When I was 9 years old, I went off to summer camp for the first time. And my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do, because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. And this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. You have the animal warmth of your family sitting right next to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventure land inside your own mind. And I had this idea that camp was going just like this, but better. I had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns. Camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. And on the very first day, our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that she said we would be doing everyday for the test of the summer to instill camp spirit. And it went like this: R-O-W-D-I-E, that?s the way we spell rowdy. Rowdy, rowdy, let?s get rowdy. Yeah. So I couldn?t figure out for the life of me why we were supposed to be so rowdy, or why we had to spell this word incorrectly, but I recited a cheer. I recited a cheer along with everybody else. I did my best. And I just waited for the time that I could go off and read my books, but the first time that I took my book out of my suitcase, the coolest girl in the bunk came up to me and she asked me, “Why are you being so mellow? “Mellow, of course, being the exact opposite of “R-O-W-D-I-E”. And then the second time I tired it, the counselor came up to me with a concerned expression on her face and she repeated the point
about camp spirit and said we should all work very hard to be outgoing. And so I put my books away, back in their suitcase, and I put them under my bed, and there they stayed for the rest of the summer. And I felt kind of guilty about this. I felt as if the books needed me somehow, and they are calling out to me and I was forsaking them, but I did forsake them and I didn?t open that suitcase again until I was back home with my family at the end of the summer.
Now, I tell you this story about summer camp. I could have told you 50 other just like it, all the time that I got the message that somehow my quiet and introverted style of being was not necessarily the right way to go, that I should be trying to pass as more of an extrovert. And I always sensed deep down that this was wrong and that introverts were pretty excellent just as they were, but for years I denied this intuition, and so I become a Wall Street lawyer, of all things, instead of the writer that I had always longed to be, partly because I needed to prove myself that I could be bold and assertive too. And I was always going off to crowded bars when I really would have preferred to just have a nice dinner with friends. And I made these self-negating choices so reflexively, that I wasn?t even aware that I was making them.
Now this is what many introverts do, and it?s our loss for sure, but it is also our colleagues? loss and our communities? loss. And at the risk of sounding grandiose, it is the
world?s loss, because when it comes to creativity and to leadership, we need introverts doing what they do best. A third to a half of the population is introverts, a third to a half. So that?s one out of every two or three people you know. So even if you?re an extrovert yourself, you know I? talking about your coworkers and your spouses and your children and the person sitting next to you right now, all of them subject to this bias that is pretty deep and real in our society. We all internalize it from a very early age without even having a language for what we?re doing.
Now to see the bias clearly you need to understand what introversion is. And it?s different from being shy. Shyness is about fear of social judgment. Introversion is more about, how do you respond to stimulation, including social stimulation. So extroverts really crave large amounts of stimulation, whereas introverts feel at their most alive and their most switched on and their most capable when they?re in quiet, more low-key environments. Not all the time, you know these things aren?t absolute, but a lot of the time.
So the key then to maximizing our talents is for us all to put ourselves in the zone of stimulation that is right for us. But now here?s where the bias comes in. Our most important institutions, our schools and our workplaces, they are designed mostly for extroverts, and for extroverts? need for lots of stimulation. And also we are living through this belief system. We have this belief system right now that I call the new groupthink, which
holds that all creativity and all productivity come from a very oddly gregarious place.
So if you picture the typical classroom nowadays: When I was going to school, we sat in rows. You know, we sat in rows of desks like this, and we did most of our work pretty autonomously, but nowadays, your typical classroom has pods of desks, four or five or six or seven kids all facing each other. And kids are working in countless group assignments. Even in subjects like math and creative writing, which you think, would depend on solo flights of thought. Kids are now expected to act as committee members. And for the kids who prefer to go off by themselves or just to work alone, those kids are seen as outliers often, or worse, as problem cases. And the vast majority of teachers? reports believing that the ideal student is an extrovert as opposed to an introvert, even though introverts actually get better grades and are more knowledgeable, according to research.
Okay, same thing is true in our workplaces. We now, most of us work in open plan offices, without walls, where we are subject to the constant noise and gaze of our coworkers. And when it comes to leadership, introverts are routinely passed over for leadership positions, even though introverts tend to be very careful, much less likely to take outsize risks, which is something we might all favor nowadays. And interesting research by Adam Grant at the Wharton School has found that introverted leaders often deliver better outcomes than extroverts do, because when they are managing proactive employees, they?re much more
likely to let those employees run with their ideas, whereas an extrovert can, quite unwittingly, get so excited about things that they?re putting their own stamp on things, and other people?s ideas might not as easily then bubble up to the surface.
Now in fact, some of our transformative leaders in history have been introverts. I?ll give you some examples. Eleanor Roosevelt, Rosa Parks, Gandhi, all these people described themselves as quiet and soft-spoken and even shy. And they all took the spotlight, even though every bone in their bodies was telling them not to. And this turns out to have a special power all its own, because people could feel these leaders were at the helm, not because they enjoyed directing others and not out of the pleasure of being looked at. They were there because they had no choice; because they were driven to do what they thought was right.
Now I think at this point it?s important for me to say that I actually love extroverts.
