家事。在我八歲那一年，我們家招來了一位新的男仆。他的名字叫做fide.我父親只告訴我們說，他是來自一個非常窮苦的家庭，我母親會時不時的將山芋、大米，還有我們穿舊的衣服送到他的家里。每當我剩下晚飯的時候，我的母親就會說：吃凈你的食物！難道你不知道嗎？像fide家這樣的人可是一無所有。因此我對他們家人充滿了憐憫。

后來的一個星期六，我們去fide的村莊拜訪，他的母親向我們展示了一個精美別致的草籃----用fide的哥哥用染過色的酒椰葉編制的。我當時完全被震驚了。我從來沒有想過fide的家人居然有親手制造東西的才能。在那之前，我對fide家唯一的了解就是他們是何等的窮困，正因為如此，他們在我腦中的印象只是一個字------“窮”。他們的貧窮是我賜予他們的單一故事。

多年以后，在我離開尼日利亞前往美國讀大學的時候，我又想到了這件事。我那時19歲，我的美國室友當時完全對我感到十分驚訝了。他問我是從哪里學的講一口如此流利的英語，而當我告知她尼日利亞剛巧是以英語作為官方語言的時候，她的臉上則是寫滿了茫然。她問我是否可以給她聽聽她所謂的“部落音樂”，可想而知，當我拿出瑪麗亞凱莉的磁帶時，她是何等的失望，她斷定我不知道如何使用電爐。

我猛然意識到“在他見到我之前，她就已經對我充滿了憐憫之心。她對我這個非洲人的預設心態是一種充滿施恩與好意的憐憫之情。我那位室友的腦中有一個關于非洲的單一故事。一個充滿了災難的單一故事。在這個單一的故事中，非洲人是完全沒有可能在任何方面和她有所相似的；沒有可能接收到比憐憫更復雜的感情；沒有可能以一個平等的人類的身份與她

溝通。

我不得不強調，在我前往美國之前，我從來沒有有意識的把自己當做個非洲人。但在美國的時候，每當人們提到”非洲“時，大家都會轉向我，雖然我對納米比亞之類的地方一無所知。但我漸漸的開始接受這個新的身份，現在很多時候我都是把自己當做一個非洲人來看待。不過當人們把非洲當做一個國家來討論的時候，我還是覺得挺反感的。最近的一次例子就發生在兩天前，我從拉各斯搭乘航班，旅程原本相當愉快，直到廣播里開始介紹在”印度、非洲以及其他國家”所進行的慈善事業。

當我以一名非洲人的身份在美國讀過幾年之后，我開始理解我那位室友當時對我的反應。如果我不是在尼日利亞長大，如果我對非洲的一切認識都是來自于大眾流行的影像，我相信我眼中的非洲也同樣是充滿了美麗的地貌、美麗的動物，以及一群難以理解的人們進行著毫無意義的戰爭、死于艾滋和貧窮、無法為自己辯護，并且等待著一位慈悲的、白種的外國人的救贖，我看待非洲的方式將會和我兒時看待fide一家的方式是一樣的。

我認為關于非洲的這個單一故事從根本上來自于西方的文學。這是來自倫敦商人john locke的一段話。他在1561年的時候，曾游歷非洲西部，并且為他的航行做了翻很有趣的記錄。他先是把黑色的非洲人稱為“沒有房子的野獸”，隨后又寫道：“他們也是一群無頭腦的人，他們的嘴和眼睛都長在了他們的胸口上。”

我每次讀到這一段的時候，都不禁大笑起來。他的想象力真的是讓人敬佩。但關于他的作品極其重要的一點是它昭示著西方社會講述非洲故事的一個傳統，在這個傳統中，撒哈拉以南的非洲充滿了消極、差異以及黑暗，是偉大的詩人rudyard kipling筆下所形容的“半惡魔、半孩童”的奇異人種。

