Jonathan Haidt: How common threats can make common (political) ground
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 01. 2013
- If an asteroid were headed for Earth, we'd all band together and figure out how to stop it, just like in the movies, right? And yet, when faced with major, data-supported, end-of-the-world problems in real life, too often we retreat into partisan shouting and stalemate. Jonathan Haidt shows us a few of the very real asteroids headed our way -- some pet causes of the left wing, some of the right -- and suggests how both wings could work together productively to benefit humanity as a whole.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/translate
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector
Jonathan Haidt is a beacon of light in these dark times.
For me, you hit the mark right on target. Thanks. I've always felt that it's nice to know that I'm not alone.
He doesn't blame non-married couples for rising inequality, he merely points out that an instable home environment is a major contributing factor.
He certainly did not say that "only" married couples kids will make good money.
He is a liberal atheist.
Ahh Jonathan Haidt. One of my favorite social scientists.
7 years later his message is becoming sooo much more important.
Left, Right, Center: Please watch and become a member of the Asteroids Club! Time is running out but we can save ourselves from ourselves.
You're comment is educated and perfectly articulated. You've given me a lot to think about, sir.
I saw the video and felt hope, I saw the comments and felt despair.
We may not be able to change anyone's minds here, but we can change our own actions.
Stop polarizing, start uniting.
What! This is CRIMINALLY under viewed. Less than a 100k views are you kidding me????
he kinda glossed over a big problem: the religious divide. It's simple to say, "Let's work together on strengthening families", but when one side is willing to accept exactly one family dynamic as legitimate while condemning the rest who don't fit the mold for whatever reason, then the conversation breaks down immediately. The right seems weighed down with racist, sexist, and homophobic people choking out all the reasonable republicans and it's become impossible to have a constructive debate.
So good to see Jonathan Haidt talking about this important stuff rather than the “college safe spaces, shout downs & cancel culture” stuff that seems to be the main thing guys like him focus on these days. 2013 seems like a much more sane time!
He brings this bipartisan philosophy into his work on the university today. It’s the same framework, just a different topic.
In a nutshell, we all need to unite and work together
I was wondering the same issue, It really bugged me he just completely forgets about that considering the military industrial complex makes up a large portion of US Debt
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
I'd rather be called a wise man than a child of any imaginary being.
Meh, I still like peacemakers, God or not.
David Battle I've found that peace is often made at the barrel of a gun.
Are you a paid troll, or do you just do it on a volunteer basis?
@@tejasgreen1717 the meaning of his sentence is: "i like peacemakers". it doesnt matter if you believe in a god or not, nobody cares
I'm glad people like you exist.
You are right, it is a big issue in the US when it comes to how media, the population and politics feed of each other. That said I think changes to the political system could lessen the need for the sensationalism and therefore moving back towards a more down to earth media.
That was such a great speech.
Sometimes things are just right or wrong. So there is no room for compromise.
I agree with you completely. He didn't gloss over it though, more that he didn't touch on the subject.
But this again is because people look for common ground rather than common threats, so this too can be fixed if both sides accept the common threats. Because both sides has a point, one just need to see what will happen if you ignore them.
Hi John,
Whatever counter-arguments you may have, now's the time to make them; a *video* response would be even more efficacious at getting your point(s) across.
Always bear in mind though, when it comes to *naïvety*, Matt 7:3 speaks volumes.
Καληνύχτα και καλή τύχη.
(& of course *Ευτυχισμένο το Νέο Έτος!*)
Percy.
^_^
Hahhahaha, the applause at the beginning... Subtle.
I like the urgency that Jonathan has but placing the end of the Planet w/ global warning at the same level than the other issues are very confusing. They really have different proportions and consequences.
"This might not be as scary as an asteroid, but look at this graph!"
On reflection, should that have been "今日は ミットサッケイ さん"?
Please advise.
:)
You can tell that this guy is really smart because he's dismissing the entire argument with a brutally concise statement. In a mere two words he identifies the video's weakness; errant conclusions derived from a simplisitic model of reality. This astute observation is testimony to the enormous sophistication of this man's knowledge and intellect. Never mind that it's a 20min video, not a f**king book or even a documentary, which already stretches most of its target audiences' attention span.