I always like to say some of my best friends are extrovert including my beloved husband. And we all fall at different points, of course, along the introvert/extrovert spectrum.
Even Carl Jung, the psychologist who first popularized these terms, said that there?s no such thing as a pure introvert or a pure extrovert. He said that such a man would be in a lunatic asylum, if he existed at all. And some people fall smack in the middle of the introvert/extrovert spectrum, and we call these people ambiverts.
And I often think that they have the best of all worlds, but many of us do recognize
ourselves as one type or the other. And what I?m saying is that culturally we need a much better balance. We need more of a yin and yang between these two types. This is especially important when it comes to creativity and to productivity, because when psychologists look at the lives of the most creative people, what they find are people who are very good at exchanging ideas and advancing ideas, but also have a serious streak of introversion in them. And this is because solitude is a crucial ingredient often to creativity.
So Darwin, he took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically turned down dinner party invitations.
Theodor Geisel, better known as Dr. Seuss, he dreamed up many of his amazing creations in a lonely bell tower office that he had in the back of his house in La Jolla, California. And he was actually afraid to meet the young children who read his books for fear that they were expecting him this kind of jolly Santa Claus-like figure and would be disappointed with his more reserved persona.
Steve Wozniak invented the first Apple computer sitting alone in his cubical in Hewlett-Packard where he was working at the time. And he says that he never would have become such an expert in the first place had he not been too introverted to leave the house when he was growing up.
Now of course, this does not mean that we should all stop collaborating, and case in
point is Steve Wozniak famously coming together with Steve Jobs to start Apple Computer, but it does mean that solitude matters and that for some people it is the air that they breathe. And in the fact, we have known for centuries about the transcendent power of solitude. It?s only recently that we?ve strangely begun to forget it. If you look at most of the world?s major religions, you will find seekers, Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, seeders who are going off by themselves alone to the wilderness where they then have profound epiphanies and revelations that they then bring back to the rest of the community. So no wildness, no revelations.
This is no surprise though if you look at the insights of contemporary psychology. It turns out that we can?t even be in a group of people without instinctively mirroring, mimicking their opinions. Even about seemingly personal and visceral things like which you?re attracted to, you will start aping the beliefs of the people around you without even realizing that that?s what you?re doing. And groups famously follow the opinions of the most dominant or charismatic person in the room, even though there?s zero correlation between being the best talker and having the best ideas, I mean zero. So……
You might be following the person with the best ideas, but you might not. And do you really want to leave it up to chance? Much better for everybody to go off by themselves, generate their own ideas freed from the distortions of group dynamics, and then come
together as a team to talk them through in a well-managed environment and take it from there.
Now if all this is true, then why are we getting it so wrong? Why are we setting up our schools this way and our workplaces? And why are we making these introverts feel so guilty about wanting to just go off by themselves some of the time?
One answer lies deep in our cultural history. Western societies, and in particular the U.S., have always favored the man of action over the man of contemplation and “man” of contemplation, but in America?s early days, we lived in what historians call a culture of character, where we still, at that point, valued people for their inner selves and their moral rectitude. And if you look at the self-help books from this era, they all had titles with things like “Character, the Grandest Thing in the World.”And they featured role models like Abraham Lincoln who was praised for being modest and unassuming. Ralph Waldo Emerson called him” A man who does not offend by superiority.”
But then we hit the 20th century and we entered a new culture that historians call the culture of personality. What happened is we had evolved an agricultural economy to a world of big business. And so suddenly people are moving from small towns to the cities. And instead of working alongside people they?ve known all their lives, now they are having to prove themselves in a crowd of strangers. So, quite understandably, qualities like magnetism
and charisma suddenly come to seem really important. And sure enough, the self-help books change to meet these new needs and they start to have names like “how to win friends and influence people”. And they feature as their role models really great salesmen. So that?s the world we…re living in today. That?s our cultural inheritance.
Now none of this is to say that social skills are unimportant, and I?m also not calling for the abolishing of teamwork at all. The same religions who send their sages off to lonely mountain tops also teach us love and trust. And the problems that we are facing today in fields like science and in economics are so vast and so complex that we are going to need armies of people coming together to solve them working together. But I am saying that the more freedom that we give introverts to be themselves, the more likely that they are to come up with their own unique solutions to these problems.
So now I?d like to share with you what?s in my suitcase today. Guess what? Books. I have a suitcase full of books. Here?s Margaret Atwood, “Cat?s Eye.” Here?s a novel by Milan Kundera. And here?s” the guide for the perplexed” by Maimonides.
But these are not exactly my books. I brought these books with me because they were written by my grandfather?s favorite authors.
My grandfather was a rabbi and he was a widower, who lived alone in a small apartment in Brooklyn that was my favorite place in the world when I was growing up,
partly because it was filled with his very gentle, very courtly presence and partly because it was filled with books. I mean literally every table; every chair in his apartment had yielded its original function to now serve as a surface for swaying stacks of books. Just like the rest of my family, my grandfather?s favorite thing to do in the whole world was to read. But he also loved his congregation, and you could feel this love in the sermons that he gave every week for the 62 years that he was a rabbi. He would take the fruits of each week?s reading and he would weave these intricate tapestries of ancient and humanist thought. And people would come from all over to hear him speak.
