Teach arts and sciences together
-
0:00 - 0:04What I want to do today is spend
some time talking about some stuff -
0:04 - 0:08that's giving me a little bit
of existential angst, -
0:08 - 0:09for lack of a better word,
-
0:09 - 0:11over the past couple of years.
-
0:11 - 0:16And basically, these three quotes
tell what's going on. -
0:16 - 0:20"When God made the color purple,
God was just showing off," -
0:20 - 0:22Alice Walker wrote in "The Color Purple."
-
0:22 - 0:26And Zora Neale Hurston wrote
in "Dust Tracks On A Road," -
0:26 - 0:29"Research is a formalized curiosity.
-
0:29 - 0:32It's poking and prying with a purpose."
-
0:32 - 0:34And then finally,
when I think about the near future, -
0:34 - 0:38we have this attitude, "Well,
whatever happens, happens." -
0:38 - 0:39Right?
-
0:39 - 0:41So that goes along with
the Cheshire Cat saying, -
0:42 - 0:44"If you don't care much
where you want to get to, -
0:44 - 0:46it doesn't much matter which way you go."
-
0:46 - 0:50But I think it does matter which way
we go and what road we take, -
0:50 - 0:53because when I think
about design in the near future, -
0:53 - 0:56what I think are the most
important issues, -
0:56 - 0:58what's really crucial and vital,
-
0:58 - 1:02is that we need to revitalize
the arts and sciences right now, -
1:02 - 1:04in 2002.
-
1:04 - 1:07(Applause)
-
1:09 - 1:13If we describe the near future
as 10, 20, 15 years from now, -
1:13 - 1:17that means that what we do today
is going to be critically important, -
1:17 - 1:21because in the year 2015,
in the year 2020, 2025, -
1:21 - 1:24the world our society
is going to be building on, -
1:24 - 1:26the basic knowledge and abstract ideas,
-
1:26 - 1:29the discoveries
that we came up with today, -
1:29 - 1:32just as all these wonderful things
we're hearing about -
1:32 - 1:34here at the TED conference
-
1:34 - 1:36that we take for granted
in the world right now, -
1:36 - 1:39were really knowledge
and ideas that came up -
1:39 - 1:41in the 50s, the 60s and the 70s.
-
1:42 - 1:44That's the substrate
that we're exploiting today. -
1:44 - 1:46Whether it's the internet,
-
1:46 - 1:47genetic engineering, laser scanners,
-
1:47 - 1:51guided missiles, fiber optics,
high-definition television, -
1:52 - 1:56remote sensing from space
and the wonderful remote-sensing photos -
1:56 - 2:01that we see in 3D weaving, TV programs
like Tracker and Enterprise, -
2:01 - 2:05CD-rewrite drives, flat-screen,
Alvin Ailey's "Suite Otis," -
2:05 - 2:09or Sarah Jones's "Your Revolution Will
Not [Happen] Between These Thighs," -
2:09 - 2:11which, by the way, was banned by the FCC,
-
2:11 - 2:12or ska --
-
2:12 - 2:16all of these things, without question,
almost without exception, -
2:16 - 2:20are really based on ideas
and abstract and creativity -
2:20 - 2:22from years before.
-
2:22 - 2:23So we have to ask ourselves:
-
2:23 - 2:26What are we contributing
to that legacy right now? -
2:26 - 2:28And when I think about it,
-
2:28 - 2:29I'm really worried.
-
2:29 - 2:31To be quite frank, I'm concerned.
-
2:31 - 2:34I'm skeptical that we're doing
very much of anything. -
2:34 - 2:36We're, in a sense,
-
2:36 - 2:39failing to act in the future.
-
2:39 - 2:42We're purposefully,
consciously being laggards. -
2:42 - 2:43We're lagging behind.
-
2:44 - 2:47Frantz Fanon, who was a psychiatrist
from Martinique, said, -
2:47 - 2:50"Each generation must,
out of relative obscurity, -
2:50 - 2:51discover its mission
-
2:51 - 2:53and fulfill or betray it."
-
2:55 - 2:57What is our mission?
