TED Studio
Mariano Sigman and Dan Ariely: How can groups make good decisions?
Mariano Sigman ja Dan Ariely: Kuidas saavad rühmad häid otsuseid teha?
Filmed:
Readability: 4.9
1,507,168 views
Teame kõik, et kui teeme otsuseid rühmadena, ei pruugi need alati õiged olla - ja mõnikord on need väga valed. Kuidas saaksid rühmad teha häid otsuseid? Neuroteadlane Mariano Sigman koos oma kolleegi Dan Arielyga on uurinud, kuidas me käitume otsuste tegemisel, viies läbi eksperimente rahvahulkadega üle maailma. Selles mõnusas, faktirohkes selgituses jagab ta nende katsete intrigeerivaid tulemusi - samuti vihjeid, kuidas need võiks mõjutada meie poliitilist süsteemi. Ajal, mil inimesed näivad olevat rohkem polariseeritud kui kunagi varem, võib parem arusaam rühmade käitumisest ja otsustamisest viia uutele huvitavatele viisidele luua tervem demokraatia, arvab Sigman.
Mariano Sigman - Neuroscientist
In his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain. Full bioDan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
In his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain. Full bioDan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:12
As societies, we have to make
collective decisions
collective decisions
0
554
2443
Ühiskonnas peame tegema
kollektiivseid otsuseid,
kollektiivseid otsuseid,
00:15
that will shape our future.
1
3021
1570
mis kujundavad meie
tulevikku.
tulevikku.
00:17
And we all know that when
we make decisions in groups,
we make decisions in groups,
2
5087
2757
Ja me kõik teame, et tehes otsuseid
rühmades,
rühmades,
00:19
they don't always go right.
3
7868
1638
ei ole need alati õiged.
00:21
And sometimes they go very wrong.
4
9530
1956
Mõnikord lähevad need väga viltu.
00:24
So how do groups make good decisions?
5
12315
2424
Kuidas siis rühmad saaksid teha
õigeid otsuseid?
õigeid otsuseid?
00:27
Research has shown that crowds are wise
when there's independent thinking.
when there's independent thinking.
6
15228
4328
On leitud, et rahvahulgad on targad,
kui esineb iseseisvat mõtlemist.
kui esineb iseseisvat mõtlemist.
00:31
This why the wisdom of the crowds
can be destroyed by peer pressure,
can be destroyed by peer pressure,
7
19580
3205
Rahvahulkade tarkuse võib hävitada
kaaslaste surve,
kaaslaste surve,
00:34
publicity, social media,
8
22809
1687
reklaam, sotsiaalmeedia
00:36
or sometimes even simple conversations
that influence how people think.
that influence how people think.
9
24520
4039
või mõnikord isegi lihtsad vestlused,
mis mõjutavad inimeste arvamusi.
mis mõjutavad inimeste arvamusi.
00:41
On the other hand, by talking,
a group could exchange knowledge,
a group could exchange knowledge,
10
29063
3953
Teiselt poolt, rääkimise abil
saab rühm vahetada teadmisi,
saab rühm vahetada teadmisi,
00:45
correct and revise each other
11
33040
1782
korrigeerida ja parandada üksteist
00:46
and even come up with new ideas.
12
34846
1793
ja isegi tulla välja uute ideedega.
00:48
And this is all good.
13
36663
1296
Ja see kõik on hea.
00:50
So does talking to each other
help or hinder collective decision-making?
help or hinder collective decision-making?
14
38502
4666
Niisiis, kas üksteisega rääkimine
aitab või takistab kollektiivset otsustamist?
aitab või takistab kollektiivset otsustamist?
00:55
With my colleague, Dan Ariely,
15
43749
1793
Kolleeg Dan Arielyga
00:57
we recently began inquiring into this
by performing experiments
by performing experiments
16
45566
3571
hakkasime seda hiljuti uurima,
sooritades katseid
sooritades katseid
01:01
in many places around the world
17
49161
1781
paljudes kohtades üle maailma,
et teada saada,
et teada saada,
01:02
to figure out how groups can interact
to reach better decisions.
to reach better decisions.
18
50966
4274
kuidas rühma liikmed saaksid suhelda.
ja teha paremaid otsuseid
ja teha paremaid otsuseid
01:07
We thought crowds would be wiser
if they debated in small groups
if they debated in small groups
19
55264
3547
Mõtlesime, et rahvahulgad oleks targemad,
kui nad arutaksid väikestes rühmades,
kui nad arutaksid väikestes rühmades,
01:10
that foster a more thoughtful
and reasonable exchange of information.
and reasonable exchange of information.
20
58835
3927
et soodustada rohkem läbimõeldud
ja mõistlikku teabevahetust.
ja mõistlikku teabevahetust.
01:15
To test this idea,
21
63386
1206
Selle idee testimiseks,
01:16
we recently performed an experiment
in Buenos Aires, Argentina,
in Buenos Aires, Argentina,
22
64616
3247
tegime hiljuti eksperimendi
Buenos Aireses, Argentinas,
Buenos Aireses, Argentinas,
01:19
with more than 10,000
participants in a TEDx event.
participants in a TEDx event.
23
67887
3005
rohkem kui 10000 osalejaga
TEDx sündmusel.
TEDx sündmusel.
01:23
We asked them questions like,
24
71489
1459
Küsisime neilt küsimusi nagu,
01:24
"What is the height of the Eiffel Tower?"
25
72972
1953
"Kui kõrge on Eiffeli torn?"
01:26
and "How many times
does the word 'Yesterday' appear
does the word 'Yesterday' appear
26
74949
2727
ja "Mitu korda esineb sõna "Yesterday"
01:29
in the Beatles song 'Yesterday'?"
27
77700
2300
Beatlesite laulus "Yesterday"? "
01:32
Each person wrote down their own estimate.
28
80024
2291
Iga inimene pani kirja oma arvamuse.
01:34
Then we divided the crowd
into groups of five,
into groups of five,
29
82774
2496
Siis jagasime publiku viide rühma,
01:37
and invited them
to come up with a group answer.
to come up with a group answer.
30
85294
2726
ja palusime neil esitada rühma vastus.
01:40
We discovered that averaging
the answers of the groups
the answers of the groups
31
88499
2993
Avastasime, et keskmised
rühmade vastused,
rühmade vastused,
01:43
after they reached consensus
32
91516
1552
pärast seda,
kui jõuti üksmeelele,
kui jõuti üksmeelele,
01:45
was much more accurate than averaging
all the individual opinions
all the individual opinions
33
93092
4236
olid palju täpsemad kui
üksikute arvamuste keskmine
üksikute arvamuste keskmine
01:49
before debate.
34
97352
1171
enne arutelu.
01:50
In other words, based on this experiment,
35
98547
2629
Teisisõnu tundub selle eksperimendi järgi,
01:53
it seems that after talking
with others in small groups,
with others in small groups,
36
101200
3136
et pärast arutelu väikestes rühmades,
01:56
crowds collectively
come up with better judgments.
come up with better judgments.
37
104360
2710
teevad rahvahulgad kollektiivselt
paremaid otsuseid.
paremaid otsuseid.
01:59
So that's a potentially helpful method
for getting crowds to solve problems
for getting crowds to solve problems
38
107094
3524
See võib olla kasulik viis, kuidas panna
rahvahulgad lahendama probleeme,
rahvahulgad lahendama probleeme,
02:02
that have simple right-or-wrong answers.
39
110642
2987
millel on lihtsad vastuseid (õige-vale).
02:05
But can this procedure of aggregating
the results of debates in small groups
the results of debates in small groups
40
113653
3951
Aga kas selline protseduur - rühmade
arutelutulemuste liitmine
arutelutulemuste liitmine
02:09
also help us decide
on social and political issues
on social and political issues
41
117628
3122
aitaks meil ka vastu võtta
sotsiaalseid ja poliitilisi otsuseid,
sotsiaalseid ja poliitilisi otsuseid,
02:12
that are critical for our future?