But here?s the thing about my grandfather. Underneath this ceremonial role, he was really modest and really introverted, so much so that when he delivered these sermons, he had trouble making eye contact with the very same congregation that he had been speaking to for 62 years. And even away from the podium, when you called him to say hello, he would often end the conversation prematurely for fear that he was taking up too much of your time. But when he died at the age of 94, the police had to close down the streets of his neighborhood to accommodate the crowd of people who came out to mourn him.
And so these days I try to learn from my grand father?s example in my own way. So I just published a book about introversion, and it took me about 7 years to write. And for me, that seven years was like total bliss, because I was reading, I was writing, I was
thinking, I was researching. It was my version of my grandfather?s hours of the day alone in his library.
But now all of a sudden my job is very different, and my job is to be out here talking about it, talking about introversion. And that?s a lot harder for me, because as honored as I am to be here with all of you right now, this is not my natural milieu. So I prepared for moments like these as best I could. I spent the last year practicing public speaking every chance I could get. And I call this my “year of speaking dangerously.” And that actually helped a lot.
But I?ll tell you, what helps even more is my sense, my belief, my hope that when it comes to our attitudes to introversion and to quiet and to solitude, we truly are poised on the brink on dramatic change. I mean, we are. And so I am going to leave you now with three calls for action for those who share this vision.
No.1, stop the madness for constant group works. Just stop it. And I want to be clear about what I?m saying, because I deeply believe our offices should be encouraging casual, chatty café-style types of interactions, you know, the kind where people come together and serendipitously have an exchange of ideas. That is great. It?s great for introverts and it?s great for extroverts. But we need much more privacy and much more freedom and much more autonomy at work. School, same thing. We need to be teaching kids to work together, for sure,
but we also need to be teaching them how to work on their own. This is especially important for extroverted children too. They need to work on their own because that is where deep thought comes from in part.
Okay, no.2, go to the wilderness. Be like Buddha, have your own revelations. I?m not saying that we all have to now go off and build our own cabins in the woods and never talk to each other again, but I am saying that we could all stand to unplug and get inside our own heads a little more often.
No.3, take a good look at what?s inside your own suitcase and why you put it there. So extroverts, maybe your suitcases are also full of books. Or maybe they?re full of champagne glasses or skydiving equipment. Whatever it is, I hope you take these things out every chance you get and grace us with your energy and your joy. But introverts, you being you, you probably have the impulse to guard very carefully what?s inside your own suitcase. And that?s okay. But occasionally, just occasionally, I hope you will open up your suitcases for other people to see, because the world needs you and in needs the things you carry.
So I wish you the best of all possible journeys and the courage to speak softly. Thank you very much.