What do we have to do? -
2:57 - 3:01I think our mission is
to reconcile, to reintegrate -
3:01 - 3:03science and the arts,
-
3:03 - 3:08because right now, there's a schism
that exists in popular culture. -
3:08 - 3:12People have this idea that science
and the arts are really separate; -
3:12 - 3:15we think of them as separate
and different things. -
3:15 - 3:18And this idea was probably
introduced centuries ago, -
3:18 - 3:20but it's really becoming critical now,
-
3:21 - 3:25because we're making decisions
about our society every day -
3:25 - 3:30that, if we keep thinking that the arts
are separate from the sciences, -
3:30 - 3:32and we keep thinking it's cute to say,
-
3:32 - 3:34"I don't understand
anything about this one, -
3:34 - 3:37I don't understand anything
about the other one," -
3:37 - 3:39then we're going to have problems.
-
3:39 - 3:41Now, I know no one
here at TED thinks this. -
3:41 - 3:43All of us, we already know
that they're very connected. -
3:43 - 3:46But I'm going to let you know
that some folks in the outside world, -
3:46 - 3:49believe it or not,
think it's neat when they say, -
3:49 - 3:52"Scientists and science is not creative.
-
3:52 - 3:55Maybe scientists are ingenious,
but they're not creative." -
3:55 - 3:57And then we have this tendency,
-
3:57 - 4:00the career counselors
and various people say things -
4:00 - 4:02like, "Artists are not analytical.
-
4:02 - 4:04They're ingenious, perhaps,
-
4:05 - 4:06but not analytical."
-
4:07 - 4:09And when these concepts
underlie our teaching -
4:09 - 4:11and what we think about the world,
-
4:11 - 4:13then we have a problem,
-
4:13 - 4:15because we stymie support for everything.
-
4:15 - 4:17By accepting this dichotomy,
-
4:17 - 4:19whether it's tongue-in-cheek,
-
4:19 - 4:21when we attempt
to accommodate it in our world, -
4:21 - 4:24and we try to build
our foundation for the world, -
4:24 - 4:25we're messing up the future,
-
4:25 - 4:28because: Who wants to be uncreative?
-
4:28 - 4:30Who wants to be illogical?
-
4:30 - 4:32Talent would run
from either of these fields -
4:32 - 4:34if you said you had to choose either.
-
4:34 - 4:36Then they'll go to something
where they think, -
4:36 - 4:39"Well, I can be creative
and logical at the same time." -
4:39 - 4:41Now, I grew up in the '60s
and I'll admit it -- -
4:41 - 4:44actually, my childhood spanned the '60s,
-
4:44 - 4:46and I was a wannabe hippie,
-
4:46 - 4:50and I always resented the fact
that I wasn't old enough to be a hippie. -
4:51 - 4:53And I know there are people here,
the younger generation, -
4:53 - 4:55who want to be hippies.
-
4:55 - 4:57People talk about the '60s all the time.
-
4:57 - 4:59And they talk about the anarchy
that was there. -
4:59 - 5:01But when I think about the '60s,
-
5:01 - 5:05what I took away from it was
that there was hope for the future. -
5:05 - 5:07We thought everyone could participate.
-
5:07 - 5:11There were wonderful, incredible ideas
that were always percolating, -
5:11 - 5:14and so much of what's cool or hot today
-
5:14 - 5:16is really based on some of those concepts,
-
5:16 - 5:19whether it's people trying to use
the Prime Directive from Star Trek, -
5:19 - 5:21being involved in things,
-
5:21 - 5:24or, again, that three-dimensional
weaving and fax machines -
5:24 - 5:26that I read about in my weekly readers
-
5:26 - 5:29that the technology and engineering
was just getting started. -
5:29 - 5:31But the '60s left me with a problem.
-
5:31 - 5:36You see, I always assumed
I would go into space, -
5:36 - 5:37because I followed all of this.
-
5:37 - 5:40But I also loved the arts and sciences.
-
5:40 - 5:43You see, when I was growing up
as a little girl and as a teenager, -
5:43 - 5:46I loved designing and making doll clothes
-
5:46 - 5:48and wanting to be a fashion designer.
-
5:48 - 5:49I took art and ceramics.
-
5:49 - 5:55I loved dance: Lola Falana,
Alvin Ailey, Jerome Robbins. -
5:55 - 5:59And I also avidly followed
the Gemini and the Apollo programs. -
5:59 - 6:03I had science projects
and tons of astronomy books. -
6:03 - 6:04I took calculus and philosophy.