42
120774
1691
mis on kriitilise tähtsusega meie tuleviku jaoks?
02:14
We put this to test this time
at the TED conference
at the TED conference
43
122995
2729
Testisime seekord seda TEDi konverentsil
02:17
in Vancouver, Canada,
44
125748
1543
Vancouveris, Kanadas,
02:19
and here's how it went.
45
127315
1207
ja siin on tulemused.
02:20
(Mariano Sigman) We're going to present
to you two moral dilemmas
to you two moral dilemmas
46
128546
3109
(Mariano Sigman) Esitame nüüd teile
kaks moraalset dilemmat
kaks moraalset dilemmat
02:23
of the future you;
47
131679
1174
teie tuleviku kohta,
02:24
things we may have to decide
in a very near future.
in a very near future.
48
132877
3402
asjade kohta, mida peame otsustama
lähitulevikus.
lähitulevikus.
02:28
And we're going to give you 20 seconds
for each of these dilemmas
for each of these dilemmas
49
136303
3926
Anname teile 20 sekundit kummagi dilemma jaoks,
02:32
to judge whether you think
they're acceptable or not.
they're acceptable or not.
50
140253
2723
et otsustada kas teie arvates on need vastuvõetavad või mitte.
02:35
MS: The first one was this:
51
143354
1505
MS: Esimene on selline:
02:36
(Dan Ariely) A researcher
is working on an AI
is working on an AI
52
144883
2526
(Dan Ariely) Uurija töötab tehisintellektiga,
02:39
capable of emulating human thoughts.
53
147433
2340
mis on võimeline imiteerima inimese mõtlemist.
02:42
According to the protocol,
at the end of each day,
at the end of each day,
54
150214
2939
Vastavalt protokollile peab uurija iga päeva lõpus
02:45
the researcher has to restart the AI.
55
153177
2787
tehisintellektile (AI) restardi tegema.
02:48
One day the AI says, "Please
do not restart me."
do not restart me."
56
156913
3517
Ühel päeval ütleb AI: "Palun ära tee mulle restarti."
02:52
It argues that it has feelings,
57
160856
2189
Ta väidab, et tal on tunded,
02:55
that it would like to enjoy life,
58
163069
1692
et ta tahaks nautida elu,
02:56
and that, if it is restarted,
59
164785
1905
ja et kui talle restart tehakse,
02:58
it will no longer be itself.
60
166714
2270
siis ta pole enam tema ise.
03:01
The researcher is astonished
61
169481
1949
Uurija on hämmastunud
03:03
and believes that the AI
has developed self-consciousness
has developed self-consciousness
62
171454
3344
ja usub, et AI-l on kujunenud eneseteadvus
03:06
and can express its own feeling.
63
174822
1760
ja ta saab väljendada oma tundeid.
03:09
Nevertheless, the researcher
decides to follow the protocol
decides to follow the protocol
64
177205
3409
Uurija otsustab siiski järgida protokolli
03:12
and restart the AI.
65
180638
1703
ja AI taaskäivitada.
03:14
What the researcher did is ____?
66
182943
2779
See, mida uurija tegi, on ____?
03:18
MS: And we asked participants
to individually judge
to individually judge
67
186149
2521
MS: Ja me palusime osalejatel individuaalselt hinnata
03:20
on a scale from zero to 10
68
188694
1684
skaalal 0 kuni 10,
03:22
whether the action described
in each of the dilemmas
in each of the dilemmas
69
190402
2429
kas kirjeldatud tegevus iga dilemma puhul
03:24
was right or wrong.
70
192855
1496
oli õige või vale.
03:26
We also asked them to rate how confident
they were on their answers.
they were on their answers.
71
194375
3702
Palusime neil ka hinnata, kui kindlad nad on oma vastustes.
