ted中文演讲稿

ted中文演讲稿篇一

李世默TED演讲稿(中英文)

李世默TED：

中国崛起与“元叙事”的终结

Good morning. My name is Eric Li, and I was born here. But no, I wasn’t born there. This was where I was born: Shanghai, at the height of the Cultural Revolution. My grandmother tells me that she heard the sound of gunfire along with my first cries. When I was growing up, I was told a story that explained all I ever needed to know that humanity. It went like this. All human societies develop in linear progression, beginning with primitive society, then slave society, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally, guess where we end up? Communism! Sooner or later, all of humanity, regardless of culture, language, nationality, will arrive at this final stage of political and social development. The entire world’s peoples will be unified in this paradise on earth and live happily ever after. But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil, the good of socialism against the evil of capitalism, and the good shall triumph. That, of course, was the meta-narrative distilled from the theories of Karl Marx. And the Chinese bought it. We were taught that grand story day in and day out. It became part of us, and we believed in it. The story was a bestseller. About on third of the entire world’s population lived under that meta narrative. Then, the world changed overnight. As for me, disillusioned by the failed religion of my youth, I went to America and became a Berkeley hippie. Now, as I was coming of age, something else happened. As if one big story wasn’t enough, I was told another one. This one was just as grand. It also claims that all human societies develop in a linear progression towards a singular end. This one went as follows. All societies, regardless of culture, be it Christian, Muslim, Confucian, must progress from traditional societies in which groups are the basic units to modern societies in which atomized individuals are the sovereign units, and all these individuals are, by definition, rational, and they all want one thing: the vote. Because they all rational, once given the vote, they produce good government and live happily ever after. Paradise on earth, again. Sooner or later, electoral democracy will be the only political system for all countries

and all peoples, with a free market to make them all rich. But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil. The good belongs to those who are democracies and are charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force, against the evil of those who do not hold elections. Now. This story also became a bestseller. According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010. In the last 20years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus: multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on them is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world. Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success. Those who do not are doomed to fail. But this time, the Chinese didn’t buy it. Fool me once… The rest is history. In just 3p years, China went from one of the poorest agricultural countries in the world to its second-largest economy. Six hundred fifty million people were lifted out of poverty. Eighty percent of the entire world’s poverty alleviation during that period happened in China. In other words, all the new and old democracies put together amounted to a mere fraction of what a single, one-party state did without voting. See, I grew up on this stuff: food stamps. Meat was rationed to a few hundred grams per person per month at one point. Needless to say, I ate my grandmother’s portions. So I asked myself, what’s wrong with this picture? Here I am in my hometown, my business growing leaps and bounds. Entrepreneurs are starting companies every day. Middle class is expanding in speed and scale unprecedented in human history. Yet, according to the grand story, none of this should be happening. So I went and did the only thing I could. I studied it. Yes, China is a one-party state run by the Chinese Communist Party, the Party, and they don’t hold elections. There assumptions are made by the dominant political theories of our time. Such a system is operationally rigid, politically closed, and morally illegitimate. Well, the assumptions are wrong. The opposites are true. Adaptability, meritocracy, and legitimacy are the three defining characteristics of China’s one-party system. Now, most political scientists will tell us that a one-party system is inherently incapable of self-correction. It won’t last long because it cannot adapt. Now here are the facts. In 64 years of running the largest country in the world, the range of the party’s policies

has been wider than any other country in recent memory, from radical land collectivization to the Great Leap Forward, then privatization of farmland, then the Cultural Revolution, then Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, then successor Jiang Zemin took the giant political step of opening up party membership to private businesspeople, something unimaginable during Mao’s rule. So the party self-corrects in rather dramatic fashions. Institutionally, new rules get enacted to correct previous dysfunctions. For example, term limits. Political leaders used to retain their positions for life, and they used that to accumulate power and perpetuate their rules. Mao was the father of modern China, yet his prolonged rule led to disastrous mistakes. So the party instituted term limits with mandatory retirement age of 68 to 70. One thing we often hear is political reforms have lagged far behind economic reforms and China is in dire need of political reform. But this claim is a rhetorical trap hidden behind a political bias. See, some have decided a priori what kinds of changes they want to see, and only such changes can be called political reform. The truth is, political reforms have never stopped. Compared with 30 years ago, 20 years, even 10 years ago, every aspect of Chinese society, how the country is governed, from the most local level to the highest center, are unrecognizable today. Now such changes are simply not possible without political reforms of the most fundamental kind. Now I would venture to suggest the Party is the world’s leading expert in political reform. The second assumption is that in a one-party state, power gets concentrated in the hands of the few, and bad governance and corruption follow. Indeed, corruption is a big problem, but let’s first look at the larger context. Now, this maybe be counterintuitive to you. The party happens to be one of the most meritocratic political institutions in the world today. China’s highest ruling body, the Politburo, has 25 members. In the most recent one, only five of them came from a background of privilege, so-called Princelings. The other 20, including the President and the Premier, came from entirely ordinary backgrounds. In the larger central committee of 300 or more, the percentage of those who were born into power and wealth was even smaller. The vast majority of senior Chinese leaders worked and competed their way to the top. Compare that with the ruling elites in both developed and developing countries, I think you’ll find the Party