教你认识真正的内向人与外向人 社会上有着关于内向者和外向者的7个传言和误解。比如内向的人不喜欢与人交往，外向的人很肤浅，内向的人很自命不凡，外向的人不擅长倾听等等。这些都是关于这两种类型人的一些假象。那么实际上又是怎样的呢?珍妮弗·康维勒博士是一个权威的演讲教授，高管培训师兼作家，她这样说道：“内向型的人从其自己的内部世界获得能量，而外向的人则是从外界的人群、环境及刺激中汲取能量。”她说内向的人享受孤单，并且需要有独处的时间，他们喜欢一对一的深入交谈。“他们用手指来‘说话’，通常会选择发邮件而不是打电话，更喜欢用写作来表达自己因为这样他们能对自己进行反思。外向的人热衷于出入各种社交场合。“他们先交谈再作思考，因为他们更能通过话语传达自己的观点。”他们在交谈中显得更加精力充沛，语速更快而且抑扬顿挫。换而言之，外部的活动更能使外向的人活跃起来，而点子和内部的反思更能吸引内向的人。这是临床心理学家罗莉·海尔格博士，在她的一部书——《一个人的狂欢：内向性格的力量》的观点。书中还提到内向的人大脑活动要比外向的人要活跃。她说：“脑成像研究表明，当内向者和外向者对外部刺激做出反应时，内向者大脑中处理信息、负责认知和处理问题的区域活动更加活跃。”。这可能就解释了为什么内向的人需要独处
的时间来进行自我反思，因为他们需要通过这个过程来分析问题、理清思绪。接下来，是一些常见的误区和真相。误区1：内向的人都害羞真相：的确有一部分内向的人是害羞的。但内向并不等于害羞。内向的人看上去害羞，因为他们通常在开口说话前先做思考，海尔格博士说道。（海尔格还是一 位心理学助理教授，就职于西维吉尼亚的Davis &Elkins大学）他们需要通过内部心理活动对信息进行处理，而外向的人则是在说话的过程中进行思考，她补充道。苏珊·凯恩在她的畅销书《安静：内向世界的竞争力》中提到：害羞是源于人惧怕遭到社会的否认和嘲笑，而内向则是因为人更喜欢刺激相对更小的环境。害羞是一种内在的痛苦感，而内向并不是这样。误区2：内向的人不擅长公共演讲真相：康维勒教授说：“靠演讲来谋生的人中，至少有一半人本质上是内向的，”，“只不过是他们做了充分的准备和练习，而且他们能 充分发挥自己的优点。”谈到内向但极具影响力的公共演讲者，凯恩就是一个很好的例子。大家不妨看看她的TED演讲， 她那场演讲获得了超过500万的点击率。凯恩最近还获得了2013年“会议主持人” 的金槌奖，该奖为该组织的最高荣誉。在她的书中，有一位哈佛大学的心理讲师，他被称为“罗宾·威廉姆斯（美国著名喜剧导演、演员)和爱恩斯坦的集合体”， 再有甚者，他在哈佛开设的课程往往座无虚席，他的课大多是在学生们激动得站立、鼓掌喝彩声中结束的。然而，这位
TED英语演讲稿 When you are a kid, you get asked this one particular question a lot, it really gets kind of annoying. What do you want to be when you grow up? Now, adults are hoping for answers like, I want to be an astronaut or I want to be a neurosurgeon, youre adults in your imaginations. Kids, theyre most likely to answer with pro-skateboarder, surfer or minecraft player. I asked my little brother, and he said, seriously dude, Im 10, I have no idea, probably a pro-skier, lets go get some ice cream. See, us kids are going to answer something were stoked on, what we think is cool, what we have experience with, and thats typically the opposite of what adults want to hear. But if you ask a little kid, sometimes youll get the best answer, something so simple, so obvious and really profound. When I grow up, I want to be happy. For me, when I grow up, I want to continue to be happy like I am now. Im stoked to be here at TedEx, I mean, Ive been watching Ted videos for as long as I can remember, but I never thought Id make it on the stage here so soon. I mean, I just became a teenager, and like most teenage boys, I spend most of my time wondering,
Ted中英对照演讲稿 大人能从小孩身上学到什么 Now, I want to start with a question: When was the last time you were called childish? For kids like me, being called childish can be a frequent occurrence. Every time we make irrational demands, exhibit irresponsible behavior, or display any other signs of being normal American citizens, we are called childish, which really bothers me. After all, take a look at these events: Imperialism and colonization, world wars, George W. Bush. Ask yourself: Who's responsible? Adults. 首先我要问大家一个问题：上一回别人说你幼稚是什么时候？像我这样的小孩，可能经常会被 人说成是幼稚。每一次我们提出不合理的要求，做出不负责任的行为，或者展现出有别于普通美 国公民的惯常行为之时，我们就被说成是幼稚。这让我很不服气。首先，让我们来回顾下这些事件：帝国主义和殖民主义，世界大战，小布什。请你们扪心自问下：这些该归咎于谁？是大人。 Now, what have kids done? Well, Anne Frank touched millions with her powerful account of the Holocaust, Ruby Bridges helped end segregation in the United States, and, most recently, Charlie Simpson helped to raise 120,000 pounds for Haiti on his little bike. So, as you can see evidenced by such examples, age has absolutely nothing to do with it. The traits the word childish addresses are seen so often in adults that we should abolish this age-discriminatory word when it comes to criticizing behavior associated with irresponsibility and irrational thinking. 而小孩呢，做了些什么？安妮·弗兰克(Anne Frank)对大屠杀强有力的叙述打动了数百万人的心。鲁比·布里奇斯为美国种族隔离的终结作出了贡献。另外，最近还有一个例子，查理·辛普 森（Charlie Simpson）骑自行车为海地募得 12万英镑。所以，这些例子证明了年龄与行为完 全没有关系。 "幼稚"这个词所对应的特点是常常可以从大人身上看到，由此我们在批评不负责 和非理性的相关行为时，应停止使用这个年龄歧视的词。 (Applause) Thank you. Then again, who's to say that certain types of irrational thinking aren't exactly what the world needs? Maybe you've had grand plans before, but stopped yourself, thinking: That's impossible or that costs too much or that won't