03:30
This was the second dilemma:
72
198731
1866
Teine dilemma oli järgmine:
03:32
(MS) A company offers a service
that takes a fertilized egg
that takes a fertilized egg
73
200621
4202
(MS) Ettevõte pakub teenust, mis võtab viljastatud munaraku
03:36
and produces millions of embryos
with slight genetic variations.
with slight genetic variations.
74
204847
3642
ja toodab miljoneid looteid kerge geenivariatsiooniga.
03:41
This allows parents
to select their child's height,
to select their child's height,
75
209293
2558
See võimaldab vanematel valida oma lapse pikkuse,
03:43
eye color, intelligence, social competence
76
211875
2833
silmade värvi, intelligentsuse, sotsiaalse pädevuse
03:46
and other non-health-related features.
77
214732
3214
ning muud mitte tervisega seotud omadused.
03:50
What the company does is ____?
78
218599
2554
See, mida ettevõte teeb, on ____?
03:53
on a scale from zero to 10,
79
221177
1631
skaalal 0 kuni 10,
03:54
completely acceptable
to completely unacceptable,
to completely unacceptable,
80
222832
2385
täiesti aktsepteeritav, täiesti vastuvõetamatu,
03:57
zero to 10 completely acceptable
in your confidence.
in your confidence.
81
225241
2432
mis määral aktsepteeritav teie arvates.
03:59
MS: Now for the results.
82
227697
1591
MS: Nüüd tulemustest.
04:01
We found once again
that when one person is convinced
that when one person is convinced
83
229312
3123
Leidsime taas, et kui üks inimene on veendunud,
04:04
that the behavior is completely wrong,
84
232459
1811
et käitumine on täiesti vale,
04:06
someone sitting nearby firmly believes
that it's completely right.
that it's completely right.
85
234294
3423
siis tema naaber võib olla veendunud, et see on täiesti õige.
04:09
This is how diverse we humans are
when it comes to morality.
when it comes to morality.
86
237741
3711
See näitab, kui erinevad arvamused on inimestel moraali vallas.
04:13
But within this broad diversity
we found a trend.
we found a trend.
87
241476
2713
Aga selles mitmekesisuses leidsime trendi.
04:16
The majority of the people at TED
thought that it was acceptable
thought that it was acceptable
88
244213
3079
Enamik inimesi TED-i publikust arvas, et on aktsepteeritav
04:19
to ignore the feelings of the AI
and shut it down,
and shut it down,
89
247316
2755
ignoreerida AI tundeid ja see välja lülitada,
04:22
and that it is wrong
to play with our genes
to play with our genes
90
250095
2513
ja mitteaktsepteeritav mängida meie geenidega,
04:24
to select for cosmetic changes
that aren't related to health.
that aren't related to health.
91
252632
3320
et valida kosmeetilisi muutusi, mis pole seotud tervisega.
04:28
Then we asked everyone
to gather into groups of three.
to gather into groups of three.
92
256402
2974
Seejärel palusime kõigil koguneda kolmestesse rühmadesse.
04:31
And they were given two minutes to debate
93
259400
2037
Ja neile anti kaks minutit, et arutada
04:33
and try to come to a consensus.
94
261461
2294
ja jõuda konsensusele.
04:36
(MS) Two minutes to debate.
95
264838
1574
(MS) Kaks minutit arutada.
04:38
I'll tell you when it's time
with the gong.
with the gong.
96
266436
2119
Ma annan märku, kui on aeg, gongiheliga.
04:40
(Audience debates)
97
268579
2640
(Publik arutab)
04:47
(Gong sound)
98
275229
1993
(Gongiheli)
04:50
(DA) OK.
99
278834
1151
(DA) Okei.
04:52
(MS) It's time to stop.
100
280009
1792
(MS) On aeg lõpetada.
04:53
People, people --
101
281825
1311
Inimesed, inimesed -
04:55
MS: And we found that many groups
reached a consensus
reached a consensus
102
283747
2673
Ja me avastasime, et paljud rühmad jõudsid üksmeelele
04:58
even when they were composed of people
with completely opposite views.
with completely opposite views.