being near the top in upward mobility. The question then is, how could that be possible in a system run by one party? New we come to a powerful political institution, little-known to Westerners: the Party’s Organization Department. The Department functions like a giant human resource engine that would be the envy of even some of the most successful corporations. It operates a rotation pyramid made up of there components: civil service, state-owned enterprises, and social organizations like a university or a community program. The form separate yet integrated career paths for Chinese officials. They recruit college grads into entry-level positions in all three tracks, and they start from the bottom, called Keyuan Then they could get promoted through four increasingly elite ranks: fuke, ke, fuchu, and chu. Now these are not moves from karate kids, okay? It’s serious business. The range of positions is wide, from running health care in a village to foreign investment in a city district to manager in a company. Once a year, the department reviews their performance. They interview their superiors, their peers, their subordinates. They vet their personal conduct. They conduct public opinion surveys. Then they promote the winners. Throughout their careers, these cadres can move through and out of all three tracks. Over time, the food ones move beyond the four base levels to the fuju and ju, levels. There, they enter high, officialdom. By that point, a typical assignment will be to manage a district with population in the millions or a company with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue. Just to show you how competitive the system is, in 2012, there were 900000 fuke and ke levels, 600000 fuchu and chu levels, and only 40000 fuju and ju levels. After the ju levels, the best few move further up several more ranks, and eventually make it to the Central Committee. The process takes two to three decades. Does patronage play a role? Yes of course. But merit remains the fundamental driver. In essence, the Organization Department runs a modernizes version of China’s centuries-old mandarin system. China’s new President Xi Jinping is son of a former leader, which is very unusual, first of his kind to make the top job. Even for him, the career took 30 years. He started as a village manager, and by the time he entered the Politburo, he had managed areas with total population of 150 million people and combined GDPs of 1.5 trillion U.S. dollars. Now, please don’t get

me wrong, okay? This is not a putdown of anyone. It’s just a statement of fact. George W. Bush, remember him? This is not a putdown. Before becoming Governor of Texas, or Barack Obama before running for President, could not make even a small county manager in China’s system. Winston Churchill once said that democracy is a terrible system except for all the rest. Well, apparently he hadn’t heard of the Organization Department. Now, Westerners always assume that multi-party election with universal suffrage is the only source of political legitimacy. I was asked once, “The Party wasn’t voted in by election. Where is the source of Legitimacy?” I said, “How about competency?”: We all know the facts. In 1949, when the Party took power, China was mired in civil wars, dismembered by foreign aggression, average life expectancy at that time, 42 years old. Today, it’s the second largest economy in the world, an industrial powerhouse, and its people live in increasing prosperity. Pew Research polls Chinese public attitudes, and here are the numbers in recent years. Satisfaction with the direction of the country: 85 percent. Those who think they’re better off than five years ago, 70%. Those who expects the future to be better, a whopping 82 percent. Financial Times polls global youth attitudes and these numbers, brand new, just came from last week. Ninety-three-percent of China’s GenerationY are optimistic about their country’s future. Now, if this is not legitimacy, I’m not sure what is. In contrast, most electoral democracies around the world are suffering from dismal performance. I don’t need to elaborate for this audience how dysfunctional it is from Washington to European capitals. With a few exceptions, the vast number of developing countries that have adopted electoral regimes are still suffering from poverty and civil strife. Governments get elected, and then they fall below 50 percent approval in a few months and stay there and get worse until the next election. Democracy is becoming a perpetual cycle of elect and regret. At this rate, I’m afraid it is democracy, not China’s one-party system, that is in danger of losing legitimacy. Now, I don’t want to create the misimpression that China’s hunky-dory on the way to some kind of superpowerdom. The country faces enormous challenges. Social and economic problems that come with wrenching change like this are mine-boggling. Pollution is one. Food safety. Population issues. On the political front, the worst problem is

ted中文演讲稿篇二

你不必沉迷英语 TED演讲稿

I know what you're thinking. You think I've lost my way, and somebody's going to come on the stage in a minute and guide me gently back to my seat. (Applause) I get that all the time in Dubai. "Here on holiday are you, dear?" (Laughter) "Come to visit the children? How long are you staying?"

我知道你们在想什么，你们觉得我迷路了，马上就会有人走上台温和地把我带回我的座位上。（掌声）。我在迪拜总会遇上这种事。“来这里度假的吗，亲爱的？”（笑声）“来探望孩子的吗？这次要待多久呢？"

Well actually, I hope for a while longer yet. I have been living and teaching in the Gulf for over 30 years. (Applause) And in that time, I have seen a lot of changes. Now that statistic is quite shocking. And I want to talk to you today about language loss and the globalization of English. I want to tell you about my friend who was teaching English to adults in Abu Dhabi. And one fine day, she decided to take them into the garden to teach them some nature vocabulary. But it was she who ended up learning all the Arabic words for the local plants, as well as their uses -- medicinal uses, cosmetics, cooking, herbal. How did those students get all that knowledge? Of course, from their grandparents and even their great-grandparents. It's not necessary to tell you how important it is to be able to communicate across generations.

恩，事实上，我希望能再待久一点。我在波斯湾这边生活和教书已经超过30年了。（掌声）这段时间里，我看到了很多变化。现在这份数据是挺吓人的，而我今天要和你们说的是有关语言的消失和英语的全球化。我想和你们谈谈我的朋友，她在阿布达比教成人英语。在一个晴朗的日子里，她决定带她的学生到花园去教他们一些大自然的词汇。但最后却变成是她在学习所有当地植物在阿拉伯语中是怎么说的。还有这些植物是如何被用作药材，化妆品，烹饪，香草。这些学生是怎么得到这些知识的呢？当然是从他们的祖父母，甚至曾祖父母那里得来的。不需要我来告诉你们能够跨代沟通是多么重要。

But sadly, today, languages are dying at an unprecedented rate. A language dies every 14 days. Now, at the same time, English is the undisputed global language. Could there be a connection? Well I don't know. But I do know that I've seen a lot of changes. When I first came out to the Gulf, I came to Kuwait in the days when it was still a hardship post. Actually,

not that long ago. That is a little bit too early. But nevertheless, I was recruited by the British Council along with about 25

other teachers. And we were the first non-Muslims to teach in the state schools there in Kuwait. We were brought to teach English because the government wanted to modernize the country and empower the citizens through education. And of course, the U.K. benefited from some of that lovely oil wealth. 但遗憾的是，今天很多语言正在以前所未有的速度消失。每14天就有一种语言消失，而与此同时，英语却无庸置疑地成为全球性的语言。这其中有关联吗？我不知道。但我知道的是，我见证过许多改变。初次来到海湾地区时，我去了科威特。当时教英文仍然是个困难的工作。其实，没有那么久啦，这有点太久以前了。总之，我和其他25位老师一起被英国文化协会聘用。我们是第一批非穆斯林的老师，在科威特的国立学校任教。我们被派到那里教英语，是因为当地政府希望国家可以现代化并透过教育提升公民的水平。当然，英国也能得到些好处，产油国可是很有钱的。

Okay. Now this is the major change that I've seen -- how teaching English has morphed from being a mutually

beneficial practice to becoming a massive international

business that it is today. No longer just a foreign language on the school curriculum. And no longer the sole domain of mother England. It has become a bandwagon for every

English-speaking nation on earth. And why not? After all, the best education -- according to the latest World University Rankings -- is to be found in the universities of the U.K. and the U.S. So everybody wants to have an English education, naturally. But if you're not a native speaker, you have to pass a test.

言归正传，我见过最大的改变，就是英语教学的蜕变如何从一个互惠互利的行为变成今天这种大规模的国际产业。英语不再是学校课程里的外语学科，也不再只是英国的专利。英语（教学）已经成为所有英语系国家追逐的潮流。何乐而不为呢？毕竟，最好的教育来自于最好的大学，而根据最新的世界大学排名，那些名列前茅的都是英国和美国的大学。所以自然每个人都想接受英语教育，但如果你不是以英文为母语，你就要通过考试。

Now can it be right to reject a student on linguistic ability

alone? Perhaps you have a computer scientist who's a genius. Would he need the same language as a lawyer, for example?

Well, I don't think so. We English teachers reject them all the time. We put a stop sign, and we stop them in their tracks. They can't pursue their dream any longer, till they get English. Now let me put it this way, if I met a Dutch

speaker who had the cure for cancer, would I stop him from entering my British University? I don't think so. But indeed, that is exactly what we do. We English teachers are the

gatekeepers. And you have to satisfy us first that your English is good enough. Now it can be dangerous to give too much power to a narrow segment of society. Maybe the barrier would be too universal.

