SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Megan Hustad writes in the NYT that while it’s not exactly fair to say that the TED conference series and web video function like an organized church, understanding the parallel structures is useful for conversations about faith, how susceptible we humans remain to the cadences of missionary zeal, and how the TED style with its promise of progress, is as manipulative as the orthodoxies it is intended to upset. According to Hustad, a great TED talk is reminiscent of a tent revival sermon, a gathering of the curious and the hungry. "A persistent human problem is introduced, one that, as the speaker gently explains, has deeper roots and wider implications than most listeners are prepared to admit," says Hustad. "Once everyone has been confronted with this evidence of entropy, contemplated life’s fragility and the elusiveness of inner peace, a decision is called for: Will you remain complacent, or change?" TED talks routinely present problems of huge scale and scope — we imprison too many people; the rain forest is dying; look at all this garbage; we’re unhappy; we have Big Data and aren’t sure what to do with it — then wrap up tidily and tinily. Do this. Stop doing that. Buy an app that will help you do this other thing. "I never imagined that the Baptists I knew in my youth would come to seem mellow, almost slackers by comparison," concludes Hustad. "Of course they promoted Jesus as a once-and-done, plug-and-play solver of problems — another questionable approach."
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Wednesday March 18 2015, @02:09AM
When knowledge or entertainment is pushed from a single person or small group to a large number of people present physically, there tend to be only a few usable approaches. Notice here the author isn't comparing TED talks to religion, but rather to tent revival sermons which are a tool for conducting a very similar task. One should expect that the tools of rhetoric, of physically structuring the lecture space and audience placement, and the approach and organization of the lecture would be similar as a result.
What should be painfully obvious is that this is status signalling, like skyboxes at the Superbowl or box seats at a popular theater. After all, that tent revival sermon doesn't charge you $8500 per head to get in the door to see and be seen (though there might be a request for a higher donation from people in the nice seating).
Moving on, I grant that there is a religion-like aspect to a ideology system (or rather a loose assembly) associated with this sort of activity, namely, transhumanism. For example, it makes grand promises, such as, the post-scarcity society, nanotech that will fix every problem of the human condition in twenty years, and immortality via technology. But the big difference between transhumanism and actual religion is that these beliefs have a fair chance of manifesting in the real world though perhaps not on the desired schedule.
Finally, let's keep in mind who's talking. The New York Times has done this sort of thing [nytimes.com] before with blogs ("...for doing what bloggers do — expressing their opinions in provocative and often crude language."). TED is a competing means to get information, which doesn't rely on the NYT as intermediary. So of course, there's something wrong with that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 18 2015, @05:21AM
> how could the TED talks be any different?
It could have a paper with each talk, and/or a bunch of citations. Add one or more reviewed journal(s) to the site and assemble an appropriate team for each topic. Rather than reject the paper have the reviewers describe what is wrong with it, then give the author a chance to respond to that.
They already have something like this for rejected talks but that process is kinda crude.