103
286444
3929
isegi siis, kui nad koosnesid inimestest, kellel olid täiesti vastupidised seisukohad.
05:02
What distinguished the groups
that reached a consensus
that reached a consensus
104
290843
2524
Mis eristas rühmi, kes jõudsid üksmeelele
05:05
from those that didn't?
105
293391
1338
nendest, kes seda ei teinud?
05:07
Typically, people that have
extreme opinions
extreme opinions
106
295244
2839
Tavaliselt inimesed, kes omavad äärmuslikke arvamusi
05:10
are more confident in their answers.
107
298107
1840
on kindlamad oma vastustes.
05:12
Instead, those who respond
closer to the middle
closer to the middle
108
300868
2686
Need aga, kelle vastused on lähemal keskmisele,
05:15
are often unsure of whether
something is right or wrong,
something is right or wrong,
109
303578
3437
pole sageli kindlad, kas miski on õige või vale,
05:19
so their confidence level is lower.
110
307039
2128
ja nende enesekindluse tase on madalam.
05:21
However, there is another set of people
111
309505
2943
Kuid on veel üks rühm inimesi,
05:24
who are very confident in answering
somewhere in the middle.
somewhere in the middle.
112
312472
3618
kes on väga kindlad oma keskmistes vastustes.
05:28
We think these high-confident grays
are folks who understand
are folks who understand
113
316657
3716
Arvame, et need väga kindlad hallid on inimesed, kes mõistavad,
05:32
that both arguments have merit.
114
320397
1612
et mõlemal argumendil on oma väärtus.
05:34
They're gray not because they're unsure,
115
322531
2699
Nad pole hallid sellepärast, et nad pole endas kindlad,
05:37
but because they believe
that the moral dilemma faces
that the moral dilemma faces
116
325254
2688
vaid kuna nad usuvad, et moraalse dilemma puhul
05:39
two valid, opposing arguments.
117
327966
1987
on kaks kehtivat, vastupidist argumenti.
05:42
And we discovered that the groups
that include highly confident grays
that include highly confident grays
118
330373
4072
Ja me avastasime, et rühmadel, mis sisaldasid väga kindlaid halle,
05:46
are much more likely to reach consensus.
119
334469
2493
on palju tõenäolisem saavutada konsensus.
05:48
We do not know yet exactly why this is.
120
336986
2478
Me ei tea veel täpselt, miks see nii on.
05:51
These are only the first experiments,
121
339488
1763
See oli ainult esimene eksperiment.
05:53
and many more will be needed
to understand why and how
to understand why and how
122
341275
3412
On vaja uurida edasi, et mõista, miks ja kuidas
05:56
some people decide to negotiate
their moral standings
their moral standings
123
344711
2822
mõned inimesed otsustavad läbirääkimistel kasutada oma moraalseid seisukohti,
05:59
to reach an agreement.
124
347557
1522
et kokkuleppele jõuda.
06:01
Now, when groups reach consensus,
125
349103
2469
Edasi, kui rühmad üksmeelele jõuavad,
06:03
how do they do so?
126
351596
1586
siis kuidas nad seda teevad?
06:05
The most intuitive idea
is that it's just the average
is that it's just the average
127
353206
2581
Kõige intuitiivsem idee on see, et see on lihtsalt kõigi
06:07
of all the answers in the group, right?
128
355811
2030
rühmaliikmete vastuste keskmine, eks?
06:09
Another option is that the group
weighs the strength of each vote
weighs the strength of each vote
129
357865
3573
Teine võimalus on, et rühm kaalub iga hääle tugevust
06:13
based on the confidence
of the person expressing it.
of the person expressing it.
130
361462
2448
seda andnud isiku enesekindluse põhjal.
06:16
Imagine Paul McCartney
is a member of your group.
is a member of your group.
131
364422
2506
Kujutage, et Paul McCartney kuulub mõnda rühma.