-
6:04 - 6:08I wondered about infinity
and the Big Bang theory. -
6:08 - 6:11And when I was at Stanford,
I found myself, my senior year, -
6:11 - 6:13chemical engineering major,
-
6:13 - 6:16half the folks thought I was a political
science and performing arts major, -
6:16 - 6:19which was sort of true, because I was
Black Student Union President, -
6:19 - 6:21and I did major in some other things.
-
6:21 - 6:23And I found myself the last quarter
-
6:23 - 6:25juggling chemical engineering
separation processes, -
6:25 - 6:29logic classes, nuclear magnetic
resonance spectroscopy, -
6:29 - 6:32and also producing and choreographing
a dance production. -
6:33 - 6:35And I had to do the lighting
and the design work, -
6:35 - 6:38and I was trying to figure out:
-
6:38 - 6:41Do I go to New York City
to try to become a professional dancer, -
6:41 - 6:43or to go to medical school?
-
6:43 - 6:45Now, my mother helped
me figure that one out. -
6:45 - 6:48(Laughter)
-
6:48 - 6:53But when I went into space,
I carried a number of things up with me. -
6:53 - 6:54I carried a poster by Alvin Ailey --
-
6:54 - 6:57you can figure out now,
I love the dance company -- -
6:57 - 7:00an Alvin Ailey poster of Judith Jamison
performing the dance "Cry," -
7:00 - 7:02dedicated to all black women everywhere;
-
7:02 - 7:06a Bundu statue, which was from
the women's society in Sierra Leone; -
7:06 - 7:09and a certificate for the Chicago
Public School students -
7:09 - 7:12to work to improve their science and math.
-
7:13 - 7:14And folks asked me,
-
7:14 - 7:17"Why did you take up what you took up?"
-
7:17 - 7:19And I had to say,
-
7:19 - 7:21"Because it represents human creativity;
-
7:21 - 7:24the creativity that allowed us,
-
7:24 - 7:27that we were required to have
to conceive and build and launch -
7:27 - 7:28the space shuttle,
-
7:28 - 7:31which springs from the same source
as the imagination and analysis -
7:31 - 7:33that it took to carve a Bundu statue,
-
7:33 - 7:38or the ingenuity it took to design,
choreograph and stage "Cry." -
7:39 - 7:43Each one of them are different
manifestations, incarnations, -
7:43 - 7:46of creativity --
avatars of human creativity. -
7:47 - 7:49And that's what we have to
reconcile in our minds, -
7:49 - 7:51how these things fit together.
-
7:51 - 7:55The difference between arts and sciences
is not analytical versus intuitive. -
7:55 - 7:56Right?
-
7:56 - 8:00E = mc2 required an intuitive leap,
-
8:00 - 8:02and then you had to do
the analysis afterwards. -
8:03 - 8:05Einstein said, in fact,
-
8:05 - 8:07"The most beautiful thing
we can experience -
8:07 - 8:08is the mysterious.
-
8:08 - 8:11It is the source
of all true art and science." -
8:11 - 8:14Dance requires us to express
and want to express -
8:14 - 8:15the jubilation in life,
-
8:16 - 8:17but then you have to figure out:
-
8:17 - 8:19Exactly what movement do I do
-
8:19 - 8:21to make sure it comes across correctly?
-
8:21 - 8:23The difference between arts and sciences
-
8:23 - 8:26is also not constructive
versus deconstructive. -
8:26 - 8:29A lot of people think of the sciences
as deconstructive, -
8:29 - 8:30you have to pull things apart.
-
8:31 - 8:34And yeah, subatomic physics
is deconstructive -- -
8:34 - 8:36you literally try to tear atoms apart
-
8:36 - 8:38to understand what's inside of them.
-
8:38 - 8:42But sculpture, from what I understand
from great sculptors, -
8:42 - 8:43is deconstructive,
-
8:43 - 8:46because you see a piece and you remove
what doesn't need to be there. -
8:46 - 8:48Biotechnology is constructive.
-
8:49 - 8:51Orchestral arranging is constructive.
-
8:51 - 8:54So, in fact, we use constructive
and deconstructive techniques -
8:54 - 8:55in everything.
-
8:56 - 8:59The difference
between science and the arts -
8:59 - 9:03is not that they are different sides
of the same coin, even, -
9:03 - 9:05or even different parts
of the same continuum, -
9:05 - 9:09but rather, they're manifestations
of the same thing. -
9:09 - 9:12Different quantum states of an atom?