但仅凭语言能力就拒绝学生这样对吗？譬如如果你碰到一位天才计算机科学家，但他会需要有和律师一样的语言能力吗？我不这么认为。但身为英语老师的我们，却总是拒绝他们。我们处处设限，将学生挡在路上，使他们无法再追求自己的梦想，直到他们通过考试。现在容我换一个方式说，如果我遇到了一位只会说荷兰话的人，而这个人能治愈癌症，我会阻止他进入我的英国大学吗？我想不会。但事实上，我们的确在做这种事。我们这些英语老师就是把关的。你必须先让我们满意，使我们认定你的英文够好。但这可能是危险的。把太多的权力交由这么小的一群人把持，也许会令这种障碍太过普及。

Okay. "But," I hear you say, "what about the research? It's all in English." So the books are in English, the journals are done in English, but that is a self-fulfilling . It feeds the English requirement. And so it goes on. I ask you, what happened to translation? If you think about the Islamic

Golden Age, there was lots of translation then. They translated from Latin and Greek into Arabic, into Persian, and then it was translated on into the Germanic languages of Europe and the Romance languages. And so light shone upon the Dark Ages of Europe. Now don't get me wrong; I am not against teaching English, all you English teachers out there. I love it that we have a global language. We need one today more than ever. But I am against using it as a barrier. Do we really want to end up with 600 languages and the main one being English, or Chinese? We need more than that. Where do we draw the line? This system equates intelligence with a knowledge of English which is quite .

于是，我听到你们问"但是研究呢?研究报告都要用英文。”的确，研究论著和期刊都要用英文发表，但这只是一种理所当然的现象。有英语要求，自然就有英语供给，然后就这么循环下去。我倒想问问大家，为什么不用翻译呢？想想伊斯兰的黄金时代，当时翻译盛行，人们把拉丁文和希腊文翻译成阿拉伯文或波斯文，然后再由拉伯文或波斯文翻译为欧洲的日耳曼语言以及罗曼语言。于是文明照亮了欧洲的黑暗时代。但不要误会我的意思，我不是反对英语教学或是在座所有的英语老师。我很高兴我们有一个全球性的语言，这在今日尤为重要。但我反对用英语设立障碍。难道我们真希望世界上只剩下600种语言，其中又以英文或中文为主流吗？我们需要的不只如此。那么我们该如何拿捏呢？这个体制把智能和英语能力画上等号这是相当武断的。

And I want to remind you that the giants upon whose

shoulders today's stand did not have to have

English, they didn't have to pass an English test. Case in point, Einstein. He, by the way, was considered remedial at school because he was, in fact, dyslexic. But fortunately for the world, he did not have to pass an English test. Because they didn't start until 1964 with TOEFL, the American test of English. Now it's exploded. There are lots and lots of tests of English. And millions and millions of students take these tests every year. Now you might think, you and me, those fees aren't bad, they're okay, but they are prohibitive to so many millions of poor people. So immediately, we're rejecting them.

我想要提醒你们，扶持当代知识分子的这些“巨人肩膀"不必非得具有英文能力，他们不需要通过英语考试。爱因斯坦就是典型的例子。顺便说一下，他在学校还曾被认为需要课外补习，因为他其实有阅读障碍。但对整个世界来说,很幸运的当时他不需要通过英语考试，因为他们直到1964年才开始使用托福。现在英语测验太泛滥了，有太多太多的英语测验，以及成千上万的学生每年都在参加这些考试。现在你会认为，你和我都这么想，这些费用不贵，价钱满合理的。但是对数百万的穷人来说，这些费用高不可攀。所以，当下我们又拒绝了他们。 It brings to mind a headline I saw recently: "Education: The Great Divide." Now I get it, I understand why people would focus on English. They want to give their children the best chance in life. And to do that, they need a Western education. Because, of course, the best jobs go to people out of the

Western Universities, that I put on earlier. It's a circular thing.

这使我想起最近看到的一个新闻标题：“教育：大鸿沟”现在我懂了。我了解为什么大家都重视英语，因为他们希望给孩子最好的人生机会。为了达成这目的，他们需要西方教育。毕竟，不可否认，最好的工作都留给那些西方大学毕业出来的人。就像我之前说的，这是一种循环。

Okay. Let me tell you a story about two scientists, two English scientists. They were doing an experiment to do with genetics and the forelimbs and the hind limbs of animals. But they couldn't get the results they wanted. They really didn't know what to do, until along came a German scientist who realized that they were using two words for forelimb and hind limb, whereas genetics does not differentiate and neither does

German. So bingo, problem solved. If you can't think a thought, you are stuck. But if another language can think that thought, then, by cooperating, we can achieve and learn so much more. 好，我跟你们说一个关于两位科学家的故事：有两位英国科学家在做一项实验，是关于遗传学的，以及动物的前、后肢。但他们无法得到他们想要的结果。他们真的不知道该怎么办，直到来了一位德国的科学家。他发现在英文里前肢和后肢是不同的二个字，但在遗传学上没有区别。在德语也是同一个字。所以，叮！问题解决了。如果你不能想到一个念头，你会卡在那里。但如果另一个语言能想到那念头，然后通过合作我们可以达成目的，也学到更多。

My daughter, came to England from Kuwait. She had studied science and mathematics in Arabic. It's an Arabic medium school. She had to translate it into English at her grammar school. And she was the best in the class at those subjects. Which tells us that, when students come to us from abroad, we may not be giving them enough credit for what they know, and they know it in their own language. When a language dies, we don't know what we lose with that language.

