关键词不能为空

当前您在: 主页 > 英语 >

学术交流英语口语考试视频文本

作者:高考题库网
来源:https://www.bjmy2z.cn/gaokao
2021-01-24 23:45
tags:

-

2021年1月24日发(作者:麦地那)


Video
1
listen
better
We
are
losing
our
listening. We
spend
roughly
60
percent
of
our
communication time listening, but we're not very good at it. We retain just 25 percent of
what we hear. Now not you, not this talk, but that is generally true. Let's define listening as
making
meaning from sound. It's
a
mental process, and
it's
a
process
of
use
some
pretty cool techniques
to do this. One
of them is pattern recognition. (Crowd
Noise) So in a cocktail party like this, if I say,
just
sat
up. We
recognize
patterns to
distinguish
noise
from
signal, and
especially
our
encing is another technique we use. If I left this pink noise on for more than a
couple
of
minutes, you
would
literally
cease
to
hear
it. We
listen
to
differences, we
discount sounds that remain the then there is a whole range of filters. These
filters take us from all sound down to what we pay attention to. Most people are entirely
unconscious of these filters. But they actually create our reality in a way, because they tell
us what we're paying attention to right you one example of that: Intention is very
important in sound, in listening. When I married my wife, I promised her that I would listen
to
her
every
day as
if
for
the
first

that's
something
I
fall
short
of
on
a
daily
basis. (Laughter) But it's a great intention to have in a that's not all. Sound
places us in space and in time. If you close your eyes right now in this room, you're aware
of
the
size
of
the
room from
the
reverberation and
the
bouncing
of
the
sound
off
the
surfaces. And
you're
aware
of
how
many
people
are
around
you because
of
the
micro-noises
you're
receiving. And
sound
places
us
in
time
as
well, because
sound
always
has time
embedded
in
it. In
fact,
I
would
suggest
that
our
listening
is
the
main
waythat
we
experience
the
flow
of
time from
past
to
future. So,

is
time
and
meaning
that? Well there are a lot of reasons for this. First of all, we invented ways of recording
-- first writing, then audio recording and now


Video
recording
as
well. The
premium
on
accurate
and
careful
listeninghas
simply
disappeared. Secondly,
the
world
is
now
so
noisy, (Noise)
with
this
cacophony
going
on visually
and
auditorily, it's
just
hard
to
listen; it's
tiring
to
listen. Many
people
take
refuge in headphones, but they turn big, public spaces like this, shared soundscapes, into
millions
of
tiny,
little
personal
sound
bubbles. In
this
scenario,
nobody's
listening
to
're
becoming
impatient. We
don't
want
oratory
anymore, we
want
sound
bites. And the art of conversation is being replaced -- dangerously, I think -- by personal
broadcasting. I don't know how much listening there is in this conversation, which is sadly
very
common,especially
in
the
U.K. We're
becoming
desensitized. Our
media
have
to
scream at us with these kinds of headlines in order to get our attention. And that means
it's harder for us to pay attention to the quiet, the subtle, the is a serious
problem that we're losing our listening. This is not trivial. Because listening is our access
to
understanding. Conscious
listening
always
creates
understanding. And
only
without
conscious listening can these things happen -- a world where we don't listen to each other
at all, is a very scary place indeed. So I'd like to share with you five simple exercises, tools
you
can
take
away
with
you, to
improve
your
own
conscious

you
like
that?(Audience: Yes.) first one is silence. Just three minutes a day of silence is
a wonderful exercise to reset your ears and to recalibrate so that you can hear the quiet
again. If you can't get absolute silence, go for quiet, that's absolutely , I call
this
the
mixer. (Noise)
So
even
if
you're
in
a
noisy
environment
like
this
-- and
we
all
spend a lot of time in places like this -- listen in the coffee bar to how many channels of
sound can I hear? How many individual channels in that mix am I listening to? You can do
it in a beautiful place as well, like in a lake. How many birds am I hearing? Where are they?
Where
are
those
ripples? It's
a
great
exercise for
improving
the
quality
of
your
,
this
exercise
I
call
savoring, and
this
is
a
beautiful
exercise. It's
about
enjoying mundane sounds. This, for example, is my tumble dryer. (Dryer) It's a waltz. One,
two,
three.
One,
two,
three.
One,
two,
three. I
love
it. Or
just
try
this
one
on
for
size. (Coffee
grinder) Wow! So
mundane
sounds
can
be
really
interesting
if
you
pay
attention. I
call
that
the
hidden
choir. It's
around
us
all
the

next
exercise is
probably the most important of all of these, if you just take one thing away. This is listening
positions
-- the
idea
that
you
can
move
your
listening
position to
what's
appropriate
to
what you're listening to. This is playing with those filters. Do you remember, I gave you
those
filters
at
the
beginning. It's
starting
to
play
with
them
as
levers,to
get
conscious
about
them
and
to
move
to
different
places. These
are
just
some
of
the
listening
positions, or
scales
of
listening
positions,
that
you
can
use. There
are
many. Have
fun
with
that.
It's
very

finally,
an
acronym. You
can
use
this
in
listening,
in
communication. If you're in any one of those roles -- and I think that probably is everybody
who's listening to this talk -- the acronym is RASA, which is the Sanskrit word for juice or
essence. And
RASA
stands
for
Receive, which
means
pay
attention
to
the
person; Appreciate,
making
little
noises like



the
word

my passion, it's my life. I wrote a whole book about it. So I live to 's too much to
ask from most people. But I believe that every human being needs to listen consciously in
order
to
live
fully
-- connected
in
space
and
in
time to
the
physical
world
around
us, connected
in
understanding
to
each
other, not
to
mention
spiritually
connected, because every spiritual path I know of has listening and contemplation at its
's why we need to teach listening in our schools as a skill. Why is it not taught?
It's crazy. And if we can teach listening in our schools, we can take our listening off that
slippery slope to that dangerous, scary world that I talked about and move it to a place
where everybody is consciously listening all the time -- or at least capable of doing I
don't know how to do that, but this is TED, and I think the TED community is capable of
anything. So I invite you to connect with me, connect with each other, take this mission
out and let's get listening taught in schools, and transform the world in one generation to a
conscious listening world -- a world of connection, a world of understanding and a world of
you for listening to me today.(Applause)
我们正在丧失倾听的能力

我们交流过程中
60%
的时间都是用来倾听

但其实我们并不擅长
倾听我们只保留了
25%
所听到的内容

不是指在座各位和这个演讲

这是一个普遍的事实


我们来定义倾听

就是使得声音有意义

这是一个心理过程

它也是一个提取的过程我们用一
些很酷的技术完成这个过程

其中之一是模式识别技术

(人群噪音)在像这样的一个鸡尾酒
会上

如果我说


大卫,
莎拉,
注意了


你们中间就会有人坐直身子

我们能识别出一些声音特


从而从信号中区分它们

特别是对于自己的名字

区分是我们用的另外一个技术

如果我让
这种粉红噪声保持几分钟

你就不会很认真的听它了

我们只会听有变化声音

我们不大专注
于持续不变的声音这里有一系列的过滤功能

它把我们从所有声音中抽离出来

重点去听我
们所关注的

大多数人都完全没有察觉这些

过滤器

但是它们在某种程度上创造了现实生


因为它们告诉我们当下我们正在关注什么

举个例子:

意向在声音和听觉中非常重要


娶我夫人的时候

我向她承诺我每天都会像我们第一次见面那样

去倾听她

现在我每天都在
下降

(笑声)

但这是这种关系下的一个很好的意愿但这不是全部

声音把我们置于时间和空
间中

如果你现在马上闭上眼

你会通过声音回响以及声音

在物体表面撞击的力度

感觉出这
件房间的大小

你还可以感觉到在你周围有多少人

因为你可以听到周围微小的噪音

同时,

音还把我们置于时间中

因为声音总是和时间

并存的

实际上我认为听觉是我们最主要的方


去感受时间从过去到未来

的流动

因此

声音是时间和存在

--
很好的引述我在演讲开始
的时候说过,我们正逐 渐丧失倾听的能力

我为什么这么说呢?