-
9:12 - 9:14Or maybe if I want to be
more 21st century, -
9:14 - 9:17I could say that they're different
harmonic resonances of a superstring. -
9:17 - 9:19But we'll leave that alone.
-
9:19 - 9:21They spring from the same source.
-
9:21 - 9:24The arts and sciences are avatars
of human creativity. -
9:24 - 9:26It's our attempt as humans
-
9:26 - 9:29to build an understanding
of the universe, the world around us. -
9:29 - 9:32It's our attempt to influence things,
-
9:32 - 9:34the universe internal to ourselves
-
9:34 - 9:35and external to us.
-
9:36 - 9:41The sciences, to me, are manifestations
of our attempt to express or share -
9:41 - 9:44our understanding, our experience,
-
9:44 - 9:47to influence the universe
external to ourselves. -
9:47 - 9:50It doesn't rely on us as individuals.
-
9:50 - 9:53It's the universe,
as experienced by everyone. -
9:53 - 9:56The arts manifest our desire,
-
9:56 - 9:58our attempt to share or influence others
-
9:58 - 10:02through experiences
that are peculiar to us as individuals. -
10:02 - 10:04Let me say it again another way:
-
10:04 - 10:08science provides an understanding
of a universal experience, -
10:08 - 10:12and arts provide a universal understanding
-
10:12 - 10:14of a personal experience.
-
10:15 - 10:17That's what we have to think about,
-
10:17 - 10:19that they're all part of us,
they're all part of a continuum. -
10:19 - 10:23It's not just the tools,
it's not just the sciences, -
10:23 - 10:26the mathematics and the numerical stuff
and the statistics, -
10:26 - 10:28because we heard, very much on this stage,
-
10:28 - 10:30people talked about music
being mathematical. -
10:32 - 10:33Arts don't just use clay,
-
10:33 - 10:36aren't the only ones that use clay,
light and sound and movement. -
10:37 - 10:41They use analysis as well.
-
10:42 - 10:43So people might say,
-
10:43 - 10:46"Well, I still like that intuitive
versus analytical thing," -
10:46 - 10:49because everybody wants to do
the right brain, left brain thing. -
10:49 - 10:52We've all been accused of being
right-brained or left-brained -
10:52 - 10:53at some point in time,
-
10:53 - 10:55depending on who we disagreed with.
-
10:55 - 10:56(Laughter)
-
10:56 - 10:58You know, people say "intuitive" --
-
10:58 - 11:00that's like you're in touch with nature,
-
11:00 - 11:02in touch with yourself and relationships;
-
11:02 - 11:04analytical, you put your mind to work.
-
11:04 - 11:07I'm going to tell you a little secret.
You all know this, though. -
11:07 - 11:09But sometimes people use
this analysis idea, -
11:09 - 11:11that things are outside of ourselves,
-
11:11 - 11:15to say, this is what
we're going to elevate -
11:15 - 11:18as the true, most important
sciences, right? -
11:18 - 11:21Then you have artists -- and you all know
this is true as well -- -
11:21 - 11:25artists will say things about scientists
-
11:25 - 11:29because they say they're too concrete,
they're disconnected from the world. -
11:29 - 11:31But, we've even had that here on stage,
-
11:31 - 11:34so don't act like you don't know
what I'm talking about. -
11:34 - 11:35(Laughter)
-
11:35 - 11:38We had folks talking
about the Flat Earth Society -
11:38 - 11:39and flower arrangers,
-
11:39 - 11:41so there's this whole dichotomy
-
11:41 - 11:44that we continue to carry along,
even when we know better. -
11:45 - 11:47And folks say we need to choose either-or.
-
11:48 - 11:51But it would really be foolish
to choose either one, -
11:51 - 11:53intuitive versus analytical.
-
11:53 - 11:54That's a foolish choice.
-
11:54 - 11:59It's foolish just like trying to choose
between being realistic or idealistic. -
11:59 - 12:00You need both in life.
-
12:01 - 12:02Why do people do this?
-
12:02 - 12:05I'm going to quote
a molecular biologist, Sydney Brenner, -
12:05 - 12:07who's 70 years old, so he can say this.
-
12:07 - 12:10He said, "It's always important
to distinguish between chastity -
12:10 - 12:11and impotence."