我的女儿从科威特来到英格兰，她在阿拉伯的学校学习科学和数学。那是所阿拉伯中学。在学校里，她得把这些知识翻译成英文，而她在班上却能在这些学科上拿到最好的成绩。这告诉我们，当外籍学生来找我们，我们可能无法针对他们所知道的给予赞赏，因为那是来自于他们母语的知识。当一个语言消失时，我们不知道还有什么也会一并失去。

This is -- I don't know if you saw it on CNN recently -- they gave the Heroes Award to a young Kenyan shepherd boy who couldn't study at night in his village like all the village children,

ted中文演讲稿篇三

TED演讲稿

好了，我们即将潜入海底深处。

We're going to go on a dive to the deep sea,

任何一个有过这种美妙机会的人都知道

and anyone that's had that lovely opportunity knows

在这两个半小时的下降过程中，

that for about two and half hours on the way down,

是一个完全漆黑的世界。

it's a perfectly positively pitch-black world.

我们透过窗户会看见世界上各种最神秘的动物， And we used to see the most mysterious animals out the window

各种无法形容的动物。这些闪亮着的光， that you couldn't describe: these blinking lights --

完美地构成了如萤火虫般发光的世界。 a world of bioluminescence, like fireflies.

研究保护协会的Edith Witter博士

Dr. Edith Widder -- she's now at the Ocean Research and Conservation Association --

发明了一种照相机，

was able to come up with a camera

这种照相机可以拍下这些令人难以置信的生物。 that could capture some of these incredible animals,

这就是你现在在屏幕上看到的。

and that's what you're seeing here on the screen.

他们全部都是生物发光体。像我说的，就像萤火虫一样。

That's all bioluminescence. So, like I said: just like fireflies.

这是个会飞的火鸡，在树下。（笑声）

There's a flying turkey under a tree. (Laughter)

我知道我现在像是个实习期的地质学家，不过我就是喜欢。

I'm a geologist by training. But I love that.

你可以看到这些生物发出的光，

And you see, some of the bioluminescence

有些是为了避免被吃掉。 they use to avoid being eaten,

有些又是为引诱食物上钩。 some they use to attract prey,

尽管如此，用艺术的角度来看，这些都如此神奇。 but all of it, from an artistic point of view, is positively amazing.

再来看看这里发生了些什么—— And a lot of what goes on inside ...

这条鱼有着会发光，闪烁的眼睛。

there's a fish with glowing eyes, pulsating eyes.

有些颜色则可以催眠。

Some of the colors are designed to hypnotize,

多么有趣的图案。这是最后一个：

these lovely patterns. And then this last one,

也是我的最爱，像转轮一样的设计。 one of my favorites, this pinwheel design.

每一次潜水都充满着惊喜。

Just absolutely amazing, every single dive.

这正是一个未知的世界。到今天为止，我们只探索了其中的极小部分，

That's the unknown world, and today we've only explored about 3 percent

大约只占了所有海洋的3%。 of what's out there in the ocean.

到现在，我们已经发现了世界上最高的山峰， Already we've found the world's highest mountains,

最深的峡谷，

the world's deepest valleys,

水下湖，水下瀑布，

underwater lakes, underwater waterfalls --

还有我们刚才看到的。

a lot of that we shared with you from the stage.

然而，恰是我们曾经以为根本不可能有生命的地方，And in a place where we thought no life at all,{ted中文演讲稿}.

我们发现了众多的生物，还有它们的密度和多样性，

we find more life, we think, and diversity and density

都超过了热带雨林。这告诉我们

than the tropical rainforest, which tells us that

我们实际上对自己的星球还不甚了解。 we don't know much about this planet at all.

还有剩下的97%，那里要不就是一片荒芜，要不就是充满惊喜。

There's still 97 percent, and either that 97 percent is empty or just full of surprises.

不过我现在还是想说说浅水里的世界， But I want to jump up to shallow water now

来看看那些神奇的生物。

and look at some creatures that are positively amazing.

头足类动物，有头有角。小时候我把他们当作是枪乌贼。

Cephalopods -- head-foots. As a kid I knew them as calamari, mostly. (Laughter)

这是一条章鱼。 This is an octopus --

这是来自Roger Hanlon博士，海洋生物实验室的成果。

this is the work of Dr. Roger Hanlon at the Marine Biological Lab --

这些头足类动物真令人着迷，

and it's just fascinating how cephalopods can,

它用它们的眼睛，它们那难以置信的眼睛来观察周围的环境，

with their incredible eyes, sense their surroundings,

看光，看图案。

look at light, look at patterns.

这有只章鱼正在穿过礁石。

Here's an octopus moving across the reef,

找到一个位置，停下来，卷起，然后马上消失在背景之中。

finds a spot to settle down, curls up and then disappears into the background.

这很难做到。 Tough thing to do.

接下来，再来一起看一对鱿鱼。

In the next bit, we're going to see a couple squid.

这就是鱿鱼。当雄性鱿鱼搏斗时，

These are squid. Now males, when they fight,

如果它们想要显示出自己的侵略性，它们就变为白色了。

if they're really aggressive, they turn white.

这有两条雄鱿鱼在搏斗。

And these two males are fighting,

它们用撞屁股的方式来搏斗，

they do it by bouncing their butts together,

真是挺有意思的方法。这里有一条雄性在左边， which is an interesting concept. Now, here's a male on the left

雌性在右边。

and a female on the right,

看，这条雄性能有办法利用颜色把自己分为两半， and the male has managed to split his coloration

所以雌性只能看到它温顺，优雅的一边，

so the female only always sees the kinder gentler squid in him.{ted中文演讲稿}.

雄性-- （笑声）再来看一次。

And the male ... (Laughter) We're going to see it again.

让我们再看一次。注意它的颜色：

Let's take a look at it again. Watch the coloration:

白色在右边，棕色在左边。

white on the right, brown on the left.

它后退一步，让其它的雄性无法靠近

He takes a step back -- so he's keeping off the other males

来到另外一边，并且马上转换颜色。

by splitting his body -- and comes up on the other side ...

瞧！以前有人告诉我 Bingo! Now I'm told that's

这个雄性特征不仅仅是在鱿鱼身上，不过我也不太确定。

not just a squid phenomenon with males, but I don't know.

墨鱼，我很喜欢墨鱼。这是一只巨型澳大利亚墨鱼。 Cuttlefish. I love cuttlefish. This is a Giant Australian Cuttlefish.

看它，看它那双无精打采的眼睛。

And there he is, his droopy little eyes up here.

不过它们能做很神奇的事。

But they can do pretty amazing things, too.

我们马上就能看到它退入到礁石的夹缝中去， Here we're going to see one backing into a crevice, and

注意它的触角。 watch his tentacles --

它就这样把触角拉进来，使自己看起来像海藻一样。he just pulls them in, makes them look just like algae.

刹那就消失在背景中。

Disappears right into the background.

多神奇！这又是两只雄性在搏斗。

Positively amazing.Here's two males fighting.

当然，这些头足类非常聪明，

Once again, they're smart enough, these cephalopods;

他们知道如何不会伤害到对方。 they know not to hurt each other.

不过看下它们能够利用皮肤来变换图案。怎么样？ But look at the patterns that they can do with their skin.

很神奇吧！

That's an amazing thing.

这是个章鱼。有时候，它们不想被别人发现它们在移动，

Here's an octopus. Sometimes they don't want to be seen when they move

因为那些食肉动物会发现它们。 because predators can see them.

看，这个家伙把自己弄的像石头一样，

Here, this guy actually can make himself look like a rock,{ted中文演讲稿}.

观察着它周围的环境，

and, looking at his environment,

然后滑过水底，

can actually slide across the bottom,

利用波纹和阴影来隐藏自己，从而不被发现。 using the waves and the shadows so he can't be seen.

就是这样，无声无息地融入环境之中。 His motion blends right into the background --

这就是移动石头的手法。我们从浅海中学到了很多新东西。{ted中文演讲稿}.

the moving rock trick. So, we're learning lots new from the shallow water.

继续来探索下深海领域， Still exploring the deep,

同时从浅海中学到很多新东西。

but learning lots from the shallow water.

这有个原因来解释：在浅海里，

There's a good reason why: the shallow water's

到处都是捕猎者。这是条梭鱼。 full of predators -- here's a barracuda --

如果你是条章鱼或是头足类动物的话， and if you're an octopus or a cephalopod,

你确实需要知道怎么利用周围的环境来隐藏自己。 you need to really understand how to use your surroundings to hide.

下个画面里，你可以看到一个美丽的珊瑚。

In the next scene, you're going to see a nice coral bottom.

你会发现，一条章鱼

And you see that an octopus would stand out

我以为是电脑特效。让我们看看倒放。

如果不进行伪装，极易被发现。

very easily there if you couldn't use your camouflage,

伪装是改变你皮肤的颜色和纹理。 use your skin to change color and texture.

前面这里有些海藻，

Here's some algae in the foreground ...