这里面有许多的原因

首先,
我们发明了记录的方式
--
一开始通过书写,接着是录音

然后到了现在可以记录影像

精确、
仔细的倾听所带来的好处

已经消失了

第二,现在的世界太嘈杂了

(噪音)伴随着视觉、听
觉上的

这样的污染

已经很难去倾听了

也疲于去倾听了

许多人用耳机逃避吵杂的世界

但是
他们把像这样的庞大的,公共空间

本可被共享的音乐场景

变成了数百万个这样的私人音乐
小气泡

这种情况下,没有人会倾听其他人我们正在变得浮躁

我们更青睐简单的语言而不再
需要

那些华丽的词藻

交谈的艺术

正在被私人化的平实语言所取代

我认为这是很危险的


不清楚这种交谈中倾听能够占几成

通常都很不乐观

特别是在英国

我们正在变得麻木

媒体
不得不用这样的标题向我们

嘶吼


就是为了夺人眼球

这就意味着我们难以专注于

安静的,
细微的

需要理解的东西丧失倾听的能力是个很严重的问题

这不是没有意义的

因为倾听是
我们去认识事物的途径

有意识的去倾听往往有助于我们的理解力

如果失去有意识的倾


就会导致以下的后果
--
一个人们不会相互倾听的世界

是非常可怕的

因此

我希望与大家
分享

五个简单的技巧来帮助大家

改进自己有意识的倾听

你们想听吗?
(听众:
当然)

好!
首先是安静

每天只需拿出三分钟让自己安静下来

就是一个很好的练习

来让听觉系统进行
重置和调整

从而可以再一次感受到宁静

如果没有完全无声的环境

那就去一个安静的地方
也没问题第二点,我称之为混合器

(噪音)即使你在一个像这样嘈杂的环境中
--
我们很多
时间都生活在这样的环境中
--
在咖啡厅里听

你可以听到多少种声音?

你可以在混杂噪音中
分辨出多少独立的声音?

这种方法也可以在幽静的地方练习,比如在湖边

我可以听到多少
种鸟叫声?

它们从哪里发出?传向哪里?

这也是很好的练习

来改善我们的听觉能力第三
点,
我称之为品味声音

这是个很好的练习

是关于享受平淡声音的

比如说,
这是我的滚筒式
干衣机

(干衣机)
像华尔兹一样
1

2

3

1

2

3

1

2

3
我喜欢它

或者试试这个(咖
啡研磨机)

哇喔!

如果你用心,如此平凡的声音也可以这样有趣

我称其为隐形合唱团他们
一直都在我们周围下一个练习

也许是五项之中最重要的

如果只选一个的话

那就是倾听的
状态
--
你可以改变你倾听的状态

根据你所听的内容而定

这些要用到哪些过滤器

还记得吗,
我开始的时候提到过的像一个杠杆一样去运用它们

根据它们来移动到不同的地方

屏幕上
只是一部分倾听的状态

或者是大家可以运用的倾听状态的一些尺度

还有许多

它很有趣,

让人激动最后,
是一个缩略词

你可以在倾听、
交流时用到它

只要你处于其中一种情况下
--

想可能听这个演讲的在座各位都是吧
--
这个缩写就是
RASA
它本身是个梵文

意思是汁液或
者精华

同时
RASA
这里代表着

接受

意思是关注于与你交谈的人

赏识,做出些反映

比如,
恩,哦,好不错;

小结


所以,因此

这个词在交流中是非常重要的

以及

询问

最后的时候
问些问题声音是我的爱好

我的生命

我为此写了一本书,所以我为倾听而生

当然这对大多
数人来说要求太高了

但是我相信每一个人

都需要有意识的倾听

才是完整的生活
--
把空间
和时间

和我们周围的自然世界联系起来

把每个人用相互理解联系起来

更不用说是精神层
面的联系

因为每一个我了解的精神幽径

都包括发自内心的倾听

和凝视这就是为什么

我们
需要在学校把倾听当作一个技能

去传授

为什么实际情况却相反?太不可理解了

如果我们
可以在学校里传授倾听技巧

可以阻止我们的听觉坠向我提到过的

那个危险、
可怕的世界


将其引导到一个每个人都乐于有意识的去倾听的地方
--
或者至少有能力去倾听现在还不知
道如何做到这点

但这就是
TED
我认为
TED
团体有能力做任何事情

因此我邀请大家联系我,
同时彼此互相联系

秉承这个使命,同时让倾听课程进入学校

通过一代人的努力把世界变成
一个乐于倾听的世界
--
一个彼此联系的世界

一个相互理解的世界

一个和平的世界谢谢大
家今天倾听我的演讲(掌声)
Vedio2
Remix
We're going to begin in 1964. Bob Dylan is 23
years old, and his career is just reaching its pinnacle. He's been christened the voice of a
generation, and
he's
churning
out
classic
songs at
a
seemingly
impossible
rate, but
there's
a
small
minority
of
dissenters,
and
they
claim that
Bob
Dylan
is
stealing
other
people's
songs.2004.
Brian
Burton,
aka
Danger
Mouse, takes
the
Beatles'

Album,
it
with
Jay-Z's

Black
Album
create

Grey
Album.
Grey Album
sends
out
countless cease-and-desist
letters
for

competition and
dilution
of
our
valuable property.
media. It was made using these three techniques: copy, transform and combine. It's how
you
remix.
You
take
existing
songs, you
chop
them
up,
you
transform
the
pieces, you
combine
them
back
together
again, and
you've
got
a
new
song,
but
that
new
song is
clearly comprised of old I think these aren't just the components of remixing. I
think these are the basic elements of all creativity. I think everything is a remix, and I think
this is a better way to conceive of right, let's
head back to
1964, and let's
hear where
some
of
Dylan's
early
songs
came
from. We'll
do
some
side-by-side
comparisons right, this first song you're going to hear is
traditional
folk

that,
you'll
hear
Dylan's

of
War.
Jean
Ritchie:
?
In
Nottamun Town, not a soul would look out, ??
not a soul would look up, not a soul would
look down. ?Bob Dylan: ? Come you masters of war, ??
you that build the big guns, you
that build the death planes, ??
You
that build all the bombs. ?
Kirby Ferguson: Okay, so
that's
the
same
basic
melody and
overall
structure.
This
next
one
is

Patriot
Game,
by Dylan.
Dominic Behan: ? Come all ye young rebels, ??

and list while I sing, ??
for the
love of one's land is a terrible thing. ?BD: ? Oh my name it is nothin', ??
my age it means
less, ??

the country I come from is called the Midwest. ?
KF: Okay, so in this case, Dylan
admits he must have heard
kind
of
bubbled
back
up in
his
brain,
he
just
thought
it
was
his

one,
this
is

Think Twice, It's All Right.
Paul Clayton: ? It ain't no use
to sit and sigh now,
??

darlin', and it ain't no use to sit and cry now. ?BD: ? It ain’t no use
to
sit and wonder why, babe, ??

if you don't know by now, ??
and it ain't no use to sit and
wonder why, babe, ??

it'll never do somehow. ?
KF: Okay, now, there's a lot of these. It's
been
estimated
that
two
thirds
of
the
melodiesDylan
used
in
his
early
songs
were
borrowed. This
is
pretty
typical
among
folk
's
the
advice
of
Dylan's
idol,
Woody
Guthrie.
worlds
are
the
important
thing. Don't
worry
about
tunes.
Take
a
tune, sing high when they sing low, sing fast when they sing slow, and you've got a new
tune.
And
that's,
that's
what
Guthrie
did
right
here, and
I'm
sure
you
all
recognize
the
results. (Music) We know this tune, right? We know it? Actually you don't. That is
the
World's
on
Fire,
a
very
old
melody, in
this
case
performed
by
the
Carter
Family. Guthrie
adapted
it
into

Land
Is
Your
Land.
Bob
Dylan,
like
all
folk
singers,
he
copied
melodies, he
transformed
them,
he
combined
them
with
new
lyrics which
were
frequently
their
own
concoction of
previous
,
American
copyright
and
patent
laws
run
counter to
this
notion
that
we
build
on
the
work
of
others. Instead, these laws and laws around the world use the rather awkward analogy of
property. Now, creative works may indeed be kind of like property, but it's property that
we're
all
building
on, and
creations
can
only
take
root
and
grow once
that
ground
has
been

Ford
once
said,

invented
nothing
new. I
simply
assembled
the
discoveries of other men behind whom were centuries of work. Progress happens when
all the factors that make for it are ready and then it is inevitable.
it
debut. Apple
undoubtedly
brings
this
innovation
to
us
early, but
its
time
was
approaching
because
its
core
technology had
been
evolving
for
decades. That's
multi-touch,
controlling
a
device by
touching
its
display. Here
is
Steve
Jobs
introducing
multi-touch and making a rather foreboding Jobs: And we have invented a new
technology called multi-touch. You can do multi-fingered gestures on it, and boy have we
patented
it.
(Laughter) KF:
Yes.
And
yet,
here
is
multi-touch
in
action. This
is
at
TED,
actually,
about
a
year
earlier. This
is
Jeff
Han,
and,
I
mean,
that's
multi-touch. It's
the
same
animal,
at
least. Let's
hear
what
Jeff
Han
has
to
say
about
this newfangled
technology. Jeff Han: Multi-touch sensing isn't anything -- isn't completely new. I mean,
people like Bill Buxton have been playing around with it in the ' technology, you
know,
isn't
the
most
exciting
thing
here right
now
other
than
probably
its
newfound
accessibility. KF: So he's pretty frank about it not being new. So it's not multi-touch as a
whole
that's
patented. It's
the
small
parts
of
it
that
are, and
it's
in
these
small
details
where we can clearly see patent law contradicting its intent: to promote the progress of
useful

is
the
first
ever
slide-to-unlock. That
is
all
there
is
to
it.
Apple
has
patented this. It's a 28-page software patent, but I will summarize what it covers. Spoiler
alert:
Unlocking
your
phone by
sliding
an
icon
with
your
finger.
(Laughter) I'm
only
exaggerating a little bit. It's a broad , can someone own this idea? Now, back
in the '80s, there were no software patents,and it was Xerox that pioneered the graphical
user
interface. What
if
they
had
patented
pop-up
menus, scrollbars,
the
desktop
with
icons
that
look
like
folders and
sheets
of
paper?Would
a
young
and
inexperienced
Apple have survived the legal assault from a much largerand more mature company like
Xerox?Now,
this
idea
that
everything
is
a
remix
might
sound like
common
sense
until
you're the one getting remixed. For example ... SJ: I mean, Picasso had a saying. He said,

about stealing great ideas. KF: Okay, so that's in '96. Here's in 2010.
Android because it's a stolen product.
this.
(Laughter) Okay,
so
in
other
words,
great
artists
steal,
but
not
from
me. (Laughter)Now,
behavioral
economists
might
refer
to
this
sort
of
thing
as
loss
aversion We
have
a
strong
predisposition
towards
protecting what
we
feel
is
ours. We
have
no
such
aversion
towards
copying what
other
people
have,
because
we
do
that
here's the sort of equation we're looking at. We've got laws that fundamentally
treat
creative
works
as
property, plus
massive
rewards
or
settlements in
infringement
cases,
plus
huge
legal
fees to
protect
yourself
in
court, plus
cognitive
biases
against
perceived the sum looks like this. That is the last four years of lawsuits in the
realm of smartphones. Is this promoting the progress of useful arts?1983. Bob Dylan is 42
years old, and his time in the cultural spotlight is long since past. He records a song called

past, through a much darker time, but a simpler one, a time when musicians like Willie
McTell had few illusions about what they did.
'em my own way.
from within. We are not self-made. We are dependent on one another, and admitting this
to ourselves isn't an embrace of mediocrity and derivativeness. It's a liberation from our
misconceptions, and it's an incentive to not expect so much from ourselves and to simply
you so much. It was an honor to be here. Thank you. (Applause)
Thank you. Thank you. (Applause)
Thank you. (Applause)
我们从
1964
年开始谈起。

鲍勃

·

迪伦才

23


和他的事业正处在颠峰。

他被尊为时代
之声他在以看似不可能的速度,

制作经典歌曲

但有少数的异议,并且他们声称

鲍勃

·


伦在剽窃其他人的歌曲。
2004.
布莱恩

·

伯顿,也就是危险老鼠,

取了披头士的

白色专辑



结合专辑
Ja y-Z


黑色专辑

创建了

灰色专辑



灰色专辑

立即在网上疯传

披头士乐
队的唱片公司发出了无数

停止

不公平竞争

和稀释重要财产。

的信函好了 ,

灰色专辑

是混
搭的,

它是从旧媒体造出的新媒体。

它是由以下三种技巧来造成的:
复制、

转换和合并。


程是:你把现有的歌曲,

截成小段、

变换这些片断,

最后再结合起来,

你造出了一首新
歌,但这首新歌

很明显是老歌曲组成的。但我觉得这些不是只是复配的组件。

我认为这些
是所有创新的基本要素。

我认为一切都是混搭,

而且我认为这是对创造力更好的态度。好
吧,让我们回到

1964
年,让我们听听

其中的一些迪伦早期的歌曲是从哪来的。

我们要在
这里做一些横向比较。
好吧,
第一首歌你会听到



诺塔芒城


它是一个传统的民间曲调。


后,你会听到迪伦的

战争之王

。让

·

里奇:

?


诺塔芒城,一个灵魂都不会向往看,
??

灵魂不会向上看,没有一个灵魂会向下瞧。
?
鲍勃

·

迪伦:

?
来吧战争之王,
??


构建枪支,你的打造死亡的飞机,
??

你,造成所有的炸弹。
?
柯比弗格森:

好吧,这就
是相同的基本旋律

与整体结构。
这下一个是

爱国者游戏



由多米尼克本汉。
同时,

你将听
到迪伦的

上帝在 我们这边


多米尼克本汉:

?
来吧,
你们反叛的年轻人,
??