-
12:12 - 12:13Now --
-
12:13 - 12:15(Laughter)
-
12:15 - 12:21I want to share with you
a little equation, OK? -
12:21 - 12:26How does understanding science
and the arts fit into our lives -
12:26 - 12:27and what's going on
-
12:27 - 12:30and the things we're talking about
here at the design conference? -
12:30 - 12:32And this is a little thing I came up with:
-
12:32 - 12:33understanding
-
12:33 - 12:35and our resources and our will
-
12:36 - 12:37cause us to have outcomes.
-
12:37 - 12:40Our understanding is our science,
our arts, our religion; -
12:40 - 12:43how we see the universe around us;
-
12:43 - 12:45our resources, our money,
our labor, our minerals -- -
12:45 - 12:49those things that are out there
in the world we have to work with. -
12:49 - 12:51But more importantly, there's our will.
-
12:51 - 12:52This is our vision,
-
12:52 - 12:55our aspirations of the future,
our hopes, our dreams, -
12:55 - 12:56our struggles and our fears.
-
12:56 - 13:00Our successes and our failures influence
what we do with all of those. -
13:00 - 13:04And to me, design and engineering,
craftsmanship and skilled labor, -
13:04 - 13:07are all the things that work
on this to have our outcome, -
13:07 - 13:09which is our human quality of life.
-
13:10 - 13:12Where do we want the world to be?
-
13:12 - 13:14And guess what?
-
13:14 - 13:15Regardless of how we look at this,
-
13:15 - 13:18whether we look at arts and sciences
as separate or different, -
13:18 - 13:22they're both being influenced now
and they're both having problems. -
13:22 - 13:24I did a project called
S.E.E.ing the Future: -
13:24 - 13:25Science, Engineering and Education.
-
13:25 - 13:27It was looking at how to shed light
-
13:27 - 13:29on the most effective use
of government funding. -
13:29 - 13:32We got a bunch of scientists
in all stages of their careers. -
13:32 - 13:35They came to Dartmouth College,
where I was teaching. -
13:35 - 13:37And they talked about,
with theologians and financiers: -
13:37 - 13:40What are some of the issues
of public funding -
13:40 - 13:41for science and engineering research?
-
13:41 - 13:43What's most important about it?
-
13:44 - 13:45There are some ideas that emerged
-
13:45 - 13:48that I think have really
powerful parallels to the arts. -
13:48 - 13:51The first thing they said
was that the circumstances -
13:51 - 13:54that we find ourselves in today
in the sciences and engineering -
13:54 - 13:56that made us world leaders
-
13:56 - 14:01are very different than the '40s,
the '50s, and the '60s and the '70s, -
14:01 - 14:02when we emerged as world leaders,
-
14:03 - 14:05because we're no longer
in competition with fascism, -
14:05 - 14:06with Soviet-style communism.
-
14:06 - 14:10And by the way, that competition
wasn't just military; -
14:10 - 14:14it included social competition
and political competition as well, -
14:14 - 14:18that allowed us to look at space
as one of those platforms -
14:18 - 14:20to prove that our social
system was better. -
14:20 - 14:24Another thing they talked
about was that the infrastructure -
14:24 - 14:25that supports the sciences
-
14:25 - 14:26is becoming obsolete.
-
14:26 - 14:29We look at universities and colleges --
-
14:29 - 14:32small, mid-sized community colleges
across the country -- -
14:32 - 14:34their laboratories are becoming obsolete.
-
14:34 - 14:37And this is where we train
most of our science workers -
14:37 - 14:40and our researchers --
and our teachers, by the way. -
14:40 - 14:45And there's a media that doesn't support
the dissemination of any more than -
14:45 - 14:48the most mundane and inane of information.
-
14:48 - 14:51There's pseudoscience, crop circles,
alien autopsy, haunted houses, -
14:51 - 14:53or disasters.
-
14:53 - 14:54And that's what we see.
-
14:54 - 14:57This isn't really the information you need
to operate in everyday life -
14:57 - 15:00and figure out how to participate
in this democracy -
15:00 - 15:02and determine what's going on.
-
15:02 - 15:04They also said there's a change
in the corporate mentality. -
15:04 - 15:07Whereas government money
had always been there -
15:07 - 15:09for basic science
and engineering research, -
15:09 - 15:12we also counted on some companies
to do some basic research. -
15:12 - 15:15But what's happened now
is companies put more energy -
15:15 - 15:18into short-term product development
-
15:19 - 15:22than they do in basic engineering
and science research. -
15:23 - 15:26And education is not keeping up.
