Translator: Hana Colucci Reviewer: Elitsa Panaite
Nowadays, there are lots of ways to get our ideas out into the world.
There is social media, web hosting, blogs,
comments on news articles.
Yeah.
If you've got something to say, you can find the place to say it.
And partly because of these platforms,
we also live in a world of fake news and echo chambers,
where we surround ourselves with sources that tell us what we already think
and how clever we are for thinking it.
So, yeah, you agree with me? Wow, you must be really smart.
(Laughter)
And, obviously, an excellent source of information.
But if we step outside those circles,
having lots of ideas and opinions around us is a good thing.
It makes it harder for us to exist solely in our information bubbles.
A diversity of ideas is also an indicator of a tolerant society,
and that very tolerance
suggests that we should respect the ideas and opinions of others, right?
Each according to their own. Let a thousand flowers bloom.
I would argue that's not only wrong,
it's dangerous.
Treating all ideas as equally worthy of respect is a toxic notion.
Because if all ideas are equal, then all ideas are worthless.
Now, let me explain that thinking a bit.
If there is no criteria we can use
to determine if one idea is better or worse than any other,
then it is by definition both worthless and useless.
In other words,
an idea that can't be evaluated is an idea without value.
But we value ideas for different reasons.
Some ideas are valuable because they change how we think
and can, therefore, make possible that which wasn't possible before.
They open up opportunities for us to imagine and to dream
and to act.
The TEDx forum gives us lots of examples of these.
Ideas that can take us places,
that help us explore, progress and develop,
that give us meaning and purpose
are good ideas.
But not all ideas are like that.
I'd also suggest that an inability, even unwillingness,
to discriminate between good and bad ideas
has left us with a deficit of, among other things,
good politicians and high quality public debate.
So where does this sentiment come from,
that we should treat all ideas and opinions with respect?
To my mind,
it's kind of a broad and deep social movement towards tolerance and equality -
which is a good thing.
But what that movement sometimes fails to recognize
is a very important principle:
that people are innately worthy of respect,
but ideas are not.
We can't empathize with ideas like we can with people.
Ideas can't suffer, they don't know joy,
and they are not by themselves responsible for other people.
Ideas shouldn't get respect unless they earn it.
The world of ideas should be a brutal meritocracy.
They should stand or fall according to their merits,
not because of who promotes them
or because of the passion or sincerity with which they're expressed.
So, ideas and people are different.
Sometimes, however, we integrate our ideas into our identity.
And that can make us very resistant to critical analysis of them,
can even make us angry when others dare to challenge us.
And that anger can make others hesitate to criticize us.
But if our ideas can't be challenged and critiqued,
then they are nothing more than gang colors,
identifying us in the same way that bumper stickers or football jerseys do.
To say that my idea can't be challenged because it's part of my identity
and that an attack on it is an attack on me,
equivalent to a denial of my human respect,
is a fallacy of reasoning,
and I call this fallacy "The fallacy of deepest defense."
It's a blurring of the line between people and ideas.
So we need to interrogate our own thinking
with the same rigor that we would use to interrogate the thinking of others,
and to expect the same from them,
perhaps letting go of some cherished ideas along the way.
Because it is far more sensible to let go of an idea,
if we have good reasons to do so,
than it is to cling onto it
in the face of compelling evidence or arguments against it -
a stubbornness born of not separating our ideas and our identity.
Thinking critically about our ideas and why we believe in them
is an essential part of our personal growth.
Critical thinking is not something to be weaponized for use against others.
It is rather a mirror that we can hold up to ourselves.
We should, therefore, respect the right of others to inquire into anything
and to go wherever their free inquiry may lead them.
We should also respect the fact
that they may end up embracing ideas that we ourselves would not wish to hold.
But what we don't have to respect is the idea itself.
The right to hold and promote an idea
does not create in others an obligation to respect it.
The right to be heard is not the right to be taken seriously.
(Applause)
I said earlier, if all ideas are equal then all ideas are worthless.
But all ideas aren't equal. And all ideas aren't worthless.
Some are better than others.
No one person can tell us the criteria for a good idea across all contexts.
That's something we have to work on collectively and collaboratively.
But what we can say
is that the very best ideas are those that help all of us to flourish.
Not just some of us at the expense of others.
When we realize this, we can look ahead with more clarity
to find, to recognize, and to accept
those ideas that really are worth spreading.
Thank you.
(Applause)