在我唱时,
??
列出爱一个人的土地是件可怕的事情。
?
BD


?
哦我的名字什么都不是,
??

我的年
龄不是问题

??

我来自的国家被称为中西部。
?
KF


好的所以在这种情况下,
迪伦承认


一定会听说过

爱国者游戏

,他忘了这件事,

然后当这首歌有点回想起来时,

在他的大脑
中,他认为那是他的歌。最后一 个,这是

谁会给你买丝带,

另一个传统民间小调。

旁边< br>的是

不要犹豫,那没关系。

这更多关于歌词。保罗

·

克莱顿:

?
坐地叹息没有用
??


爱的

,现在坐地叹息没有用。
?
BD


?
坐地冥想没有用,宝贝,
??

如果你现在还不明白
??

坐地冥想为什么真的没有用,宝贝,
??

它永远不会有用。
?
KF


好吧,现在,有了
很多例子。

据预计,迪伦有三分之二

在他早期的歌中用过的旋律都是借来的。

这在民间歌
手中相当平常。

这里是迪伦的偶像

Woody
Guthrie
的意见。

世界是重要的事情,

就是别
担心歌的曲调。一首曲子,

当他们唱低,你就唱高

当他们唱得慢,你就唱快。你就有一首
新的曲子。

(笑声)
(掌声)

这就是

Guthrie
就在这里做的

相信大家都承认这结果。

(音
乐)

我们听过这首曲子,正确吗?我们听过它吗?

其实你没有。

这就是

当世界起火

的非
常老的旋律,

这个由卡特家族演奏。
Guthrie
改编它为

这片土地是你的土地



所以,鲍


·

迪伦,像所有的民歌手,他复制旋律,

他改变了它们,将它们与新歌词结合

这经常是
自己炮制

以前的东西。现在,关于我们建立在别人的工作的概念,

美国的版权和专利法律
背道而驰。

这些法律和世界各地的法律都

使用财产似的笨拙的类比。

现在,创意作品可能
确实是有点像财产,

但它的价值,是基于我们后来附加的创造上,

只要一有创意的土壤


只有这样创意才能继续生根发芽亨利

·

福特曾经说过:

我没发明什么新的

我只重新组合他
人的发现

那背后是几个世纪的积累。

当所有的因素,已准备好

进步才会实现,才成为必然


2007
年,
iPhone
首次亮相。

苹果无疑将这种创新给我们带来早了,

因为及其核心技术
曾被数十年来不断发展,

但它的时代已经接近。

这就是多点触控来控制设备的技术

这就是
多点触控来控制设备的技术

这里是史蒂夫

·

乔布斯在引入多点触摸

并说着预言性的玩笑。
史蒂夫

·

乔布斯:

与我们发明了一种新技术

被称为多点触摸。

你可以抓取的手势,

而且
我们申请了专利!(笑声)
KF


是的。然而,这里是多点触控的进展。

这是在

TED
,其
实,
较早前一年左右。

这是杰夫
·
韩,
我的意思是,
这就是多点触控。

它至少是相同的动物。


我们听听杰夫汉已谈论这

新奇的技术。

杰夫

·

汉:

多点触摸感应不是别的什么






是全新的。
我的意思是,
人们喜欢比尔巴克斯顿

它在八十年代玩弄它。

这项技术,
你知道,
现在并不是最令人兴奋的事情

除了它也许开拓了新的应用范围
KF


所以他相当坦率
,
这个
技术不是新的。

所以,不是多点触控整体被专利保护,

这是它的小部分才是。

正是在这些
小细节中

我们可以清楚地看到专利法反驳其意图:

为促进有价值艺术的进步。这里是第一


滑动解锁。

就这么简单。苹果,这已获得专利。

它是一种

28
页软件专利,但我会总
结它所涵盖的内容。

注意
,
你们可能要失望了:

解锁您的电话

通过滑动用手指的图标。
(笑
声)

我只一点有点夸大。它是一种广泛的专利。现在,有人可以拥有这种想法吗?

现在,
早在八十年代,没有软件专利

开创了图形用户界面的施乐公司才那么干。

如果他们拥有弹
出菜单专利

滚动条,在桌面上的图标看起来像文件夹和一张纸吗?

一个年轻和缺乏经验的
苹果

会经受住从大得多的施乐公司的法律攻击

而变得更成熟吗?现在,这一切都是混搭的
想法可能听起来

像是常识一样除非你是正被混编的人。

例如

… …
SJ


我的意思是,
毕加
索曾说

他 说,

好的艺术家拷贝。伟大的艺术家偷窃。

我们有,你懂,

一直对偷窃伟大的
想法不觉无耻。
KF


好的,这是在

96
年。现在是

2010
年。

我要销毁安卓系统,因为
它是一个盗窃来的产品。

(笑声)

我愿意就此开动热核战争

。(笑声)

好了,所以换句
话说,伟大的艺术家窃取,但不是从我。

(笑声)现在,行为经济学家可能会将这种事称
为损失厌恶心理

我们有强烈倾向于保护

我们自己的东西。

我们没有对复制其他人厌恶


为我们不停地做。所以这是我们看着的等式。

我们得从根本上将创意作品视为财产的法


和在侵权行为中巨大的回报或浅规则

再加上若要在法庭上保护自己的巨大的法律费


再加上若要在法庭上保护自己的巨大的法律费用

加上认知偏见反对感知损失。

与总和看
起来像这样。

这是过去四年在智能手机领域的诉讼

这是过去四年在智能手机领域的诉讼


是宣扬有用艺术的进展情况吗?
1983


鲍勃

·

迪伦是

42
岁的时候

他在文化聚光灯下的
时代早已过去。

他录了一首歌叫做

盲的

威利

麦克塔,

这首歌的名字以蓝调歌手命名


曲是穿梭到过去,到一个当时更黑暗的时代

但有一种简单音乐的过去,
人们喜欢威利

麦克
塔的过去

有他们所做的几个幻想。

我从其他作家那抄来的

但我用我自己的方式。
我认为这
是我们主要做的。

我们的创意来自于外界
,
而不是我们内心。

我们不是闭门造车,而是相互
依赖的,

对我们自己承认这一点并不是

对平庸和变种的拥抱。

这是一次我们从误解中的解
放,

这是不对自己期望过高的感知

只要开始就好。非常感谢。能够在这里是我的荣幸。


谢。

掌声)

谢谢。
谢谢。

掌声)