还有一条章鱼。难道不神奇么？不过现在，显然Roger（摄影师）吓到了它，

and an octopus. Ain't that amazing? Now, Roger spooked him

它马上释放烟雾弹——墨水来掩护逃脱。 so he took off in a cloud of ink, and when he

当它停下来，会想，“啊，我被发现了， lands the octopus says, "Oh, I've been seen.

那我最好变到最大来保护下自己。

The best thing to do is to get as big as I can get."

那片棕色让它的眼睛看起来十分大。 That big brown makes his eyespot very big.

它在唬人。让我们看一次倒放。

So, he's bluffing. Let's do it backwards --

我第一次看到的时候还以为他在开玩笑呢。

I thought he was joking when he first showed it to me.

I thought it was all graphics -- so here it is in reverse.

注意看它皮肤的颜色，以及皮肤的纹理。 Watch the skin color; watch the skin texture.

多么神奇的动物，可以改变自己的颜色和质地 Just an amazing animal, it can change color and texture

来变得和背景一样。看它消失在海藻中。

to match the surroundings. Watch him blend right into this algae.

一，二，三。

One, two, three. (Applause)

它不见了，我也该下去了。谢谢大家！

And now he's gone, and so am I. Thank you very much.

ted中文演讲稿篇四

TED演讲稿(中英)

Shanghai, at the height of the cultural revolution. My grandmother teel me that she heard the sound of the gunfire along with my first cries. When I grew up, I was told a story that explained all I needed to know about humanity. It went like this. All human societies develop in linear progression, beginning with primitive society, then slave society, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally guess where we end up.Communism! Sooner or later, all of humanity,regardless of culture, language, nationality, will arrive at this final stage of political and social development. The entire world’s peoples will be unified in this paradise on earth and live happily ever after. Before we get there, we need to engage in a struggle between good and evil, the good of socialism against the evil of capitalism and the good shall triumph. That, of course, was the meta-narrative distilled from the theories of Karl Marx. And the Chinese bought it. We were taught that grand story day in and day out. It became part of us, and we believed in it. The story was a bestseller. About one third of the entire world’s population lived under that meta narrative. Then, the world changed overnight. As for me, disillusioned by the failed religion of my youth, I went to America and became a Berkeley hippie.Now, as I was coming of age, something else happened. As if one big story wasn't’t enough, I was told another one. This one was just as grand. It also claims that all human societies develop in linear progression towards a singular end. This one went as follows: All society, regardless

of culture, be it Christian, Muslim, Confucian, must progress from traditional societies in which groups are the basic units to modern societies in which atomized individuals are the sovereign units and all these individuals are, by definition, rational, and they all want one thing: the vote. Because they are rational, once given the vote, they produce good government and live happily ever after. Paradise on earth again. Sooner or later, electoral democracy will be the only political system for all countries and all peoples, with a free market to make them all rich. But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil. The good belongs to those who are democracies and are charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force against the evil of those who do not hold elections. This story also became a bestseller. According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010. In the last 20 years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus: multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on them is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world. Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success. Those who do not are doomed to fail. But this time, the Chinese didn't’t buy it. Fool me once. The rest is history. In just 30 years, China went form one of the poorest agricultural countries in the world to its second-largest economy. Six hundred fifty million people were lifted out of poverty. Eighty percent of the entire world’s

poverty alleviation during that period happened in China. In other words, all the old and new democracies put together amounted to a mere fraction of what a single,one-party state did without voting. See, I grew up on this stuff: food stamps. Meat was rationed to a few hundred grams per person per month at one point. Needless to say, I ate all my mother’s portions. So I asked myself, what’s wrong with this picture? Here I am in my hometown, my business growing leaps and bounds. Entrepreneurs are starting companies every day. Middle class is expanding in speed and scale unprecedented in history. Yet, according to the grand story, none of this should be happening. So I went and did the only thing I could. I studied it. Yes, China is a one-party state, run by the Chinese Communist Party, the Party, and they don’t hold elections. Three assumptions are made by the dominant political theories of our time. Such a system is operationally rigid, political closed, and morally illegitimate. Well, the assumptions are wrong. The opposites are true. Adaptability, meritocracies, legitimacy are the three defining characteristics of Chin’ s one-party system. Now, most political scientists will tell us that a one-party system is inherently incapable of self-correction. It won’t last long because it cannot adapt. Now here are the facts. In 64 years of running the largest country in the world, the range of the party’s policies has been wider than any other country in recent memory, from radical land collectivization to Great Leap Forward, then privatization of

farmland, then the Cultural Revolution, then Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, then successor Jiang Zemin took the giant political step of opening up party member to private businesspeople, something unimaginable during Mao’s rule. So the party self-corrects in rather dramatic fashions. Institutionally, new rules get enacted to correct previous dysfunctions. For example, term limits. Political leaders used to retain their positions for life and they used that to accumulate power and perpetuate their rules. Mao was the father of modern China, yet his to prolonged rule led to disastrous mistakes. So the party instituted term limits with mandatory retirement age of 68 to 70. One thing we often hear is political reforms have lagged far behind economic reforms and China is in dire need of political reform. But this claim is rhetorical trap hidden behind a political bias. See, some have decided a priori what kind of changes they want to see and only such changes can be called political reform. The truth is, political reforms have never stopped. Compared with 30 years ago, 20 years, even 10 years ago, every aspect of Chinese society, how the country is governed, from the most local level to the highest center are recognizable today. Now such changes are simply not possible without political reforms of the most fundamental kind. Now I would venture to suggest the Party is the world’s leading expert in political reform. The second assumption is that in a one-party state power gets concentrated in the hands of the few and bad governance and corruption

follow. Indeed, corruption is a big problem, but let’s first look at the larger context. Now this may be counterintuitive to you. The Party happens to be the most meritocratic political institution in the world today. China’s highest ruling body, the Politburo, has 25 members. In the most recent one, only five of them came from a background of privilege, so-called princelings. The other 20, including the President and the Premier came from entirely ordinary backgrounds. In the larger central committee of 300 or more, the percentage of those who were born into power and wealth was even smaller. The vast majority of senior Chinese leaders worked and competed their way to the top. Compare that with the ruling elites in both developed and developing countries, I think you’ll find the Party being near the top in upward mobility. The question then is, how could that be possible in a system run by one party? Now we come to a powerful political institution little-known to Westerners: the Party’s Organization Department. The Department functions like a giant, human resource engine that would be the envy of even some of the most successful corporations. It operates a rotating pyramid made up of three components: civil service,state-owned enterprises, and social organizations like a university or a community program. They form separate yet integrated career paths for Chinese officials. They recruit college grads into entry-level positions in all three tracks, and they start from the bottom, called kuyen. Then they could get promoted through

ted中文演讲稿篇五

TED演讲稿

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 weren't 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. That's 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 I've 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。”{ted中文演讲稿}.

I didn't 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 didn't, 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, I'm 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, I've lived a good life. In my own humanity and mistaked, I've 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 with my wife, my friends, with people. And after, as I reflected on that, I decided to eliminate negative energy from my life. It's not perfect, but it's a lot better. I've not had a fight with my wife in 2 years. It feels great. I no longer try to be right; I choose to be happy.

那天我学到的第二件事是，正当我们通过乔治华盛顿大桥，那也没过多久，我想，哇，我有一件真正后悔的事。虽然我有人性缺点，也犯了些错，但我生活得其实不错。我试着把每件事做得更好。但因为人性，我难免有些自我中心，我后悔竟然花了许多时间，和生命中重要的人讨论那些不重要的事。我想到我和妻子、朋友及人们的关系，之后，回想这件事时，我决定除掉我人生中的负面情绪。还没完全做到，但确实好多了。过去两年我从未和妻子吵架，感觉很好，我不再尝试争论对错，我选择快乐。

The third thing I learned - and this's as you mental clock starts going, "15, 14, 13." You can see the water coming. I'm saying, "Please blow up." I don't want this thing to break in 20 pieces like you've seen in those documentaries. And as we're coming down, I had a sense of, wow, dying is not scary. It's almost like we've been preparing for it our whole lives .But it was very sad. I didn't want to go. I love my life. And

that sadness really framed in one thought, which is, I only wish for one thing. I only wish I could see my kids grow up.

我所学到的第三件事是，当你脑中的始终开始倒数“15，14，13”，看到水开始涌入，心想，“拜托爆炸吧！” 我不希望这东西碎成20片，就像纪录片中看到的那样。当我们逐渐下沉，我突然感觉到，哇，死亡并不可怕，就像是我们一生一直在为此做准备，但很令人悲伤。我不想就这样离开，我热爱我的生命。这个悲伤的主要来源是，我只期待一件事，我只希望能看到孩子长大。

About a month later, I was at a performance by my daugter -

first-grade, not much artistic talent... yet. And I 'm balling, I'm crying, like a little kid. And it made all the sense in the world to me. I realized at that point by connecting those two dots, that the only thing that matters in my life is being a great dad. Above all, above all, the only goal I have in life is to be a good dad.

一个月后，我参加女儿的表演，她一年级，没什么艺术天份，就算如此。我泪流满面，像个孩子，这让我的世界重新有了意义。当当时我意识到，将这两件事连接起来，其实我生命中唯一重要的事，就是成为一个好父亲，比任何事都重要，比任何事都重要，我人生中唯一的目标就是做个好父亲。

I was given the gift of a miracle, of not dying that day. I was given another gift, which was to be able to see into the future and come back and live differently.

那天我经历了一个奇迹，我活下來了。我还得到另一个启示，像是看见自己的未来再回來，改变自己的人生。

I challenge you guys that are flying today, imagine the same thing