Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday March 17 2015, @06:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the expensive-echo-chamber dept.

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."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Wednesday March 18 2015, @11:57AM

    by Magic Oddball (3847) on Wednesday March 18 2015, @11:57AM (#159318) Journal

    None of that indicates that poor people are less intelligent — it indicates that humans perform more weakly on standardized tests when they're sick, stressed, or otherwise highly distracted, which is completely different. One is a matter of the actual individual having reduced intellectual capacity, while the other is just a universal side-effect.

    That's all assuming that there really is an overarching "intelligence" that can predict performance in endeavors outside the academic/white-collar professional realm it was originally designed to measure, which is questionable at best. (Even within the academic/professional realm, the presence of conditions like dyslexia, dyscalculia, attention-deficit disorder, etc. altering the person's pattern of abilities suggests that "IQ" isn't remotely as useful as was believed in a simpler age.)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2