谢谢。

掌声)
Vedio 3 Talk Nerdy
Five years ago, I experienced
a bit of what it must have been like to be Alice in State asked me, a
communications teacher, to teach a communications class for engineering students. And I
was scared. (Laughter) Really scared. Scared of these students with their big brains and
their
big
books
and
their
big,
unfamiliar
words. But
as
these
conversations
unfolded, I
experienced what Alice must have when she went down that rabbit hole and saw that door
to a whole new world. That's just how I felt as I had those conversations with the students.
I
was
amazed
at
the
ideas that
they
had,
and
I
wanted
others
to
experience
this
wonderland as well. And I believe the key to opening that door is great
desperately
need
great
communication
from
our scientists
and
engineers
in
order
to
change
the
world. Our
scientists
and
engineers
are
the
ones that
are
tackling
our
grandest challenges, from energy to environment to health care, among others, and if we
don't
know
about
it
and
understand
it, then
the
work
isn't
done,
and
I
believe
it's
our
responsibility as non- scientists to have these interactions. But these great conversations
can't occur if our scientists and engineers don't invite us in to see their wonderland. So
scientists and engineers, please, talk nerdy to us.I want to share a few keys on how you
can
do
that to
make
sure
that
we
can
see
that
your
science
is
sexy and
that
your
engineering
is
engaging. First
question
to
answer
for
us:
so
what? Tell
us
why
your
science is relevant to us. Don't just tell me that you study trabeculae, but tell me that you
study trabeculae, which is the mesh-like structure of our bones because it's important to
understanding
and
treating

when
you're
describing
your
science,
beware of jargon. Jargon is a barrier to our understanding of your ideas. Sure, you can
say
accessible
to
us? And
making
your
ideas
accessible
is
not
the
same
as
dumbing
it
down. Instead,
as
Einstein
said,
make
everythingas
simple
as
possible,
but
no
simpler. You can clearly communicate your science without compromising the ideas. A few
things
to
consider
are
having
examples,
stories and
analogies.
Those
are
ways
to
engage and excite us about your content. And when presenting your work, drop the bullet
points. Have
you
ever
wondered
why
they're
called
bullet
points?
(Laughter) What
do
bullets do? Bullets kill, and they will kill your presentation.A slide like this is not only boring,
but
it
relies
too
much on
the
language
area
of
our
brain,
and
causes
us
to
become
overwhelmed. Instead, this example slide by Genevieve Brown ismuch more effective. It's
showing
that
the
special
structure of
trabeculae
are
so
strong
that
they
actually
inspired the
unique
design
of
the
Eiffel
T
ower. And
the
trick
here
is
to
use
a
single,
readable sentence that the audience can key into if they get a bit lost, and then provide
visuals which appeal to our other senses and create a deeper sense of understanding of
what's being I think these are just a few keys that can help the rest of us to
open that door and see the wonderland that is science and engineering. And because the
engineers that I've worked with have taught me to become really in touch with my inner
nerd, I want to summarize with an equation. (Laughter) Take your science, subtract your
bullet points and your jargon, divide by relevance, meaning share what's relevant to the
audience, and multiply it by the passion that you have for this incredible work that you're
doing, and that is going to equal incredible interactions that are full of understanding. And
so, scientists and engineers, when you've solved this equation, by all means, talk nerdy to
me. (Laughter) Thank you. (Applause)
五年前,我曾有过一个

有如漫游爱丽丝仙境的经历。

宾夕法尼亚州立大学让我这个教沟通
学的老师

给工程系的学生上沟通学课。

我被吓到了。
(笑声)

我真的被吓坏了。这些学生
发达的大脑,

还有他们所读的巨著,及他们使用的又长又生僻的词语通通都吓到我了。


过随着对话的展开,

我的经历就如爱丽丝一样,顺着那个兔子洞

下去,看到了那扇通往一
个全新世界的大门。

这就是我和那些学生们对话时的感受。

我对他们的想法感到惊奇,


且我希望其他人也能体验这种在仙境中的感觉。

我相信打开那扇门的关键

就是要有很好的
交流与沟通。为了改变世界,我们迫切需要从我们的

科学家和工程师那里得到良好的沟
通。

我们的科学家和工程师们解决的都是

我们所面临的最大的难题,
从能源

到环境再到卫
生保健,等等。

如果我们不明白也不理解的话,

他们的工作对我们就没有什么意义了,并
且我相信

我们作为非科学家们有责任与他们进行互动交流。

可是如果我们的科学家和工程
师们不把我们领进门

去看看他们的仙境的话,我们之间也就不可能有很好的交流。

所以科
学家和 工程师们,
请跟我们说说高科技是什么吧。
我想来分享几个有用的方法,
告诉你们如< br>何才能保证

让我们也觉得你们的科学

性感

迷人、你 们的工程学魅力四射。

第一个要回答
我们的问题:

高科技又怎样?

告诉我们,为什么你们的科学与我们有关。

别光告诉我你
们研究骨小梁,

要告诉我你们研究骨小梁是因为这种骨骼的网状组织

对认识和治疗骨质疏
松症很重要。另外当你们描述科学原理时,要注意术语的使用。

术语是我们理解你们想法
的一个障碍。

当然了,
你们可以说

空间性与瞬时性


可是为什么不说

空间与时间

呢?这
对我们来说容易理解多了。

让你们的想法简单易懂并不等于简化它,

相反,正如爱因斯坦
所说,让一切

尽可能的简单,而不是简化。

你不必非得改变你的观点才能清楚地

传达出你
的科学理论。

可以考虑用一些例子、故事、

还有类比。这些都是使你们的谈论内容

吸引我
们、让我们兴奋的方法。

还有在用幻灯片演示你们的研究成果时,不要使用点句式。

你想
过为什么点句式符号叫

子弹

点儿吗?(笑声)

子弹是干什么的?子弹能杀人,

也能灭了
你的演示报告。

像这样的幻灯片不仅仅乏味无聊,而且太过依赖

我们大脑的语言区,使我
们不知所措。

而这张由
Genevieve Brown
制作的示例幻灯片

效果就好多了。
它向我们说明
骨小梁的特殊结构

超级强大,
甚至连埃菲尔铁塔的独特设计

都受到了它的启发。

这里的窍
门就是使用简单、易读的句子,

让观众即使有点儿不明白也能够掌握要点,

然后接下来提
供一些能够刺激我们感官的图像,

并且能让我们对所描述的内容

有更深层次的理解。以上
这些就是我觉得能够帮助

我们大家打开那扇大门的钥匙,感受科学与工程学

仙境的好方
法。

那么因为与我共事过的工程师们教会我

接触我内心存在的学术狂人,

我想用一个方程
式来总结一下我的观点。
(笑声)

用你们研究的科学,减去你们的点句式

和术语,除以相
关内容,

就是要分享和观众有关的内容,

再乘以你对自己正在从事的

这份神奇工作的激情,
它就会等于:具备充分理解的、

效果惊人的互动交流。

因此,科学家和工程师们,当你们
解决了

这个方程式以后,就想尽一切办法,跟我说说高科技吧。
(笑声)

谢谢。
(掌声)


Video 4:
What's in the box? Whatever it is must be pretty important, because I've traveled
with it, moved it, from apartment to apartment to apartment.(Laughter)(Applause)
Sound familiar? Did you know that we Americans have about three times the amount of
space we did 50 years ago? Three times. So you'd think, with all this extra space, we'd
have
plenty
of
room
for
all
our
stuff. Nope. There's
a
new
industry
in
town, a
22
billion-dollar, 2.2
billion sq. ft. industry: that of personal storage. So
we've
got triple
the
space, but we've become such good shoppers that we need even more space. So where
does this lead? Lots of credit card debt, huge environmental footprints, and perhaps not
coincidentally, our
happiness
levels
flat-lined
over
the
same
50

I'm
here
to
suggest there's a better way, that less might actually equal more. I bet most of us have
experienced at some point the joys of less: college -- in your dorm,traveling -- in a hotel
room, camping -- rig up basically nothing, maybe a boat. Whatever it was for you, I bet
that, among other things, this gave you a
little
more
freedom, a
little more time. So
I'm
going to suggest that less stuff and less space are going to equal a smaller footprint. It's
actually a great way to save you some money. And it's going to give you a little more ease
in
your

