[Music]
right now each of you should have a bag
on your tables I’d like you to take a
moment and open them up
okay so everybody open them up all right
what’s in the bag
okay okay they’re ping-pong balls but
more specifically what shape are they
that’s right there is fear there are so
few shapes that are genuinely as
interesting as spheres take a moment and
look at them they are completely smooth
and they have infinite sides seriously I
love spheres today my talk is gonna be
about spheres and before you roll your
eyes and settle in for your 15 minute
nap just just hear me out for a second
I’m not a geometry enthusiast
nor am I one of Euclid’s disciples in
fact I just like viewing stories as
spheres now at first thought that sounds
a little confusing I know and to be fair
it isn’t one of the more generic
philosophical theories brought to the
table so it’s alright let me explain the
way that I’ve always seen it you can
view people look at stories three
different ways they can be one-sided and
completely objective and that can’t
change or for whatever reason be it
personal biases preconceived notions
discrepancies in each storyteller there
are two sides to a story I however
believe that there are infinite sides to
a story instead this is a me now once
upon a time Amy told Marcus story and
Mark went on to tell Daniel then Amy
told the same story to miles and miles
told Becca to review the story branched
out like this now okay you might think
story went out to a couple of people
still still the same story though I can
destroy that logic in two words
reconstructive memory now if you’ve ever
read a psychology book or even cruised
through Wikipedia page you might know
what reconstructive memory is but all
just refresh
I’m read a bit while we seem to think
that the memories that we recall are
objective and completely how we remember
them it’s been proven that things like
personal biases preconceived notions
social global and even local knowledge
can distort memories while they’re
stored away in our brain so every time
we recall the memory it’s a bit more
skewed than the last time back to the
story
so here at the center we have the
objective story the base and that’s not
all that important let’s move on let’s
think of Amy as patient zero here when
amy recalls the story to tell
mark amy amy’s recollection is a little
bit more distorted than how she first
experienced the story and due to the
complexities of the human brain
mark perceives it and understands it
slightly differently from what amy told
him then mark goes on to tell Daniel
when Mark has to recollect this memory
it’s slightly more skewed and when
Daniel hears a story he perceives it
slightly differently if you’re keeping
up that’s five faces already five faces
of an infinite sphere I could go on
about this forever but the gist of it is
quite simple the complexity of the human
brain makes it such that stories can’t
really be one-sided we have personal
biases we have preconceived notions we
have things that we personally believe
are real and not real and this generally
makes it such that we tell the story
differently from how we first heard it
that was five faces now imagine if Amy
told three other people everything is
subjective and and I know that that’s a
pretty bold statement I just I just made
a pretty bold statement but before you
try and like prove me wrong with your
science and your math let me make my
case with an example
more specifically let me make my case
with the atomic with the atomic model
now before I start I just want to point
out I’m the worst person to come to four
things
science seriously if you’re looking to
me for objective ideas don’t okay so
basically until the 18th century it was
theorized that matter was made up of
discrete units but this wasn’t really
scientific theory more a theological and
philosophical one eventually what we did
was we discovered protons and discovered
electrons and the first model of the
atom turned out a bit like this if
you’ve ever been to an eighth grade
science class you’re probably crying
right now but despite this looking
literally like an underwhelming bowl of
cereal it was what we thought was fact
at the time eventually we discovered new
things we created new microscopes we
found out what we thought would like we
never imagined that the there were other
things to this and today this is what we
view the atom as this is scientifically
correct but who’s to say that we aren’t
going to create better microscopes and
discover new things this is the issue
with the idea of objectivity now I did
nowadays it’s becoming easier and easier
to discover new things with the touch of
a button we’re constantly disproving
what we thought was right and the reason
that objectivity is so difficult to hold
on to is because we’re so complex as
beings we have so much going on this
brings us to the inevitable question of
whether or not it’s worth it to keep
discovering so like I said before pretty
much everything is subject to change
we’re constantly disproving things life
itself really is subject to change so if
we’re constantly disproving things is it
worth it to keep discovering is it worth
it to keep discovering if we know that
it’s only due to change it’s only going
to change with time it can be
discouraging to think that whatever we
discover right now is going to be
disproven but one of the few things that
we
depend on in life is that humans will
disagree and debate on these things and
what we perceive to be fact and it’s the
thing that we kind of need to like think
about right here is that we only give
things value things only have value
because we give them value this is the
basis of the existential school of
thought and a quick overview of it we
only have really give value to things
and that gives them value it sounds a
little recursive I know but so
essentially if we gave no things value
if we gave nothing value it would be as
no worst test but if we as a society
decide what is worth and what isn’t
worth it then you know we gain intrinsic
value and you know as a society we work
toward discovery so the question is is
it worth it to discover new things are
we going to give worth to discovery when
it’s only going to be disproved later on
well it seems kind of discouraging it is
worth remembering that we are constantly
conquering for a reason try to think of
human development as a staircase in
order to get to the top of the staircase
you need to you know climb each step and
climbing each step launches you slightly
further toward your goal
are you moving past each step are you
not acknowledging each step sure but
eventually you’re where you need to be
let’s think about human development as a
never ending staircase there’s always
more to conquer and always more to discover thank you