-
15:26 - 15:30In K through 12, people
are taking out wet labs. -
15:30 - 15:32They think if we put
a computer in the room, -
15:32 - 15:35it's going to take the place
of actually mixing the acids -
15:35 - 15:37or growing the potatoes.
-
15:37 - 15:39And government funding
is decreasing in spending, -
15:39 - 15:42and then they're saying,
let's have corporations take over, -
15:42 - 15:43and that's not true.
-
15:43 - 15:46Government funding
should at least do things -
15:46 - 15:50like recognize cost benefits
of basic science and engineering research. -
15:50 - 15:53We have to know that we have
a responsibility as global citizens -
15:53 - 15:54in this world.
-
15:55 - 15:57We have to look at
the education of humans. -
15:57 - 16:00We need to build our resources today
to make sure that they're trained -
16:00 - 16:02so they understand
the importance of these things. -
16:02 - 16:06And we have to support
the vitality of science. -
16:06 - 16:10That doesn't mean that everything has
to have one thing that's going to go on, -
16:10 - 16:12or that we know exactly what's going
to be the outcome of it, -
16:12 - 16:15but that we support the vitality
and the intellectual curiosity -
16:16 - 16:17that goes along [with it].
-
16:17 - 16:19And if you think about
those parallels to the arts -- -
16:19 - 16:23the competition
with the Bolshoi Ballet spurred -
16:23 - 16:27the Joffrey and the New York
City Ballet to become better. -
16:27 - 16:31Infrastructure, museums, theaters,
movie houses across the country -
16:31 - 16:32are disappearing.
-
16:32 - 16:35We have more television stations
with less to watch, -
16:35 - 16:38we have more money spent on rewrites
-
16:38 - 16:40to get old television programs
-
16:40 - 16:42in the movies.
-
16:42 - 16:45We have corporate funding now that,
-
16:45 - 16:48when it goes to support the arts,
-
16:48 - 16:51it almost requires that the product
be part of the picture -
16:51 - 16:53that the artist draws.
-
16:53 - 16:57We have stadiums that are named
over and over again by corporations. -
16:57 - 17:00In Houston, we're trying to figure out
what to do with that Enron Stadium thing. -
17:00 - 17:01(Laughter)
-
17:01 - 17:04Fine arts and education
in the schools is disappearing, -
17:04 - 17:08And we have a government
that seems like it's gutting the NEA -
17:08 - 17:09and other programs.
-
17:09 - 17:11So we have to really stop and think:
-
17:11 - 17:14What are we trying to do
with the sciences and the arts? -
17:15 - 17:16There's a need to revitalize them.
-
17:16 - 17:18We have to pay attention to it.
-
17:18 - 17:21I just want to tell you quickly
what I'm doing -- -
17:21 - 17:27(Applause)
-
17:28 - 17:31I want to tell you what I've been doing
a little bit since ... -
17:32 - 17:35I feel this need to sort of
integrate some of the ideas -
17:35 - 17:38that I've had and run across over time.
-
17:38 - 17:42One of the things that I found out
is that there's a need to repair -
17:42 - 17:45the dichotomy between the mind
and body as well. -
17:45 - 17:47My mother always told me,
you have to be observant, -
17:48 - 17:50know what's going on
in your mind and your body. -
17:50 - 17:53And as a dancer, I had this tremendous
faith in my ability to know my body, -
17:53 - 17:55just as I knew how to sense colors.
-
17:56 - 17:58Then I went to medical school,
-
17:58 - 18:02and I was supposed to just go on
what the machine said about bodies. -
18:03 - 18:06You know, you would ask patients questions
and some people would tell you, -
18:06 - 18:08"Don't listen to what the patient said."
-
18:08 - 18:11We know that patients know
and understand their bodies better, -
18:11 - 18:14but these days we're trying
to divorce them from that idea. -
18:15 - 18:18We have to reconcile
the patient's knowledge of their body -
18:18 - 18:20with physicians' measurements.
-
18:21 - 18:24We had someone talk about
measuring emotions -
18:24 - 18:28and getting machines to figure out
what to keep us from acting crazy. -
18:29 - 18:30No, we shouldn't measure.