I
started
a
project
called
Life
Edited
at
to
further
this
conversation and
to find some great solutions
in this area. First up: crowd- sourcing my
420 sq. ft. apartment in Manhattan with partners Mutopo and . I wanted it all
-- home office, sit down dinner for 10, room for guests, and all my kite surfing gear. With
over 300 entries from around the world, I got it, my own little jewel box. By buying a space
that was 420
sq. d
of 600, immediately I'm saving
200
grand. Smaller space
is
going
to
make
for
smaller
utilities
-- save
some
more
money
there, but
also
a
smaller
footprint. And
because
it's
really
designed around
an
edited
set
of
possessions
--
my
favorite stuff -- and really designed for me, I'm really excited to be how can you
live
little? Three
main
approaches. First
of
all,
you
have
to
edit
've
got
to
clear the arteries of our lives. And that shirt that I hadn't worn in years? It's time for me to
let it go. We've got to cut the extraneous out of our lives, and we've got to learn to stem
the inflow. We need to think before we buy. Ask ourselves,
me happier? Truly?
stuff that we're going to love for years, not just ly, our new mantra: small is
sexy. We want space efficiency. We want things that are designed for how they're used
the vast majority of the time, not that rare event. Why have a six burner stove when you
rarely use three? So we want things that nest, we want things that stack, and we want it
digitized. You can take paperwork, books, movies, and you can make it disappear -- it's
y, we want multifunctional spaces and housewares -- a sink combined with a
toilet, a dining table becomes a bed -- same space, a little side table stretches out to seat
10. In the winning Life Edited scheme in a render here, we combine a moving wall with
transformer furniture to get a lot out of the space. Look at the coffee table -- it grows in
height and widthto seat 10. My office folds away, easily hidden. My bed just pops out of
the
wall
with
two
fingers. Guests?
Move
the
moving
wall, have
some
fold-down
guest
beds. And of course, my own movie I'm not saying that we all need to live in
420 sq. ft. But consider the benefits of an edited life. Go from 3,000 to 2,000, from 1,500
to 1,000. Most of us, maybe all of us, are here pretty happily for a bunch of days with a
couple of bags, maybe a small space, a hotel room. So when you go home and you walk
through
your front
door, take
a
second
and
ask
yourselves,
I do
with
a
little
life
editing? Would that give me a little more freedom?Maybe a little more time?
box? It
doesn't
really
matter. I
know
I
don't
need
it. What's
in
yours? Maybe,
just
maybe, less
might
equal
more. So
let's
make
room for
the
good

you.(Applause)
猜猜看这个箱子里有什么?

至少是些要紧的东西吧

毕竟不管我去哪儿,
搬到哪儿

都 带着这
个箱子呢
(
笑声
)(
掌声
)
你们也干过差不 多的事儿吧?

说起来你们知不知道


50
年前的美国
人相比

我们有了
3
倍多的空间?

整整三倍啊!

那你可能会说,既然空间更多了

那肯定够
我们放各种东西了

非也非也。

要知道现在有个新兴产业

价值
220
亿美元、累计占地
22
亿
平方英尺

而作用就是为客户提供存储空间

虽然我们有了三倍多的空间

但我们的消费能力
增长得更快

因此我们实际上需要更多的空间

那这一切的后果有哪些呢?

比如大量的信用
卡贷款

对环境的巨大影响

还有这
50
年里停滞不前的幸福水平

而这最后一点恐怕并非无巧
不成书所以我想说,其实有一种更好的生活方式:

在这里少一些,在别处就多一些。

我相
信我们大部分人都或多或少地

体验过



的乐趣

校园里
——
我们只需要一间宿舍

旅途中
——
我们只需要一间客房

野营时
——
基本用不着什么东西

可能要一条船。

我相信,
和其它
事物相比

这些会给你带来多一点点自由

和多一点点时间

所以我想说

少用点东西、少占点
空间

就意味着对环境少些影响

也能为你节省一些花销

而且,
你的生活也会变得更加轻松因
此我开始做这个名为
Life
Edited
精简生活的项目

在网站


上一方面推广我的
理念

另一方面寻找一些解决方案

首先,我和
Mutopo


合作

众包我在曼哈顿

420
平方英尺的公寓

我希望它能拥有以下所有的功能:

家庭办公室、
10
人餐桌

留宿客
人的空间

还有我全套的风筝冲浪设备

从世界各地发来的
300
条建议中

我找到了这个最优
方案。

我买了
420
平方英尺

而不是
600
平方英尺的房子

仅此一项我就省了二十万美元


小的空间意味着更小的用具

在这方面我们不光能够省点钱

也能给环境少带来些影响

正因
为这些用具都是围绕着

我最想要的功能

专门为我设计的

我自然很向往能够住到那里那我
们怎样才能活得精简呢?

有三条大道。

第一,
你必须铁面无情地去开始精简工作

就像去除
掉我们身上的动脉瘤一样毫不留情

比如那件我好几年都没穿过的
T
恤嘛
……

是时候让它去


我们得把生活中无关紧要的细枝末节修剪掉

并且学会逆潮流而动

我们应该三思而后消


买东西之前问问自己:


买了它我真的能更加开心吗?


诚然

我们应该购买并拥有一些很
棒的东西

但我们更需要那些我们对其的喜爱经久不衰的东西

而不仅仅是任何物品第二,也
是我们的新口号:

小也有魅力

我们想要高空间利用率。

我们想要的用具

应该是依据多数
情形下它们的使用方来设计的

而不是专为少数情形而设计的。

就好比一般你连三个灶头都
很少同时使用

为什么要去买六灶头的燃气灶?

我们需要的器具应该能够大的套小的,或者
能够层叠放置的

如果一样东西能数字化那就更好

那样你可以把所有文件

书籍、< br>电影等等都
化为无形
——
就像变戏法一样。最后,我们需要多功能的空间利用与 多功能家具
——

比如
一体化的水斗和坐便器

餐桌与床的两用

同样的空间里

这个小小的桌子

可以伸展为能坐
10
个人的大桌子


精简生活

的一个优胜设计

把一堵墙和

变形金刚

式的家具有机结合

从而高
效地利用了有限的空间

看看这个咖啡桌:

它可以拉长、抬高

使得能够容纳
10
个人同时就


我的个人工作台

能够方便地折叠并隐藏

只用两个手指就能把床从墙壁里变出来

家里来
客人了?动一下这堵墙

里面有折叠式的客床

当然,它也能变成我的家庭影院我不是说每个
人都应该只住在
420
平方英 尺
(

40
平方米
)
的空间里

但精简生活的确能带来诸多好处。


如从
3000
平方英尺到
2000
平方英尺

或者从
1500

1000
平方英尺

我们中的大多数,也
可能是所有人

在这几天都过得很愉快

虽然我们只随身带了几个包

并且住在一个小小的旅
店房间里

所以你这次回家、踏入房门之后

不妨问问自己


怎么样把我的生活也精简一番
呢?



那样是不是会带来更多自由
——”


更多时间呢?

我这个箱子里装了什么?

这其实并
不重要

因为我不需要它们。

你的包袱里装了什么?