ted演讲稿 ted演讲稿 ted演讲稿 篇一: 倾听的力量 TED演讲稿 Listening is an active skill. hereas hearing is passive, listening is smething that e have t rk at. It s a relatinship ith sund. And yet it s a skill that nne f us are taught. Fr example, have yu ever cnsidered that there are listening psitins, places yu can listen frm? Here are t f them. Reductive listening is listening fr. It reduces everything dn t hat s relevant and it discards everything that s nt relevant. Men typically listen reductively. S he s saying, I ve gt this prblem. He s saying, Here s yur slutin. Thanks very much. Next. That s the ay e talk, right guys? Expansive listening, n the ther hand, is listening ith, nt listening fr. It s gt n destinatin in mind. It s just enjying the jurney. men typically listen expansively. If yu lk at these t, eye cntact, facing each ther, pssibly bth talking at the same time. Men, if yu get nthing else ut f this talk, practice expansive listening, and yu can transfrm yur relatinships. 认真倾听是一种主动技能。普通地听是被动的，而倾听却是要花功夫的。倾听是处理声音与声音之间的关系。它也是一种与生俱来的能力。比如，你考虑过倾听也有不同的姿势，以便你接收声音吗,看以下两个例子。删减性的倾听是有“选择”的听。它会只关注你想要知道的东西，而忽略无关紧要的内容。男人通常会删减性的倾听。比如一个人说: “我有个问题。”另一个人说:
2008年末，我很幸运地发现了一本好书：The Introvert Advantage: How to Thrive in a n Extrovert World（内向者优势），作者是心理学博士玛蒂·兰妮（Marti Laney）。这本书简直就是为像我这样的内向者量身打造的，而且写得又如百科全书般详细。它不仅解释了我身上的几个孤僻的行为习惯，而且还帮助我重新审视自己的人生。 认识我的人肯定都会说，“你2啊！到现在你才觉察到自己是个性格内向的人？”但是，事情并没有那么简单。问题就在于给某人贴上一个性格内向的标签本身就是一种非常肤浅的认识。人性是很复杂的。 书中有一个章节（第71页到75页）就专门探讨了人类的大脑，并分析了内向者与外向者大脑中的神经元在控制通路进行传递时的差异。如果这本书所论述的理论设想是正确的话，那么我们可以得出的结论就是：内向者对多巴胺过度敏感，他们受到的来自外界的刺激也会更多，他们也更容易筋疲力尽。而外向者恰恰相反，他们缺少多巴胺，他们的大脑需要肾上腺来创造多巴胺。外向者的神经通路也要比内向者的短些，而且他们大脑的血流量也相对要少些。存储于外向者神经系统中的信息大部分都是通过位于前额叶的布罗卡氏区（Broca’s a rea）传递的，而这里正是我们大脑运行绝大部分思考的地方。 不幸的是，按照这本书的说法，大概只有25%的人是内向者。而像我这样极端内向的人则又更少。由于整个社会缺乏对内向者的了解，所以人们就对这部分少数群体抱有许多的心理误区。（我要把我想说的话都说出来） 下面我就列出这10个比较常见的心理误区（这些是我基于自己的人生经验，然后再参考了这本书的情况下得出的结论）给大家看看。 心理误区1：内向者不喜欢说话 并不是这样，内向者不喜欢讲无关紧要的话，但他们有话必说。一遇到自己所感兴趣的话题，内向者也会滔滔不绝地谈话。 心理误区2：内向者很害羞 害羞和这个人是不是内向者一点关系都没有。内向者一点都不怕生。他们需要的仅仅是一个能促使自己与别人进行互动的理由。他们不会毫无目的地去和别人搭讪。如果你想和一个内向者聊聊天，你只要先开口说话就行了，不必要去计较繁文缛节。 心理误区3：内向者很粗鲁 在与别人照面寒暄的时候，内向者不喜欢说些拐弯抹角的话。他们希望人人都像自己那样真诚。但很不幸的是，在大部分情景下这都行不通。所以内向者很自然地就会有些社交压力，他们很难融入其他的群体中去。 心理误区4：内向者不喜欢与人打交道 恰恰相反，内向者非常珍视自己为数不多的几个朋友。他们随口就能叫出亲密朋友的名字。假如你很幸运地和一个内向者成为了朋友，你们之间的友谊会伴随你们终生的。你一旦获得了他们的认可，你就真正地走进了他们的生活圈子了。
ted精彩演讲：坠机让我学到的三件事 imagine a big explosion as you climb through 3,000 ft. imagine a plane full of smoke. imagine an engine going clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack. it sounds scary. 想像 一个大爆炸，当你在三千多英尺的高空；想像机舱内布满黑烟，想像引擎发出喀 啦、喀啦、喀啦、喀啦、喀啦的声响，听起来很可怕。 well i had a unique seat that day. i was sitting in 1d. i was the only one who can talk to the flight attendants. so i looked at them right away, and they said, no problem. we probably hit some birds. the pilot had already turned the plane around, and we werent that far. you could see manhattan. 那天我的位置很特別，我坐在1d，我是唯一可以和空服员说话的人，于是我 立刻看着他们，他们说，"没问题，我们可能撞上鸟了。" 机长已经把机头转向， 我们离目的地很近，已经可以看到曼哈顿了。 two minutes later, 3 things happened at the same time. the pilot lines up the plane with the hudson river. thats usually not the route. he turns off the engines. now imagine being in a plane with no sound. and then he says 3 words-the most unemotional 3 words ive ever heard. he says, brace for impact. 两分钟以后，三件事情同时发生：机长把飞机对齐哈德逊河，一般的航道可 不是这样。他关上引擎。想像坐在一架没有声音的飞机上。然后他说了几个字， 我听过最不带情绪的几个字，他说，"即将迫降，小心冲击。" i didnt have to talk to the flight attendant anymore. i could see in her eyes, it was terror. life was over. 我不用再问空服员什么了。我可以在她眼神里看到恐惧，人生结束了。 now i want to share with you 3 things i learned about myself that day. 现在我想和你们分享那天我所学到的三件事。 