What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
48 Comments
- wards16, on 06/23/2009, -1/+31ted.com is awesome
- TEDChris, on 06/22/2009, -2/+16There's more packed here into 6 minutes than most speakers manage in an hour. The lens of 'timeframe orientation' seems like a powerful way:
a) to understand other people
b) to change your own outlook for the better
(me: way lopsided to the future!) - ramilehti, on 06/23/2009, -3/+16Psychology is not the most scientific of fields of study I'll grant you that.
But there are a lot of therapies and information that has been acquired by behavioural analysis.
It's not all as bad as you make it out to be. - humanerror, on 06/23/2009, -0/+10I get my outlook on time from http://timecube.com
- humanerror, on 06/23/2009, -10/+18This is why I decided not to stick with a career in psychology. Look at this stuff. It's not anywhere near rigorous or technical enough to be scientific, and it's not anywhere near insightful enough to be taken seriously as philosophy.
So what is it? I did 4 years of psychology at university, and it doesn't get much better than what you can see in this video. Old men talking about their "theories" (not in the scientific sense) of personality. Maybe with some statistical analysis on shopping habits of teenagers thrown in.
As far as I could tell, the only science to be found in a university psychology department is happening in the area of neuroscience, and that's barely even related, mostly because the work actually is scientific. It's really more of a branch of biology. - bombula, on 06/23/2009, -1/+9Zimbardo's lecture about the nature of evil is really interesting too. It's up on MIT's website:
http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/459 - Jooze, on 06/23/2009, -1/+8lol wtf is this?
- asielen, on 06/23/2009, -1/+8Anything with humans involved will never be an exact science. Does that mean we should give up trying to learn about ourselves?
- inactive, on 06/23/2009, -0/+6You are educated stupid! Cube is opposite perfection. Singularity is death worship.
- DavidGX, on 06/23/2009, -0/+6I love ted talks.
- emjaymj, on 06/23/2009, -1/+6Am I missing something? How is this utter incoherence being dugg up?
- AmaDaden, on 06/23/2009, -0/+4I think he actually did. I remember taking psychology 101 and seeing him in a lot of videos. Could have just been videos for the text book we had because he was also the author.
Random side note: he is the same guy who did the 'lets make our own prison out of students and see what happens. OH SWEET JESUS HUMANS ARE TERRIBLE PEOPLE" experiment. - emjaymj, on 06/23/2009, -0/+3Holy ***** that is hilarious, and most of the reason for that is just the sheer magnitude of it all.
Edit: Wow... looking it up I've just found out the whole thing is supposed to be serious. Now it's just sad... - Laughto, on 06/23/2009, -0/+3Dugg for not linking me to letmegooglethatforyou
- atomicplayboy, on 06/23/2009, -0/+3Here's a longer speech:
http://fora.tv/2008/11/12/Philip_Zimbardo_The_Time ...
And his book about the subject:
http://www.amazon.com/Time-Paradox-Psychology-That ... - grantmoore3d, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3"Science refers to any systematic knowledge-base or prescriptive practice that is capable of resulting in a prediction or predictable type of outcome" - I'm pretty sure good psychological studies are in fact scientific. Just because the results are presented in a non-numerical fashion doesn't invalidate the research or arguments presented.
- Garmonbozzia, on 06/23/2009, -0/+2I've always thought this guy has the most evil sounding name of any real-life person.
- muzfuz, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3I've seen him give this lecture-- it's actually about an hour long, they really compressed it for TED. But very very interesting nonetheless. I have a video of the lecture floating around somewhere... maybe I'll post it on youtube or something.
- AmaDaden, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3You miss understand. I fully agree with what your saying. However right now this second we don't understand emotions on that fundamental level and it's likely to still be many years until we do so it is not information we can use to help people psychologically right now. So the rough understanding that current psychology gives us is valuable information we can use to better our selves right now. By all means we must continue to understand the chemistry involved so that we can flesh out these vague ideas we are coming up with. We should work from both ends and meet in the middle to find the full story.
- fiver22, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3For an interesting (and surprising) article on the 'Hard Science vs. Soft Science' discussion check out 'Hard and Soft Science: Physics vs Psychology' by Massimo Pigliucci in Skeptical Inquirer Vol.33 Issue 3
- inactive, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3I think it's good you chose not to stay in psychology. It clearly was not the field for you.
- Jektal, on 06/23/2009, -0/+2It was a sad day when work blocked ted.com :(
Anybody know if there's a transcript somewhere? - Wrake, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3This is the best TED ever!
- AmaDaden, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3This basically hits the nail on the head. Psychology is using and expanding upon what little we do know now instead of waiting for chemists and biologists to finally tell us how it all works. While psychology as a science gives people like my self who grew up on hard numbers the hebbe jebbes it has a place and we need to take a deep breath and see how best to connect it's work to real numbers and hard theory and not just throw it out because they went about things the wrong way.
- humanerror, on 06/24/2009, -1/+2Are you serious? I just told you I studied psychology for 4 years at university, and you assume I haven't heard of Zimbardo?
The entire point of what I said is that what Zimbardo has to say is about as good as it gets. And in my opinion, he doesn't have much to say.
If you're interested in ideas about consciousness and subjectivity and so forth, then study those things and call it what it is: philosophy. Psychology pretends to be distinct from philosophy in that it calls itself a science. . In my opinion, it does not come close to living up to this pretense. - kerbe6, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1http://fora.tv/2008/11/12/Philip_Zimbardo_The_Time ...