还是有那么一些可能性

使得
“< br>少

也能意
味着某种





所以让我们把有限的空间

都留给重要的东西吧。谢谢
(
鼓掌
)


Video 5 Goals
Everyone, please think of your biggest personal goal. For real -- you can take
a second. You've got to feel this to learn it. Take a few seconds and think of your personal
biggest goal, okay? Imagine deciding right now that you're going to do it. Imagine telling
someone that you meet today what you're going to do. Imagine their congratulations and
their high image of you. Doesn't it feel good to say it out loud? Don't you feel one step
closer already,like it's already becoming part of your identity?Well, bad news: you should
have kept your mouth shut, because that good feeling now will make you less likely to do
it. Repeated psychology tests have proven that telling someone your goal makes it less
likely to happen. Any time you have a goal, there are some steps that need to be done,
some work that needs to be done in order to achieve it. Ideally, you would not be satisfied
until
you
had
actually
done
the
work. But
when
you
tell
someone
your
goal
and
they
acknowledge it, psychologists have found that it's called a
of
tricked
into
feeling
that
it's
already
done. And
then,
because
you
felt
that
satisfaction, you're
less
motivated
to
do the
actual
hard
work
necessary.
(Laughter) So
this goes against the conventional wisdom that we should tell our friends our goals, right
-- so
they
hold
us
to
,
let's
look
at
the
proof. 1926,
Kurt
Lewin,
founder
of
social
psychology, called
this

Vera
Mahler
found, when
it
was
acknowledged by others, it felt real in the mind. 1982, Peter Gollwitzer wrote a whole book
about this and in 2009, he did some new tests that were goes like this: 163
people across four separate tests -- everyone wrote down their personal goal. Then half of
them announced their commitment to this goal to the room, and half didn't. Then everyone
was given 45 minutes of work that would directly lead them towards their goal, but they
were told that they could stop at any time. Now, those who kept their mouths shut worked
the entire 45 minutes, on average, and when asked afterwards,said that they felt that they
had a long way to go still to achieve their goal. But those who had announced it quit after
only 33 minutes, on average, and when asked afterwards, said that they felt much closer
to
achieving
their
,
if
this
is
true, what
can
we
do? Well,
you
could
resist
the
temptation to
announce
your
goal. You
can
delay
the
gratification that
the
social
acknowledgement brings, and you can understand that your mind mistakes the talking for
the doing. But if you do need to talk about something, you can state it in a way that gives
you
no
satisfaction, such as,

really
want
to
run
this marathon, so
I
need
to
train
five
times a week and kick my ass if I don't, okay?
tell someone your goal, what will you say? (Silence) Exactly, well done.(Applause)
请大家想想

你们最大的人生目标。

实际的人生目标。你得想一会儿。你有感觉知道你的目
标。

花几秒钟想想人生最大的目标,
好么?

想象一下,
立马做出决定

你将要做的事情。


象一下,告诉你今天遇到的人你将要做什么

想象他们的祝贺

和你在他们眼中的英伟形象。
大声说出来是不是十分爽?

你是不是觉得更进一步了

貌似这已经成为你自己的一部分?
嗯,
坏消息:
你最好闭嘴,

因为你的自我感觉良好,

在现实中反而使你不太容易实现目标。
许多心理测试已证明

告诉别人你的目标

反而使目标不能实现。

任何时候在你有个目标时,
你得按计划做些工作

来实现这个目标。

理想状况下,
除非你实际地做些工作,
你才会满足,
但是当你告诉别人你的目 标,大家也承认你的目标,

心理学家发现,这被称为一种社会现
实。

思维定势让你有种感觉到你的目标已经达到。

然后,因为你感到满足感,

你不那么积
极地做

实际需要的艰苦工作。

这观点和传统观点背道而驰,

我们应该告诉我们朋友们关于
我们的目标吗,对吗?

他们鼓励我们实现目标,对。我们来看看这个证明。
1926
年,社会
心理学的创始人库尔特
·
勒温

称这个为

替代


1933
年,伟拉马勒发现

当你的目标被别人
承认,在你脑子里就好比这已经实现了。
1982
年,
皮特哥尔维策尔关于此写了一本书,


2009
年,

他公布了一些新的实验证明。
比如这个:
163
个人进行
4
组不同测试
--
每个人写
下他们各自的目标,

然后一半实验的人在房间里宣布他们的目标承诺,

另一半人保守目
标。

接下来每个人有
45
分钟来工作,

他们可以努力工作直至实现他们的目标,

但他们在
任何时候也可以停下来工作。

那些不泄漏目标的人平均工作了整整
45
分钟,

在这之后的
访问,

他们感到他们为了实现目标还有很长的一段路要走。

但是那些宣布目标的人们

平均
工作大约
33
分钟后就放弃了,

当被问及时,

他们感到快要接近目标了。所以如果这是事
实,

我们会怎样做?

好吧,大家可以抵制住

宣布目标的诱惑。

大家可以延迟这种

社交承
认带来的满足。

大家明白脑子会把

说的当成做的来替代。

但是如果你的确要谈论一些目
标,

你说到这些目标时

不带有任何满足感,

例如,

我的确想要跑马拉松,

所以我需要每
周训练
5
次,

如果我做不到,就踢我的屁股 吧?

所以观众们,下一次当你试图告诉别人你
的目标时,

你会说什么?

完全正确,做对了。
(对你的目标缄默,闭住嘴。保守秘密。



Video 6 Creativity
Good morning. How are you? It's been great, hasn't it? I've been blown
away by the whole thing. In fact, I'm leaving. (Laughter) There have been three themes,
haven't there, running through the conference, which are relevant to what I want to talk
about. One is
the
extraordinary
evidence of human
creativity in
all
of
the
presentations
that we've had and in all of the people here. Just the variety of it and the range of it. The
second is that it's put us in a place where we have
no idea
what's
going
to happen, in
terms
of
the
future.
No
idea how
this
may
play
out.I
have
an
interest
in
education
-- actually, what I find is everybody has an interest in education. Don't you? I find this very
interesting. If
you're
at
a
dinner
party,
and
you
say you
work
in
education
-- actually,
you're not often at dinner parties, frankly, if you work in education. (Laughter) You're not
asked. And you're never asked back, curiously. That's strange to me. But if you are, and
you say to somebody, you know, they say,
education, you can see the blood run from their face. They're like,

me?
My
one
night
out
all
week.
(Laughter) But
if
you
ask
about
their
education, they pin you to the wall. Because it's one of those things that goes deep with
people,
am
I
right? Like
religion,
and
money
and
other
things. I
have
a
big
interest
in
education, and I think we all do. We have a huge vested interest in it, partly because it's
education
that's
meant
to take
us
into
this
future
that
we
can't
grasp. If
you
think
of
it,
children starting school this year will be retiring in 2065. Nobody has a clue --despite all
the expertise that's been on parade for the past four days -- what the world will look like in
five years' time. And yet we're meant to be educating them for it. So the unpredictability, I
think, is the third part of this is that we've all agreed, nonetheless, on
the really
extraordinary
capacities
that
children
have
-- their
capacities
for
innovation.
I
mean, Sirena last night was a marvel, wasn't she? Just seeing what she could do. And
she's
exceptional,
but
I
think
she's
not,
so
to
speak, exceptional
in
the
whole
of
childhood. What you have there is a person of extraordinary dedication who found a talent.
And
my
contention
is, all
kids
have
tremendous
talents. And
we
squander
them,
pretty
ruthlessly. So
I
want
to
talk
about
education
and I
want
to
talk
about
creativity.
My
contention is that creativity now is as important in education as literacy, and we should
treat it with the same status. (Applause)