正因為如此，我開始意識到我的那位美國室友一定在她的成長過程中，看到并且聽過關于這個單一故事的不同版本，就如同之前一位曾經批判我的小說缺乏“真實的非洲感”的教授一樣。話說我倒是甘愿承認我的小說有幾處寫的不好的地方，有幾處敗筆，但我很難想象我的小說既然會缺乏“真實的非洲感”。事實上，我甚至不知道真實的非洲感到底是個什么東西。那位教授跟我說我書中的人物都和他太相近了，都是受過教育的中產人物。我的人物會開車，他們沒有受到饑餓的困擾。正因此，他們缺乏了真實的非洲感。

我在這里不得不指出，我本人也常常被單一的故事蒙蔽雙眼。幾年前，我從美國探訪墨西哥，當時美國的政治氣候比較緊張。關于移民的辯論一直在進行著。而在美國，“移民”和“墨西哥人”常常被當做同義詞來使用。關于墨西哥人的故事是源源不絕，講的都是欺詐醫療系統、偷渡邊境、在邊境被捕之類的事情。

我還記得當我到達瓜達拉哈拉的第一天，看著人們前往工作，在市集上吃著墨西哥卷、抽著煙、大笑著，我記得我剛看到這一切時是何等的驚訝，但隨后我的心中便充滿了羞恥感。我意識到我當時完全被沉浸在媒體上關于墨西哥人的報道，以致于他們在我的腦中幻化成一個單一的個體---卑賤的移民。我完全相信了關于墨西哥人的單一故事，對此我感到無比的羞愧。這就是創造單一故事的過程，將一群人一遍又一遍地呈現為一個事物，并且只是一個事物，時間久了，他們就變成了那個事物。

而說到單一的故事，就自然而然地要講到權力這個問題。每當我想到這個世界的權力結構的時候，我都會想起一個伊傅語中的單詞，叫做“nkali”,它是一個名詞，可以在大意上被翻譯成”比另一個人強大。”就如同我們的經濟和政治界一樣，我們所講的故事也是建立在它的原則上的。這些故事是怎樣被講述的、由誰來講述、何時被講述、有多少故事被講述，這一切都取決于權力。篇五：ted演講的十條黃金法則

如何登上ted演講舞臺——ted演講的十條黃金法則、導讀：如果你喜歡ted，甚至夢想，有一天自己也站在ted的舞臺上做一個演講，本文將介紹著名的ted演講十個黃金法則，請往下看吧~~ 如果你喜歡ted，觀看了ted的演講視頻，感到激動不已，甚至夢想，有一天自己也站在ted的舞臺上做一個演講，分享你的精彩創意想法和精彩故事！這太好了，這種熱情的向往，是通往ted講臺之路的最大動力。除此之外還需要了解一些演講技巧。these 10 tips are the heart of a great ted talk.1.dream big.strive to create the best talk you have ever given.reveal something never seen before.do something the audience will remember forever.share an idea that could change the world.給自己一個高目標，要把這個演講做成你最成功的一個演講。你可以向觀眾展示某些未曾公開展示的東西或做出能夠讓觀眾留下深刻印象的事情。分享一個有可能改變世界的想法。2.show us the real you.share your passions, your dreams...and also your fears.be vulnerable.speak of failure as well as success.展示一個最真實的你。分享你的激情、夢想，乃至恐懼。不要把自己當成是完美無缺的，你可以講成功的故事，也可以講失敗的故事。4.connect with peoples emotions.make us laugh!make us cry!要說得動人一點，使得觀眾聽了會發出由衷的微笑或感動到禁不住要哭泣。5.dont flaunt your ego.dont boast.it’s the surest way to switch everyone off.不要自吹自擂。那樣做的話，最容易嚇跑觀眾。