i leant that it all changes in an instant. we have this bucket list, we have these things we want to do in life, and i thought about all the people i wanted to reach out to that i didnt, all the fences i wanted to mend, all the experiences i wanted to have and i never did. as i thought about that later on, i came up with a saying, which is, collect bad wines. because if the wine is ready and the person is there, im opening it. i no longer want to postpone anything in life. and that urgency, that purpose, has really changed my life. 在那一瞬间内，一切都改变了。我们的人生目标清单，那些我们想做的事， 所有那些我想联络却没有联络的人，那些我想修补的围墙，人际关系，所有我想 经历却没有经历的事。之后我回想那些事，我想到一句话，那就是，"我收藏的酒 都很差。" 因为如果酒已成熟，分享对象也有，我早就把把酒打开了。我不想再 把生命中的任何事延后，这种紧迫感、目标性改变了我的生命。 the second thing i learnt that day - and this is as we clear the george washington bridge, which was by not a lot - i thought about, wow, i really feel one real regret, ive lived a good life. in my own humanity and mistaked, ive tired to get better at everything i tried. but in my humanity, i also allow my ego to get in. and i regretted the time i wasted on things that did not matter with people that matter. and i thought about my relationship
Brene Brown： The power of vulnerability So, I'll start with this:a couple years ago, an event planner called me because I was going to do a speaking event.And she called, and she said,"I'm really struggling with how to write about you on the little flier."And I thought, "Well, what's the struggle?"And she said, "Well, I saw you speak,and I'm going to call you a researcher, I think,but I'm afraid if I call you a researcher, no one will come,because they'll think you're boring and irrelevant."(Laughter)And I was like, "Okay."And she said, "But the thing I liked about your talk is you're a storyteller.So I think what I'll do is just call you a storyteller."And of course, the academic, insecure part of me was like, "You're going to call me a what?"And she said, "I'm going to call you a storyteller."And I was like, "Why not magic pixie?"(Laughter)I was like, "Let me think about this for a second."I tried to call deep on my courage.And I thought, you know, I am a storyteller.I'm a qualitative researcher.I collect stories; that's what I do.And maybe stories are just data with a soul.And maybe I'm just a storyteller.And so I said, "You know what?Why don't you just say I'm a researcher-storyteller."And she went, "Haha. There's no such thing."(Laughter)So I'm a researcher-storyteller,and I'm
倾听为主题的演讲稿 篇一：倾听,演讲稿 篇一：倾听的力量 ted演讲稿 listening is an active skill. whereas hearing is passive, listening is something that we have to work at. its a relationship with sound. and yet its a skill that none of us are taught. for example, have you ever considered that there are listening positions, places you can listen from here are two of them. reductive listening is listening for. it reduces everything down to whats relevant and it discards everything thats not relevant. men typically listen reductively. so hes saying, ive got this problem. hes saying, heres your solution. thanks very much. next. thats the way we talk, right guys expansive listening, on the other hand, is listening with, not listening for. its got no destination in mind. its just enjoying the journey. women typically listen expansively. if you look at these two, eye contact, facing each other, possibly both talking at the same time. men, if you get nothing else out of this talk, practice expansive
以内向的力量为主题的演讲稿 在职场也是如此。现在我们大多数人在开放的办公室工作，时刻都能听到同事的声音，时刻都到同事的注释。谈及领导才能内向的人时常很少考虑自己的领导地位。内向的人非常谨慎，很少毛较大的风险——在座的每一位都有可能喜欢这一点。沃顿商学院的爱的木格兰特的一项有趣的研究发现内向的人能传递很好的效果。因为内向的人在管理积极主动的雇员是会更倾向于让雇员按自己的意图行事。而性格外向的人会不经意地按照自己的意图行事致使别人的想法难露头角。 事实上，历史上的一些转型的领导却都是内向的人。诸如埃丽诺罗斯福、罗莎帕克斯、和甘地——这些人都说自己是个低声下气甚至是腼腆的人。可是他们却成了公众的焦点——尽管在他们的骨子里却再告诉他们是不会担任领导职位的。并且事实表明他们有一股特别的力量，因为人们会感到这些领导人行使权力不是为了摆不别人为乐而是因他们别无选择是被迫去做自己所做的事。 此刻我想说喜欢外向对我来说其实是至关重要的。我想说我的我朋友都是开朗的，包括我所深爱的的丈夫。当然，在性格上我们不同。甚至在心理学家卡尔荣哥在普及这些术语时也没有绝对的内向和外向。他说如果这样的人真的存在的话只在精神病院里。有些人的性格正介于外向和内向之间，也就是我们称之为中向性格的人。并且我常常想他们拥有最好的世界。但是我们中的许多人却认为自己不是内向就是外向。