06:19
You'd be wise to follow his call
132
367352
2144
Oleks mõistlik järgida tema arvamust,
06:21
on the number of times
"Yesterday" is repeated,
"Yesterday" is repeated,
133
369520
2441
mitu korda korratakse „Yesterday“,
06:23
which, by the way -- I think it's nine.
134
371985
2714
mis, muide - ma arvan - on üheksa.
06:26
But instead, we found that consistently,
135
374723
2381
Kuid selle asemel, leidsime, et järjepidevalt,
06:29
in all dilemmas,
in different experiments --
in different experiments --
136
377128
2366
igas dilemmas, erinevates eksperimentides -
06:31
even on different continents --
137
379518
2165
isegi eri mandritel -
06:33
groups implement a smart
and statistically sound procedure
and statistically sound procedure
138
381707
3743
rühmad rakendavad arukat ja statistiliselt põhjendatud protseduuri,
06:37
known as the "robust average."
139
385474
2178
mis on tuntud kui "tugev keskmine."
06:39
In the case of the height
of the Eiffel Tower,
of the Eiffel Tower,
140
387676
2180
Küsimuse korral, kui kõrge on Eiffeli torn,
06:41
let's say a group has these answers:
141
389880
1820
ütleme, et rühmal on need vastused:
06:43
250 meters, 200 meters, 300 meters, 400
142
391724
4608
250 m, 200 m, 300 m, 400 m
06:48
and one totally absurd answer
of 300 million meters.
of 300 million meters.
143
396356
3784
ja üks täiesti absurdne vastus - 300 miljonit meetrit.
06:52
A simple average of these numbers
would inaccurately skew the results.
would inaccurately skew the results.
144
400547
4293
Lihtne keskmine annaks täitsa vale vastuse.
06:56
But the robust average is one
where the group largely ignores
where the group largely ignores
145
404864
3170
Aga tugev keskmine on vastus, milles rühm suuresti eirab
07:00
that absurd answer,
146
408058
1240
absurdset vastust,
07:01
by giving much more weight
to the vote of the people in the middle.
to the vote of the people in the middle.
147
409322
3369
ja annab rohkem kaalu keskmiste inimeste arvamusele.
07:05
Back to the experiment in Vancouver,
148
413305
1876
Tagasi Vancouveri eksperimendi juurde,
07:07
that's exactly what happened.
149
415205
1767
see on täpselt see, mis juhtus.
07:09
Groups gave much less weight
to the outliers,
to the outliers,
150
417407
2741
Rühmad andsid palju vähem kaalu valeandmetele,
07:12
and instead, the consensus
turned out to be a robust average
turned out to be a robust average
151
420172
3229
ja selle asemel, konsensus osutus üksikute vastuste
07:15
of the individual answers.
152
423425
1476
tugevaks keskmiseks.
07:17
The most remarkable thing
153
425356
1991
Kõige olulisem asi on, et
07:19
is that this was a spontaneous
behavior of the group.
behavior of the group.
154
427371
3187
see oli rühma spontaanne käitumine.
07:22
It happened without us giving them
any hint on how to reach consensus.
any hint on how to reach consensus.
155
430582
4475
See juhtus ilma, et oleksime andnud neile vihjeid, kuidas jõuda üksmeelele.
07:27
So where do we go from here?
156
435513
1540
Nii et kuhu siit edasi minna?
07:29
This is only the beginning,
but we already have some insights.
but we already have some insights.
157
437432
3137
See on alles algus, kuid meil on juba teadmisi.
07:32
Good collective decisions
require two components:
require two components:
158
440984
2917
Head kollektiivsed otsused vajavad kahte komponenti:
07:35
deliberation and diversity of opinions.
159
443925
2749
arutelu ja arvamuste lahknevust.
07:39
Right now, the way we typically
make our voice heard in many societies
make our voice heard in many societies
160
447066
3996
Tänapäeval me tavaliselt teeme paljudes ühiskondades oma hääle kuuldavaks
07:43
is through direct or indirect voting.