Most of these problems can be tackled from an EI (emotional and social intelligence) point of view. First there has to be awareness that a problem exists and a social conscience needs to be raised. The thing is that so far there is not enough momentum for it to reach a sufficient lasting impact whether any change occurs. Its the learning curve applied.
Anybody else notice that this title describes the basic premise of Gundam 00.
great talk, lets get it together people, bringing politicians together is more important than any of these other "asteroids" because it's the only solution that includes all other solutions!
I love Jonathan haidt...
How about we make our circle of "magnetic togetherness" humanity instead of arbitrary religions and rhetorical politics? That is the binding morality that we need that will not blind us from ourselves.
What are you willing to do to change that?
You make some great points. I will concede that Britain is just as greedy as the US. But France, for example, was a very vocal in expressing their opposition of the Iraq war. Almost all western countries did not support the US invasion of Vietnam. What exactly is France doing in West Africa? Algeria was granted independence from France 50 years ago. In any case, international companies often exploit foreign labor, but not without the permission of those countries' governments.
good point
I'd like to know if a lot of the divorce/non-marital problems are associated with the mindset that you have to be in the upper class to be happy in this country. I wouldn't doubt it. But I wouldn't blame lower class individuals for striving for greater opportunities in a higher class, and providing more stable environment for kids to grow up in. Though, the fact that you have more opportunities in a higher class is an innate problem in this country that creates the wealth complex of success.
Japan and Germany were not allowed to have a military for a while after the 2nd World War.
So... why could it not be possible in the long run?
1: LAWS of Thermodynamics only apply to closed systems
2: Why?
3. I assume you mean the expansion of space(correct me if I`m wrong): Special Relativity only applies to objects/particles with mass. Space is has no mass.
4. What do you mean?
5. no comment
6. no comment.
@ 10:55 watch the movie The Distinguished Gentleman with Eddie Murphy
I can tell that this guy is really smart, because you said he's really smart and I trust your judgement : ) Happy TwentyThirteen !
Except that global temps are not rising.
what about special interest lobby groups in Federal politics? Corruption?
3:24 assumes the fiscal cliff happened. The lowball path in that study actually has us on a surplus by 2040, with the public holding only 10% of the dept by 2050.
When he was talking about how we got to building cities from being hunter gatherers, I wanted him to say, "The explanation is.. aliens."
I see Haidt as a rebellious liberal who sympathize with conservatives. However, there is no way he thinks the left and right position are equal in terms of evidentiary support. He simply ask us to understand the other side psychologically, and appriecate the fact that the other side may not be so different from us in terms of intention and motivation. It is the only way to cooperation.
Check out this interview, I believe it will be worth your time /watch?v=jHc-yMcfAY4&feature=share
I think if we really want to reduce polarization in congress, then (in addition to John's other suggestions) we get rid of our first past the post voting system and replace it with something that would promote independent parties by removing the spoiler effect. People tend to vote strategically, rather than based on their views and conscience, and that naturally devolves towards a dichotomy wherein it's more economical to simply mudsling and debase your opponent than it is develop real solutions
great talk but, Dude - seriously - don't ever cite Bono glad-handing the powerful as an example of progress.
Wow did that guy say most people going to congress were "good hardworking people" without laughing?
dat clap change
We need doctor Manhattan!
It is probably more circular than that. Your points are valid, but the politicians drive the media, and the media in turn drive the politicians.
But I agree that media is a big part of the problem, when news becomes money the facts fall to sensationalism. (Or over-blowing of what little facts we have)
"The shooting could have been avoided if we ONLY had done this or that". Which is probably not true, as there are many factors to consider in any case, but it is easier to look at it in one color.
....lifelong problems of feeling less self-confident, never sure if one is worthy of respect, always dependant on the good opinion of others, always a bit afraid of perceived "authority".
So yes, the problem lies with "the people", so since the people are a result of how they're being treated when they are children, the most important thing is to raise them in a non-aggresive, respecting way, so they grow up to be assertive and peaceful people who don't use violence to solve social problems
It seems a stretch to assume that "non-marital births" are caused by two people having sex who are not married. Other possible causes: a) inadequate birth control, b) religious beliefs, c) insufficient income to afford marriage and cohabitation, d) rape or unwise sexual partner selection combined with inadequate birth control.
Rising non-marital births is an economic problem: if society could easily absorb this cost, we wouldn't be talking about it.
Corruption and money in politics have to be fixed first. Otherwise you still have corporate interests controlling both sides.
a fraction??
Hmm in 2011 the usa spent 41% of all the money the world spend on military, surely that's can't be a fraction of the budget, no matter how efficient or big the economy.
You shouldn't present debt and inequality as separate problems. They grew in lockstep, and they are mechanistically the same thing. Debt is included as wealth. If I own government bonds, then it is counted in my wealth, and the interest is counted as my income. The volume of debt increase matches the wealth increase almost exactly. Contrary to popular opinion, the debt isn't held by China. It is held by our own capital class.
Same problem.
Watchmen?
今日は ミズカィ-さん,
If I understand Wilhelm Reich correctly, " In its pure form, fascism is the sum total of all irrational reactions... &c. &c.", then fascism crops up pretty much anywhere where there's a economically deprived under class looking for a leader OR someone to blame, regardless of the prevailing religion.
ご幸運を祈ります!
Always,
Percy.
:)
Oh, sorry, my bad. I misunderstood because your first comment was grossly oversimplified.
You dont need all those languages. Just move to New Zealand. ;)
I agree that it's important for a statement to betrue, but my critique is that its such a vague thing you say, that it doesn't really mean anything. (And that's true too)
And if the people are the problem, that includes politicians too anyway ;)
I appreciate the fact that you're not doing nothing and try to tackle the problems of our time, but a false diagnosis is worse than doing nothing.
as for the problem, here's a short rundown: The justification of the use of violence against other....
stop polarizing means stop freedom of speech...
Ingroup vs outgroup
Quick, everyone, make up a completely false quote from the video in mockery of something in the first two minutes!
Seriously, expand your attention-span and realize that it's just a reference to another speech. His argument at that point has already been established to have two more parts to it, beyond the talk he already started to discuss. Deciding to simply be impatient and not fully hear someone out is where 99% of all political problems in the U.S. come from.
like frogs as the water temp is slowly risen...we don't even notice...
Wow... totally ignore massive military spending, unfunded wars, construction of tens of thousands of nuclear bombs, spending twice as much as others just to achieve similar levels of health care. But mostly, the military spending.
good talk, but it's already too late...
Make lobbying illegal.
Oh, wait, nobody up top would have any fun, then.
Carry on.
What about common threats that one side refuses to believe exists? (Climate change)
Exactly! Get politics out of money!
I'M GETTING MY TEDX TICKET FOR HOLYHEAD TODAY! YEYYYAAAAAAH MOTHERFUCKEEEEERS!!!!!
WE are a republic, not a democracy.
"If you don't agree with me, you are a bigot"
Your argument was alright until the last sentence.
"Politics was good a hundred years ago. Today, politicians have no ability to solve any problems because they are not students of behavior. They are not students of agriculture, oceanography - they know nothing about the factors that operate the world."
--Jacque Fresco
We need a Resource Based Economy with machines helping arrive at decisions that will create abundance for everyone.
his statistics and charts seem to indicate otherwise.
Atheism has a kind of universality to it; there are so many different reasons atheists may have for being atheists.
Which is why as an atheist I hate having to apologize for dumb statements like this. Personal religious beliefs are NOT a bad thing. The differences between us are actually very superficial when we're not arguing, but you're not winning them over. Fundamentalism is bad, though, because that's when adherents actively oppose scientific and social progress.
How can you just assume that non-marital relationships are unstable? There are people who live together, have kids, and a stable relationship without getting married... You need to take that into account. His graphs seem pseudoscientific and oversimplified.
It is striking how few views this talk has. 64K in 8 years and 8 months. Zero lessons learned in 2021
Religion is not a problem. The problem is dogma. It does not matter if that's religious fundamentalism or the rigid "communism" as seen in the USSR.
One Southpark episode put it very nicely: "let's get rid of all the -isms"!
The Venus Project
just saying..
Democracy means rule by the people. In a democratic way. By vote. That does apply to the USA. Besides, one does not exclude the other, France is another democratic republic.
Did the national debt turn downward during the Obama administration?
after the world war 2, their is iraq war, there is Afghanistan war, there is iran war, why don't u mention it???
History that you are a part of, and history that has the capability of destroying your future. But go ahead and say it's boring, just like school, who needs it?
+1
Sothern law poverty centre lol..ok
military spending in the US for 2012 is being estimated at between 1.030 trillion dollars and 1.416 trillion dollars, i don't know if this includes the 70 billion obama pledged to israel just before the end of last year...the point is, we could spend half as much, probably even less, and feed, clothe, educate, provide shelter, and provide health care for every human on the planet...this guy forgets that the studies he references are by establishment groups...
Oh my God these comments. The asteroid has already made impact…
Most Western nations.
alright got it to the point until he blames non married couples for rising inequality
i mean just wtf??
stating that only married couples kids will make good money is totally wrong and probably heavily influenced by some weird religious education
he confuses marriage with love and caring. you dont need marriage to raise kids.
i dont want to put words in your mouth, so please clarify for me.
you believe women should have reproductive rights but men shouldnt?
"Don't want babies, don't have unprotected sex."
does that apply only to men, or to women as well?
'I'm struggling to find value in this presentation. The first point that comes to mind is "Never believe statistics you didn't fake yourself." He starts by connecting increased governmt spending due to wars fought; OK. Then he ignores the two most expensive wars ever fought by the USA, Afganistan and Iraq (both at the same time!) and ignores the bank crisis which affected millions but he focuses in on social costs like medicare. I don't get his arguenent. He should view this issue more globally.
I saw such a bad rating, and then noticed it was 1 like and 2 dislikes! Lmao, lemee help that w/ a like :P
He's presenting the divide between democrats and republicans as if they're both responsible. They are not. The republicans moved so far right they make Soviet Russia seem attractive, and the democrats have also moved to the right, taking the old republican position. For him to not acknowledge this is disingenuous. Besides, they're all bought by corporate interests anyway. The last thing the US needs is bipartisanship between criminal gangs.
a lot of us just don't belong to the church of global warming or whatever the latest left wing "ain't it awful" problem of the day being touted.
Global warming connects three things that may or may not be connected: Climate change, CO2, and pollution. But the 'answer" the Church of global warming tell us is not to question their political agenda, to let the UN take over the world. Alternatives such as newer technology, are never part of the discussion.
Duh, thanks for the info, Capt. Obvious. Climatology departments in universities all over the world are clamoring for your brilliant insight. I'm sure they hadn't thought of that.
So an alien attack would unite the hole world!
Let's follow your argument. "Politicians aren't the problem; people are. People aren't the problem; insulation, media, apathy, ignorance, whatever, etc. is the problem." All right, I'll go along with it so far. But then you go back to saying people are the problem. That's some ghastly cynicism right there, the kind that undermines otherwise intelligent arguments & perspectives. It obscures the actual problems and discourages solutions.
I can tell you watched the whole video, unlike most. :P
One of the biggest problems that we have in the U.S. is how people take on the mentality of parenting others, deciding what is best for others. If people could accept that individuals know what's best for their own self, then we can definitely make strides to working together.
It's like what Christopher Hitchens said on Holocaust denial being outlawed; listen to extreme opinions and correct people to help them, don't be an ass, essentially.
He lost me the moment he showed the "global warming hoax" stuff...
so the man has absolutely no say while the baby is a fetus but immediately owes 33% of his gross income when the baby is born?
sounds like reproductive rights for some, not all...
We should raise the minimum wage to reduce the income inequality?
It boggles the mind that a brilliant psychologist can be this economically illiterate.