我说的都是文化层面上的。我们需要是更好的平衡。我们在两种极端之中需要更多地阴阳。这对我们所谈及的创造力和生产力是至关重要的，因为心理学家在研究最有创造性的人时发现那些长于与交流思想和提高思想认识的人都有几分内向。 这是因为幽居独处是创造性的重要因素。所以达尔文长时间在森林独自散步并断然拒绝宴会的邀请、西奥多尔盖泽尔（即更为人所知的苏斯博士）实在加州拉尤拉市的房子后面的一个孤独的钟楼里领悟了惊人的.创造力。其实他害怕那些期望见到快乐的圣诞老人的读者见到她如此内向时的失望的神情。史蒂夫沃兹尼亚克是在他的惠普工作室里发明了首款的苹果电脑。他说要不是因为内向而不愿意离家的话是不可能成为计算机专家的。 当然这并不意味着我们不应该合作——举个恰当的例子便是沃 兹尼亚克和史蒂夫乔布斯合作组建苹果公司——但幽居独处对有些 人像他们呼吸的空气一样重要。事实上，几个世界以来人们都知道有居独处的超越力量，是我们最近几年才把他忘记。要是你看看世界上的主要的宗教追求者——摩西、耶稣、释迦摩尼、穆罕默德——皆隐居清幽之地得到顿悟启示并启迪后人。因此没有幽静就没有启示。 篇二：内向的力量 篇二：内向的力量 不过，要是深入研究现代心理学这种想想就不会令人吃惊。事实表明我们甚至不能人在群中而不会出于本能地受到别人的影响。甚至那些有魅力的个人也会无意识的开始模仿周围人的观点。
ted演讲稿范文4篇 i was one of the only kids in college who had a reason to go to the p.o. box at the end of the day, and that was mainly because my mother has never believed in email, in facebook, in texting or cell phones in general. and so while other kids were bbm-ing their parents, i was literally waiting by the mailbox to get a letter from home to see how the weekend had gone, which was a little frustrating when grandma was in the hospital, but i was just looking for some sort of scribble, some unkempt cursive from my mother. and so when i moved to new york city after college and got completely sucker-punched in the face by depression, i did the only thing i could think of at the time. i wrote those same kinds of letters that my mother had written me for strangers, and tucked them all throughout the city, dozens and dozens of them. i left them everywhere, in cafes and in libraries, at the u.n., everywhere. i blogged about those letters and the days when they were necessary, and i posed a kind of crazy promise to the internet: that if you asked me for a hand-written letter, i would write you one, no questions asked. overnight, my inbox 1 / 42
ted演讲稿脆弱的力量 欢迎来到聘才网，以下是聘才小编为大家搜索整理的，欢迎大家阅读。 ted演讲稿脆弱的力量 那我就这么开始吧：几年前，一个为我讲演活动的策划人打电话给我，她在电话里说：“我真很苦恼该如何在宣传单上介绍你”。我心想，这有什么苦恼呢? 她继续道：“你看，我听过你的演讲，我觉得我可以称你为研究者。可我担心的是，如果我这么称呼你，没人会来听，因为大家普遍认为研究员是很无趣而且脱离现实。”这说的很对。然后她说：“但是我非常喜欢你的演讲，你的讲演就跟讲故事一样很吸引人。我想来想去，还是觉得称你为讲故事的人比较妥当”。而那个做学术的、感到不安的我脱口而出道：“你要叫我什么?”她说：“我要称你为讲故事的人。”我心想：“为什么不干脆叫魔法小精灵?”我说：“让我考虑一下。” 我试着鼓起勇气。我对自己说，我是一个讲故事的人。我是一个从事定性研究的科研人员。我收集故事，这就是我的工作。或许故事就是有灵魂的数据。或许我就是一个讲故事的人。于是我说：“听着，要不你就称我为做研究兼讲故事的人。”她大笑着说：”哈哈，没这么个说法呀。“所以我是个做研究兼讲故事的人，我今天想跟大家谈论
的：我们要谈论的话题是关于拓展认知。我想给你们讲几个故事是关于我的一份研究工作，这份研究从本质上拓宽了我个人的认知，也确确实实改变了我生活、爱、工作还有教育孩子的方式。我的故事从这里开始：当我还是个年轻的博士研究生的时候，第一年,一位研究教授对我们说：“事实是这样的，如果有一个东西你无法测量，那么它就不存在。”我心想他只是在哄哄我们这些小孩子吧。我说：“真的么?”他说：“这是理所当然的。” 你知道我有一个社会工作的学士文凭，一个社会工作的硕士文凭，我当时在读的是一个社会工作的博士文凭，所以我整个学术生涯都被人所包围，他们大抵相信生活是一团乱麻，接受它。而我的观点则倾向于，生活是一团乱麻，解开它，把它整理好，再归类放入有条理的盒子里。 我当时认为我领悟到了我的方向，找到了我的工作，有能力自己去创一番事业。社会工作的一个重要特征是工作的环境是一团遭的不适环境。我当时想我就是要把这不适环境翻个底朝天，每科都拿到A。这就是我当时的信条。我当时真的是跃跃欲试。我想这就是我的职业生涯，因为我对乱成一团，难以处理的课题很感兴趣。我想要把它们弄清楚，我想要理解它们，我想进入那些我知道是重要的东西，把它们摸个透，然后用浅显易懂的方式呈献给每一个人。 当时我的起点是“人与人之间的连接关系”。这是因为
ted英语演讲稿3篇 as a magician, i try to create images that make people stop and think. i also try to challenge myself to do things that doctors say are not possible. i was buried alive in new york city in a coffin, buried alive in a coffin in april, 1999, for a week. i lived there with nothing but water. and it ended up being so much fun that i decided i could pursue doing more of these things. the next one is i froze myself in a block of ice for three days and three nights in new york city. that one was way more difficult than i had expected. the one after that, i stood on top of a hundred foot pillar for 36 hours. i began to hallucinate so hard that the buildings that were behind me started to look like big animal heads. 作为一个魔术师，我总是尝试去创造一个现象可以让人们驻足思考。我也试着挑战自己做一些医生看来不可能的事情。我曾于1999年4月，被埋在纽约一口棺材里整整一个星期。着一个礼拜仅靠水存活下来。但结果是我从中获得极大的乐趣。于是我决定去追求实现更多这样的事。下一次就是我把自己冻在一个大冰块里整整三天三