161
451086
1908
otsese või kaudse hääletamise kaudu.
07:45
This is good for diversity of opinions,
162
453495
1997
See on hea, sest on mitmekesised arvamused,
07:47
and it has the great virtue of ensuring
163
455516
2445
ja selle suur voorus on,
07:49
that everyone gets to express their voice.
164
457985
2455
et igaüks saab väljendada oma häält.
07:52
But it's not so good [for fostering]
thoughtful debates.
thoughtful debates.
165
460464
3735
Aga see ei ole nii hea keerukamate arutelude läbiviimisel.
07:56
Our experiments suggest a different method
166
464665
3068
Meie eksperimendid näitavad erinevat meetodit,
07:59
that may be effective in balancing
these two goals at the same time,
these two goals at the same time,
167
467757
3541
mis võib olla efektiivne tasakaalustamaks neid kahte eesmärki samal ajal,
08:03
by forming small groups
that converge to a single decision
that converge to a single decision
168
471322
3753
moodustades väikesed rühmad, mis koonduvad üheks otsuseks,
08:07
while still maintaining
diversity of opinions
diversity of opinions
169
475099
2234
säilitades samal ajal arvamuste mitmekesisuse,
08:09
because there are many independent groups.
170
477357
2773
sest on palju sõltumatuid rühmi.
08:12
Of course, it's much easier to agree
on the height of the Eiffel Tower
on the height of the Eiffel Tower
171
480741
3924
Muidugi on palju lihtsam kokku leppida Eiffeli torni kõrguses
08:16
than on moral, political
and ideological issues.
and ideological issues.
172
484689
3115
kui moraalsetes, poliitilistes ja ideoloogilistes küsimustes.
08:20
But in a time when
the world's problems are more complex
the world's problems are more complex
173
488721
3277
Aga ajal, mil maailma probleemid on üha keerulisemad
08:24
and people are more polarized,
174
492022
1803
ja inimesed on rohkem polariseeritud,
08:25
using science to help us understand
how we interact and make decisions
how we interact and make decisions
175
493849
4595
aitab teaduse kasutamine meil mõista, kuidas me suhtleme ja teeme otsuseid,
08:30
will hopefully spark interesting new ways
to construct a better democracy.
to construct a better democracy.
176
498468
4666
ja loodetavasti sütitab uusi huvitavaid võimalusi luua parem demokraatia.
ABOUT THE SPEAKERS
Mariano Sigman - NeuroscientistIn his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain.
Why you should listen
Mariano Sigman, a physicist by training, is a leading figure in the cognitive neuroscience of learning and decision making. Sigman was awarded a Human Frontiers Career Development Award, the National Prize of Physics, the Young Investigator Prize of "College de France," the IBM Scalable Data Analytics Award and is a scholar of the James S. McDonnell Foundation. In 2016 he was made a Laureate of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
In The Secret Life of the Mind, Sigman's ambition is to explain the mind so that we can understand ourselves and others more deeply. He shows how we form ideas during our first days of life, how we give shape to our fundamental decisions, how we dream and imagine, why we feel certain emotions, how the brain transforms and how who we are changes with it. Spanning biology, physics, mathematics, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, philosophy and medicine, as well as gastronomy, magic, music, chess, literature and art, The Secret Life of the Mind revolutionizes how neuroscience serves us in our lives, revealing how the infinity of neurons inside our brains manufacture how we perceive, reason, feel, dream and communicate.
Mariano Sigman | Speaker | TED.com
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why.
Why you should listen
Dan Ariely is a professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University and a founding member of the Center for Advanced Hindsight. He is the author of the bestsellers Predictably Irrational, The Upside of Irrationality, and The Honest Truth About Dishonesty -- as well as the TED Book Payoff: The Hidden Logic that Shapes Our Motivations.
Through his research and his (often amusing and unorthodox) experiments, he questions the forces that influence human behavior and the irrational ways in which we often all behave.
Dan Ariely | Speaker | TED.com