- l800LEMMINGS, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1i've seen his other ted video, he's a bit of an oddball but he is a very intelligent man with a lot of very interesting ideas to offer
- Roguecop, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1LOL. It's a joke, people.
- krymson, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1I always thought Zimbardo looked like the devil in those psychology videos of his.
- Merendino, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Just because I saw it... he spelled PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) wrong in his slide... made the acronym PSTD. Like some weird venereal disease.
- MalarkeyPN, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Yeah you definitely would need an /s tag for that. You imitate crazy people too well.
Personally I lol'd at "dillusion." What is that, like, a magic trick that tastes like a pickle? Was that part of the joke? - MrsFuttbucker, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1I was hoping that he would also talk about "flow", the mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing by a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity.
If you can achieve "flow" with a future-oriented time perspective, it'll make the struggle so much easier.
Most of us has already experienced "flow" in first-person shooter games. It's those times when time and self-consciousness cease to exist, where your focus is in entirely on your actions and awareness in the game, and your abilities reached it's peak as you achieve that MULTI-KILL. - Laughto, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2It's interesting, but needs a book, or an article, or a longer speech. All the idea is in the form it's presented here is some fun system-building. It'll fit into everything if it's on your mind but there are hundreds of thousands of systems that can make the same claim. Ultimately, the only way this will change behaviour or make sense of the world is if it catches on and enters the collective imagination, or whatever you want to call it. A TED talk is a good start, but it needs more substance.
- emjaymj, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2I disagree. It's actually kind of naive to think that humans are somehow above being able to understand by science (eventually, anyways.)
In fact, perhaps one of the most interesting fields of science right now is behavioral neuroscience, which attempts to do just that. Gaining scientific understanding of how physical matter (the brain) is able to support consciousness (the mind) is probably one of the most important things mankind will ever do and to suggest that it's not even worth pursuing makes me just a little bit sad. - FelixDrylock, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1wow, I was in that room that day! I'm a big fan of Zimbardo
Thanks for the vid! - kerbe6, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2No one taking the subject of psychology seriously thinks that psychology is a science. It is inherently non-scientific. This does not make it a less valid than a science, however. Searching for answers regarding our personalities and behaviors as humans is one of the most important things we can do. The very nature of the study makes it impossible to perfect as a science, but it can be studied in a scientific manner. And this is what people like Zimbardo do.
Socrates sez: A life unexamined is a life unlived. - japandave, on 06/23/2009, -3/+4Sorry brother but you've made a human error to say the least. For one- TED isn't meant to be exceedingly technical- if it were no one would want to participate. Additionally, this isn't some old fart up on a stage spouting off his grandiose theory- It is Philip Zimbardo- a professor at Stanford for 50 years who has done great research in psychology over the years... Read up on his bio next time you belittle a prominent scholar.
That said- I couldn't agree with you more about your latter statement regarding neuroscience- but even more exciting is the study of how gene expression controls psychological disposition. - DulcetTone, on 06/23/2009, -1/+1A lecture from my Dad, now with Powerpoint. Amazing, TED!
- Emiraly, on 06/23/2009, -1/+1I wish this guy would get his own TV show or special like Michio Kaku and Neil Tyson have :(
- Roguecop, on 06/23/2009, -1/+1I dunno when I get the ***** motor going it's hard for me to stop. Only a being of the 5th dementia or higher can appreciate my 'dillusion'.
- thefourth, on 06/23/2009, -0/+0That's nice an all, but here's a site that takes a similar orientation to time and orients it to practical commercial applications. What's interesting about their model is that there isn't an "ideal" thinking style, its just important to know the way you think and how that differs from others:
www.gpsforthemind.com (requires registration)
www.mappingthinking.com (free results without registration) - humanerror, on 06/24/2009, -1/+1Whether you're "pretty sure" or not isn't the question. Go and try to find a theory in psychology that fits your own definition there. There ain't one.
It's fair to say that psychology hasn't produced any valid scientific theories yet because it is still a new science. That's fine. But that's different from what you're doing, and what most people who talk about psychology do, whether from inside or out. Namely, pretending that psychology has achieved more than it has.
Right now it amounts to a bunch of dead-ends and pretense. People building conceptual models of human behavior without any underlying theory of human cognition to base it on. Psychologists will write papers about how people prefer red over blue, but they have no idea what they're even saying. It all assumes that one accepts intuitive, vague definitions of ideas like "prefer". And if you're doing that, then what exactly is the inquiry meant to explain? These are the questions that are not currently asked within the field. It has a long, long way to go before it can even get started on the path of science. - rmxz, on 06/23/2009, -3/+2If you think of Psychology not as a science, but rather as a performance art, Zimbardo's an excellent artist.
- haydesigner, on 06/23/2009, -2/+1Insightful.
- sebey, on 06/22/2009, -5/+3You could write a book this idea. it is a life changing as GTD or 7 habits of highly effective people
you are Hungary for more of this I must say does he have a website?
I am very much future orientated and also look at the saying "time vs. money" very much linked in with this concept and possibly where it came from - Roguecop, on 06/23/2009, -6/+1Over intellectualized. The time construct is entirely misunderstood. You see it as a ribbon. It is a tapestry. What humans understand as time is a control illusion. Want to change the past? Change your perspective on the past. Want to change the present? Shift paradigms. Want to change the future? You're now doing it. We're all blessed or condemned with a healthy dose of dillusion, which is theindividual human view of things. It isn't real, it isn't what you believe. A 5th or 6th dimensional being could fully explain but would never bother.
- suprememilo, on 06/23/2009, -12/+4mmm high school psych videos.
- okayokayokay, on 06/23/2009, -16/+7Meh
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is