Thank you. That was it, by the way. Thank you very much. (Laughter) So, 15 minutes
, I was born ... no. (Laughter)I heard a great story recently -- I love telling it -- of a
little girl who was in a drawing lesson. She was six and she was at the back, drawing, and
the teacher said this little girl hardly ever paid attention, and in this drawing lesson she
did. The teacher was fascinated and she went over to her and she said,
drawing?
the
girl
said,

drawing
a
picture
of
God.
the
teacher
said,

nobody
knows
what
God
looks
like.
the
girl
said,

will
in
a
minute.
to be honest. (Laughter) If we're being strict about it, wherever he went, he was four that
year. He was in the Nativity play. Do you remember the story? No, it was big. It was a big
story. Mel Gibson did the sequel. You may have seen it:
part of Joseph, which we were thrilled about. We considered this to be one of the lead
parts. We had the place crammed full of agents in T-shirts:
(Laughter) He didn't have to speak, but you know the bit where the three kings come in.
They
come
in
bearing
gifts, and
they
bring
gold,
frankincense
and
myrhh. This
really
happened. We were sitting there and I think they just went out of sequence, because we
talked to the little boy afterward and we said,
Was
that
wrong?
just
switched,
that
was
it. Anyway,
the
three
boys
came
in
-- four-year-olds with tea towels on their heads -- and they put these boxes down, and the
first boy said,
third boy said,
will take a chance. If they don't know, they'll have a go. Am I right? They're not frightened
of being wrong. Now, I don't mean to say that being wrong is the same thing as being
creative. What we do know is, if you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up
with anything original -- if you're not prepared to be wrong. And by the time they get to be
adults, most
kids
have
lost
that
capacity. They
have
become
frightened
of
being
wrong. And
we
run
our
companies
like
this,
by
the
way. We
stigmatize
mistakes.
And
we're
now
running national
education
systems
where mistakes
are
the
worst
thing
you
can make. And the result is that we are educating people out of their creative capacities.
Picasso once said this -- he said that all children are born artists. The problem is to remain
an artist as we grow up. I believe this passionately, that we don't grow into creativity, we
grow
out
of
it.
Or
rather,
we
get
educated
out
if
it. So
why
is
this?I
lived
in
Stratford-on-Avon
until
about
five
years
ago. In
fact,
we
moved
from
Stratford
to
Los
Angeles. So you can imagine what a seamless transition that was. (Laughter) Actually, we
lived
in
a
place
called Snitterfield, just
outside
Stratford,
which
is
where Shakespeare's
father was born. Are you struck by a new thought? I was. You don't think of Shakespeare
having a father, do you? Do you? Because you don't think of Shakespeare being a child,
do you? Shakespeare being seven? I never thought of it. I mean, he was seven at some
point.
He
was
in somebody's
English
class,
wasn't
he?
How
annoying
would
that
be? (Laughter)

like
that.
It's
confusing everybody.
we
moved
from Stratford
to
Los
Angeles, and I just want to say a word about the transition, actually. My son didn't want to
come. I've got two kids. He's 21 now; my daughter's 16. He didn't want to come to Los
Angeles.
He
loved
it, but
he
had
a
girlfriend
in
England.
This
was
the
love
of
his
life,
Sarah. He'd
known
her
for
a
month. Mind
you,
they'd
had
their
fourth
anniversary, because it's a long time when you're 16. Anyway, he was really upset on the
plane, and he said,
about
that,
frankly, because
she
was
the
main
reason
we
were
leaving
the
country.(Laughter)But something strikes you when you move to America and when you
travel
around
the
world: Every
education
system
on
earth
has
the
same
hierarchy
of
subjects. Every one. Doesn't matter where you go. You'd think it would be otherwise, but it
isn't. At the top are mathematics and languages, then the humanities, and the bottom are
the arts. Everywhere on Earth. And in pretty much every system too, there's a hierarchy
within the arts. Art and music are normally given a higher status in schools than drama
and dance. There isn't an education system on the planet that teaches dance everyday to
children the
way
we
teach
them
mathematics.
Why? Why
not?
I
think
this
is
rather
important. I think math is very important, but so is dance. Children dance all the time if
they're
allowed
to,
we
all
do. We
all
have
bodies,
don't
we?
Did
I
miss
a
meeting? (Laughter) Truthfully, what happens is, as children grow up, we start to educate
them progressively from the waist up. And then we focus on their heads. And slightly to
one

you
were
to
visit
education,
as
an
alien, and
say

it
for,
public
education?
by this, who does everything that they should, who gets all the brownie points, who are
the
winners
-- I
think
you'd
have
to
conclude
the
whole
purpose
of
public
education throughout
the
world is
to
produce
university
professors.
Isn't
it? They're
the
people
who
come
out
the
top. And
I
used
to
be
one,
so
there.
(Laughter) And
I
like
university professors, but you know, we shouldn't hold them up as the high-water mark of
all human achievement. They're just a form of life,another form of life. But they're rather
curious, and
I
say
this
out
of
affection
for
's
something
curious
about
professors in my experience -- not all of them, but typically -- they live in their heads. They
live up there, and slightly to one side. They're disembodied, you know, in a kind of literal
way. They
look
upon
their
body as
a
form
of
transport
for
their
heads,
don't
they? (Laughter) It's a way of getting their head to meetings. If you want real evidence of
out-of-body
experiences, by
the
way,
get
yourself
along
to
a
residential
conference of
senior academics, and pop into the discotheque on the final night. (Laughter) And there
you will see it -- grown men and women writhing uncontrollably, off the beat,waiting until it
ends
so
they
can
go
home
and
write
a
paper
about

our
education
system
is
predicated on the idea of academic ability. And there's a reason. The whole system was
invented -- around the world, there were no public systems of education, really, before the
19th
century. They
all
came
into
being to
meet
the
needs
of
industrialism. So
the
hierarchy is rooted on two ideas. Number one, that the most useful subjects for work are
at the top. So you were probably steered benignly away from things at school when you
were a kid, things you liked, on the grounds that you would never get a job doing that. Is
that right? Don't do music, you're not going to be a musician; don't do art, you won't be an
artist. Benign
advice
--
now,
profoundly
mistaken.
The
whole
world is
engulfed
in
a
revolution. And
the
second
is
academic
ability,
which
has
really
come
to
dominate our
view of intelligence, because the universities designed the system in their image. If you
think
of
it,
the
whole
system of
public
education
around
the
world
is
a
protracted
process of university entrance. And the consequence is that many highly talented, brilliant,
creative people think they're not, because the thing they were good at at school wasn't
valued, or was actually stigmatized. And I think we can't afford to go on that the
next 30 years, according to UNESCO, more people worldwide will be graduatingthrough
education than since the beginning of history. More people, and it's the combinationof all
the
things
we've
talked
about
-- technology
and
its
transformation
effect
on
work,
and
demography and
the
huge
explosion
in
population. Suddenly,
degrees
aren't
worth

-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-



本文更新与2021-01-24 23:45,由作者提供,不代表本网站立场,转载请注明出处:https://www.bjmy2z.cn/gaokao/562991.html

学术交流英语口语考试视频文本的相关文章