-
18:30 - 18:33We shouldn't use machines
to measure road rage -
18:33 - 18:35and then do something to keep
us from engaging in it. -
18:35 - 18:39Maybe we can have machines help us
to recognize that we have road rage, -
18:39 - 18:42and then we need to know
how to control that without the machines. -
18:43 - 18:46We even need to be able to recognize that
without the machines. -
18:46 - 18:48What I'm very concerned about is:
-
18:48 - 18:54How do we bolster our self-awareness
as humans, as biological organisms? -
18:54 - 18:57Michael Moschen spoke of having to teach
-
18:57 - 19:01and learn how to feel with my eyes,
to see with my hands. -
19:01 - 19:05We have all kinds of possibilities
to use our senses by, -
19:05 - 19:08and that's what we have to do.
-
19:08 - 19:09That's what I want to do --
-
19:09 - 19:13to try to use bioinstrumentation,
those kind of things, -
19:13 - 19:16to help our senses in what we do.
-
19:16 - 19:18That's the work I've been doing now,
-
19:18 - 19:20as a company called
BioSentient Corporation. -
19:20 - 19:23I figured I'd have to do that ad,
because I'm an entrepreneur, -
19:23 - 19:27and "entrepreneur" says "somebody
who does what they want to do, -
19:27 - 19:30because they're not broke enough
that they have to get a real job." -
19:30 - 19:31(Laughter)
-
19:31 - 19:34But that's the work I'm doing,
BioSentient Corporation, -
19:34 - 19:36trying to figure out:
How do we integrate these things? -
19:36 - 19:41Let me finish by saying that
my personal design issue for the future -
19:41 - 19:43is really about integrating;
-
19:43 - 19:46to think about that intuitive
and that analytical. -
19:46 - 19:48The arts and sciences are not separate.
-
19:49 - 19:52High school physics
lesson before you leave: -
19:52 - 19:54high school physics teacher
used to hold up a ball. -
19:54 - 19:57She would say, "This ball
has potential energy. -
19:57 - 19:59But nothing will happen to it,
it can't do any work, -
19:59 - 20:01until I drop it and it changes states."
-
20:02 - 20:05I like to think of ideas
as potential energy. -
20:05 - 20:07They're really wonderful,
-
20:07 - 20:11but nothing will happen
until we risk putting them into action. -
20:11 - 20:15This conference is filled
with wonderful ideas. -
20:15 - 20:18We're going to share
lots of things with people. -
20:18 - 20:19But nothing's going to happen
-
20:19 - 20:23until we risk putting
those ideas into action. -
20:23 - 20:25We need to revitalize
the arts and sciences today. -
20:25 - 20:28We need to take responsibility
for the future. -
20:28 - 20:31We can't hide behind saying
it's just for company profits, -
20:31 - 20:33or it's just a business,
-
20:33 - 20:35or I'm an artist or an academician.
-
20:36 - 20:38Here's how you judge what you're doing:
-
20:38 - 20:41I talked about that balance
between intuitive, analytical. -
20:42 - 20:45Fran Lebowitz, my favorite cynic,
-
20:45 - 20:48said, "The three questions
of greatest concern ..." -- -
20:48 - 20:50now I'm going to add on to design --
-
20:50 - 20:52"... are: Is it attractive?"
-
20:53 - 20:55That's the intuitive.
-
20:55 - 20:57"Is it amusing?" -- the analytical,
-
20:57 - 21:00and, "Does it know
its place?" -- the balance. -
21:00 - 21:01Thank you very much.
-
21:01 - 21:04(Applause)
- Title:
- Teach arts and sciences together
- Speaker:
- Mae Jemison
- Description:
-
Mae Jemison is an astronaut, a doctor, an art collector, a dancer ... Telling stories from her own education and from her time in space, she calls on educators to teach both the arts and sciences, both intuition and logic, as one -- to create bold thinkers.
- Video Language:
- English
- Team:
- closed TED
- Project:
- TEDTalks
- Duration:
- 21:04
Camille Martínez edited English subtitles for Teach arts and sciences together | ||
Camille Martínez edited English subtitles for Teach arts and sciences together | ||
TED edited English subtitles for Teach arts and sciences together | ||
Maggie S (Amara staff) approved English subtitles for Teach arts and sciences together | ||
Maggie S (Amara staff) edited English subtitles for Teach arts and sciences together | ||
TED added a translation |