right now each of you should have a bag
on your tables I’d like you to take a
moment and open them up
okay so everybody open them up all right
what’s in the bag
okay okay they’re ping-pong balls but
more specifically what shape are they
that’s right there is fear there are so
few shapes that are genuinely as
interesting as spheres take a moment and
look at them they are completely smooth
and they have infinite sides seriously I
love spheres today my talk is gonna be
about spheres and before you roll your
eyes and settle in for your 15 minute
nap just just hear me out for a second
I’m not a geometry enthusiast
nor am I one of Euclid’s disciples in
fact I just like viewing stories as
spheres now at first thought that sounds
a little confusing I know and to be fair
it isn’t one of the more generic
philosophical theories brought to the
table so it’s alright let me explain the
way that I’ve always seen it you can
view people look at stories three
different ways they can be one-sided and
completely objective and that can’t
change or for whatever reason be it
personal biases preconceived notions
discrepancies in each storyteller there
are two sides to a story I however
believe that there are infinite sides to
a story instead this is a me now once
upon a time Amy told Marcus story and
Mark went on to tell Daniel then Amy
told the same story to miles and miles
told Becca to review the story branched
out like this now okay you might think
story went out to a couple of people
still still the same story though I can
destroy that logic in two words
reconstructive memory now if you’ve ever
read a psychology book or even cruised
through Wikipedia page you might know
what reconstructive memory is but all
just refresh
I’m read a bit while we seem to think
that the memories that we recall are
objective and completely how we remember
them it’s been proven that things like
personal biases preconceived notions
social global and even local knowledge
can distort memories while they’re
stored away in our brain so every time
we recall the memory it’s a bit more
skewed than the last time back to the
story
so here at the center we have the
objective story the base and that’s not
all that important let’s move on let’s
think of Amy as patient zero here when
amy recalls the story to tell
mark amy amy’s recollection is a little
bit more distorted than how she first
experienced the story and due to the
complexities of the human brain
mark perceives it and understands it
slightly differently from what amy told
him then mark goes on to tell Daniel
when Mark has to recollect this memory
it’s slightly more skewed and when
Daniel hears a story he perceives it
slightly differently if you’re keeping
up that’s five faces already five faces
of an infinite sphere I could go on
about this forever but the gist of it is
quite simple the complexity of the human
brain makes it such that stories can’t
really be one-sided we have personal
biases we have preconceived notions we
have things that we personally believe
are real and not real and this generally
makes it such that we tell the story
differently from how we first heard it
that was five faces now imagine if Amy
told three other people everything is
subjective and and I know that that’s a
pretty bold statement I just I just made
a pretty bold statement but before you
try and like prove me wrong with your
science and your math let me make my
case with an example
more specifically let me make my case
with the atomic with the atomic model
now before I start I just want to point
out I’m the worst person to come to four
things
science seriously if you’re looking to
me for objective ideas don’t okay so
basically until the 18th century it was
theorized that matter was made up of
discrete units but this wasn’t really
scientific theory more a theological and
philosophical one eventually what we did
was we discovered protons and discovered
electrons and the first model of the
atom turned out a bit like this if
you’ve ever been to an eighth grade
science class you’re probably crying
right now but despite this looking
literally like an underwhelming bowl of
cereal it was what we thought was fact
at the time eventually we discovered new
things we created new microscopes we
found out what we thought would like we
never imagined that the there were other
things to this and today this is what we
view the atom as this is scientifically
correct but who’s to say that we aren’t
going to create better microscopes and
discover new things this is the issue
with the idea of objectivity now I did
nowadays it’s becoming easier and easier
to discover new things with the touch of
a button we’re constantly disproving
what we thought was right and the reason
that objectivity is so difficult to hold
on to is because we’re so complex as
beings we have so much going on this
brings us to the inevitable question of
whether or not it’s worth it to keep
discovering so like I said before pretty
much everything is subject to change
we’re constantly disproving things life
itself really is subject to change so if
we’re constantly disproving things is it
worth it to keep discovering is it worth
it to keep discovering if we know that
it’s only due to change it’s only going
to change with time it can be
discouraging to think that whatever we
discover right now is going to be
disproven but one of the few things that
we
depend on in life is that humans will
disagree and debate on these things and
what we perceive to be fact and it’s the
thing that we kind of need to like think
about right here is that we only give
things value things only have value
because we give them value this is the
basis of the existential school of
thought and a quick overview of it we
only have really give value to things
and that gives them value it sounds a
little recursive I know but so
essentially if we gave no things value
if we gave nothing value it would be as
no worst test but if we as a society
decide what is worth and what isn’t
worth it then you know we gain intrinsic
value and you know as a society we work
toward discovery so the question is is
it worth it to discover new things are
we going to give worth to discovery when
it’s only going to be disproved later on
well it seems kind of discouraging it is
worth remembering that we are constantly
conquering for a reason try to think of
human development as a staircase in
order to get to the top of the staircase
you need to you know climb each step and
climbing each step launches you slightly
further toward your goal
are you moving past each step are you
not acknowledging each step sure but
eventually you’re where you need to be
let’s think about human development as a
never ending staircase there’s always
more to conquer and always more to discover thank you
Please follow and like us: