Transcriber: Chryssa R. Takahashi Reviewer: Ariana Bleau Lugo
How can an ancient Greek thinker help us understand technology?
If we think about ancient times,
we think of wise bearded man pondering over the big questions of life.
Where do we come from, where are we going,
what are we supposed to do in between.
Now, today it seems everyone's going crazy about a different question.
Is the Internet making us stupid?
I'm going to come back to my Greek thinker in a minute.
First, we need to talk about this Internet.
So let me tell you a little story.
A few weeks ago, when I was writing a book
about how to get along in digital life,
I was curious myself to find out
whether the Internet is really making us stupid,
because I myself am a heavy Internet user
and if there is this kind of dumbing down by the Internet,
I'm first in line.
So what I did was,
I called up some cognitive psychologists at the University of Basel
and I wanted them to test my brain,
see whether I can still think properly, multitask, concentrate.
You know, these kinds of things that the Internet is said to be destroying.
So I went there into a tiny lab in the basement.
One computer, one window, few technical things there,
and I underwent a series of tests.
I had to memorize patterns, calculate numbers, these kinds of things.
One hour, that was that.
I came back in one week later to do the exact same tests again.
Now the interesting thing was suddenly I struggled more.
So what had happened?
Before I had gone in for the first test I had been offline for an entire week.
Between the first and the second test,
I had pushed my usual internet exposure of eight to 10 hours a day even more.
So it seems like this heavy internet exposure
has made me struggle at these tests.
But here's the fun fact.
I did better the second time in every single test.
So I struggled more,
but the results were better, even controlled for learning effects.
So what do we learn from that?
That the Internet is FTW, for the win?
Maybe not.
It was just one experiment, just me, not overly scientific.
But there is an important takeaway message in this.
How we experience and perceive things is not always how they really are.
Most people don't seem to be aware of that.
Or if they are, they don't seem to care.
Making judgments and statements about how things are all the time,
not just about whether the Internet is making us stupid or not.
If you follow tech news and I guess you all do,
you see these kinds of statements being made all the time.
How many iPhone killers have we seen introduced.
How many Google killers have we seen.
Now Facebook is set to be overtaking Google
in, what, five years, seven years, ten years?
Twitter is changing the way we do business.
The web is dead, I've read, and Nick Denton is the new Murdoch,
whatever that means.
Journalists are guilty of doing so all the time, making these statements.
I've done them myself.
Social media consultants, they even make a living off it.
Bloggers, obvious case,
and we all do this when we tweet out our definite wisdom
about how things are in 140 characters.
Fail here, epic win there.
So it's kind of a Lucky Luck syndrome.
We judge quicker than our shadows can understand.
And it's perfectly understandable, people want to know how things are.
People want to understand how technology is evolving in the future.
It's perfectly understandable, but it's not the way to go.
And that's why I want you to meet Phyrrho of Elis.
He's a Greek philosopher,
considered the founding father of skepticism.
He's called Pyrrho of Elis because obviously he was of Elis,
being born in 360 BC,
in the region of Elis on the Peloponnese.
And he can really help us understand technology.
Of course he won't tell us whether Facebook will go down,
MySpace earlier, or that Twitter will bring peace to the Middle East.
Or whether the Internet is making us stupid for that matter.
He's teaching us a lesson that goes far beyond that.
What he's basically saying is, "Relax guys."
So Pyrrhonean skepticism is based on three assumptions.
First, we cannot fully perceive the things around us.
Second, therefore we cannot make judgments on them.
And three, and this is really the interesting point,
if we accept that...
Why doesn't it work?
Yes, if we accept this,
we will find wisdom and peace of mind, which is great.
So instead of always taking sides
and making quick judgments about how things are,
why not just take one step back and admit, we don't really know.
I mean, with technology, we're mostly speaking about the future
and a bit of modesty towards our own knowledge
about things that haven't even happened yet.
That seems reasonable, doesn't it?
Of course, taking Pyrrho literally, word by word,
would have huge implications, casting doubt over just about anything.
I couldn't be standing here because I wouldn't be able to make up my mind
whether TEDx actually existed or not,
and I couldn't be standing here telling you things
about which in pure skepticism I know nothing about.
And of course if we want to understand technology better
it's important that we talk about it, have debates, make assumptions.
But in doing so, having Pyrrho at the back of our minds
is really the way to go.
Our statements and our judgments are more sound and more reasonable
if we don't take them for granted.
And we'll actually come closer to something like truth,
if we accept that we'll never find it.
So if you go for lunch now after the next talk,
take for granted that the food is for real.
It's for free actually too.
But don't be overly sure about what you think and what you say in discussions.
Be a skeptic, follow Pyrrho of Elis.
Thank you.
(Applause)