When I was nine years old I went off to summer camp for the first time. And my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do. Because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. And this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. You have the animal warmth of your family sitting right next to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventureland inside your own mind. And I had this idea that camp was going to be just like this, but better. (Laughter) I had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns. 当我九岁的时候我第一次去参加夏令营我妈妈帮我整理好了我的 行李箱里面塞满了书这对于我来说是一件极为自然的事情因为在我的家庭里阅读是主要的家庭活动听上去你们可能觉得我们是不爱交际的但是对于我的家庭来说这真的只是接触社会的另一种途径你们有自己家庭接触时的温暖亲情家人静坐在你身边但是你也可以自由地漫游在你思维深处的冒险乐园里我有一个想法野营会变得像这样子，当然要更好些（笑声）我想象到十个女孩坐在一个小屋里都穿着合身的女式睡衣惬意地享受着读书的过程 (Laughter)
[大学演讲稿范文五分钟]五分钟ted演讲稿范文【--演讲稿范文】 listening is an active skill. whereas hearing is passive, listening is something that we have to work at. its a relationship with sound. and yet its a skill that none of us are taught. for example, have you ever considered that there are listening positions, places you can listen fromhere are two of them. reductive listening is listening for. it reduces everything down to whats relevant and it discards everything thats not relevant. men typically listen reductively. so hes saying, ive got this problem. hes saying, heres your solution. thanks very much. next. thats the way we talk, right guysexpansive listening, on the other hand, is listening with, not listening for. its got no destination in mind. its just enjoying the journey. women typically listen expansively. if you look at these two, eye contact, facing each other,
TED励志演讲稿：怎么讲话别人才更愿意听 人类的声音：是我们所有人都弹奏的乐器。可能是这个世界上最有力的声音。它绝无仅有，或能引起战争，或能说“我爱你”。 然而，很多人有这种经历，当他们说的时候，人们并不在听。这是为什么呢? 我们怎样有力地说而让世界发生某种改变? 我所提议的是，我们需要改变一些习惯。在此我为你们收集整理了，说话的七宗罪。我没打算假装这是一个详细的列表，但这七个，我以为是我们相当容易犯的坏习惯。 第一就是：流言蜚语 在背后说某些人的坏话。这不是一个好习惯，我们都很明白那个说闲话的人在五分钟以后就会在别人跟前说我们的闲话。 第二，评判 我们知道有些人在谈话中是这样的，这让人很难听进别人的话，如果你知道你被人评判且被认为不合格。 第三，消极 你能陷入这个泥潭。我的母亲，在她生命的最后几年里，变得非常非常消极，很难让人听她说话。我记得有一天，我对她说，“今天是十月一号，”她说，“我知道，这不可怕吗?”当某人那么消极的时候是很难让人听进去的。 另外一种消极，就是抱怨
这是英国的全国性艺术。是我们的全国性运动。我们抱怨天气，体育和政治，几乎每件事，但实际上抱怨是病毒性的悲催，它不会在这个世界上传播太阳和光明。 借口 我们都遇上过这个家伙。也许我们都曾经是这个家伙。有些人有指责癖好。他们怪罪任何人而不是对自己的行为负责任，所以，这又是让人难以聆听的一种。 七件里面的老六，倒数第二，浮夸，吹牛 它有时贬低了我们的语言，事实上。比如，如果我看见什么真的很神奇的事情，那我该说什么呢? (笑声) 当然这种夸大后来就变成了说谎。彻头彻尾的说谎，我们就不想听这种我们知道会说谎的人。 最后是，固执己见 把事实和意见混淆。当这两件事混为一谈，你就像在听风一样。你知道，有人用他们自己的意见来强迫你。这很难让我们听讲。 这就是说话的七宗罪。我认为这些是我们需要避免的。 但有没有比较正面的呢? 的确有。我想建议四种我们可以牢靠站立的，真正强有力的基石或者基础，如果我们想让我们的言语有力并且让世界产生变化。 幸运的是，这些事情连起来是一个单词。这个词就是“hail”，
When I was 9 years old, I went off to summer camp for the first time. And my mother packed me a suitcase full of books, which to me seemed like a perfectly natural thing to do, because in my family, reading was the primary group activity. And this might sound antisocial to you, but for us it was really just a different way of being social. You have the animal warmth of your family sitting right next to you, but you are also free to go roaming around the adventure land inside your own mind. And I had this idea that camp was going just like this, but better. I had a vision of 10 girls sitting in a cabin cozily reading books in their matching nightgowns. Camp was more like a keg party without any alcohol. And on the very first day, our counselor gathered us all together and she taught us a cheer that she said we would be doing everyday for the test of the summer to instill camp spirit. And it went like this: R-O-W-D-I-E, that’s