臺上不能推銷！除非事先有通知，否則不可談論你的公司或組織。更別指望在臺上展示你的產品。

要給其他演講嘉賓一定的回應，可以贊可以彈。意見之對立才會擦出思維之火火嘛。激情的參與本身的力量就是這么強大的。8.if possible, dont read your talk.notes are fine.but if the choice is between reading or rambling, then read!除非萬不得已，否則不要照著講稿閱讀。當然可以看自己寫的小紙片。但假如不看講稿你會表述得含糊不清的話，那還是看著稿子講吧。9.you must end your talk on time.doing otherwise is to steal time from the people that follow you.we won’t allow it.必須在規定的時間內說完。因為超時就意味著剝奪了其他人的時間。這是不允許的。10.rehearse your talk in front of a trusted friend...for timing, for clarity, for impact.為了保證演講準時、清晰、高質量，我們希望你提前跟朋友一起做試講。關于ted ted于1984年由理查德·溫曼和哈里·馬克思共同創辦，從1990年開始每年在美國加州的蒙特利舉辦一次，而如今，在世界的其他城市也會每半年舉辦一次。

它邀請世界上的思想領袖與實干家來分享他們最熱衷從事的事業。“ted”由“科技”、“娛樂”以及“設計”三個英文單詞首字母組成，這三個廣泛的領域共同塑造著我們的未來。事實上，這場盛會涉及的領域還在不斷擴展，展現著涉及幾乎各個領域的各種見解。參加者們稱它為 “超級大腦spa”和“四日游未來”。

大會觀眾往往是企業的ceo、科學家、創造者、慈善家等等，他們幾乎和演講嘉賓一樣優秀。比爾·克林頓、比爾·蓋茨、維基百科創始人吉米·威爾斯、dna結構的發現者詹姆斯·華森、google創辦人、英國動物學家珍妮·古道爾、美國建筑大師弗蘭克·蓋里、歌手保羅·西蒙、維珍品牌創始人理查德·布蘭森爵士、國際設計大師菲利普·斯達克以及u2樂隊主唱bono都曾經擔任過演講嘉賓。

大凡有機會來到ted大會現場作演講的均有非同尋常的經歷，他們要么是某一領域的佼佼者，要么是某一新興領域的開創人，要么是做出了某些足以給社會帶來改觀的創舉。比如人類基因組研究領域的領軍人物craig venter，“給每位孩子一百美元筆記本電腦”項目的創建人 nicholas negroponte，只身滑到北極的第一人 ben saunders，當代杰出的語言學家

steven pinker??至于像 al gore 那樣的明星就更是ted大會之常客了。每一個ted 演講的時間通常都是18分鐘以內，但是，由于演講者對于自己所從事的事業有一種深深的熱愛，他們的演講也往往最能打動聽者的心，并引起人們的思考與進一步探索。

第五篇：TED演講稿

embracing otherness.when i first heard this theme, i thought, well embracing otherness is embracing myself.and the journey to that i grew up on the coast of england in the 70s.my dad is white from cornwall, and my mom is black from zimbabwe.even the idea of us as a family was challenging to most people.but nature had its wicked way, and brown babies were born.but from about the age of five, i was aware that i didnt fit.i was the black atheist kid in the all-white catholic school run by nuns.i was an anomaly.and my self was rooting around for definition and trying to plug in.because the self likes to fit, to see itself replicated, to belong.that confirms its existence and its importance.and it is important.it has an extremely important function.without it, we literally cant interface with others.we cant hatch plans and climb that stairway of popularity, of success.but my skin color wasnt right.my hair wasnt right.my history wasnt right.my self became defined by otherness, which meant that, in that social world, i didnt really exist.and i was other before being anything else-first-grade, not much artistic talent...yet.and i m balling, im crying, like a little kid.and it made all the sense in the world to me.i realized at that point by connecting those two dots, that the only thing that matters in my life is being a great dad.above all, above all, the only goal i have in life is to be a good dad.一個月后，我參加女兒的表演，她一年級，沒什么藝術天份，就算如此。我淚流滿面，像個孩子，這讓我的世界重新有了意義。當當時我意識到，將這兩件事連接起來，其實我生命中唯一重要的事，就是成為一個好父親，比任何事都重要，比任何事都重要，我人生中唯一的目標就是做個好父親。那天我經歷了一個奇跡，我活下來了。我還得到另一個啟示，像是看見自己的未來再回來，改變自己的人生。