2016桑德伯格演讲

合集下载

世界十大经典励志演讲稿

世界十大经典励志演讲稿在人生的道路上，我们都会遇到各种挑战和困难，而励志演讲正是那些鼓舞人心、激励人们前行的力量之一。

下面，让我们一起来回顾一些世界十大经典励志演讲稿，感受那些激荡心灵的力量。

1. 马丁·路德·金的《我有一个梦想》。

马丁·路德·金在这篇演讲中，表达了他对种族平等和公正的渴望，呼吁人们摒弃种族歧视，追求和平与团结。

这篇演讲激励了无数人，成为了美国民权运动的标志性演讲之一。

2. 史蒂夫·乔布斯的斯坦福大学毕业演讲。

乔布斯在这个演讲中分享了自己对生命和死亡的思考，鼓励毕业生要勇敢追随内心的声音，不要被他人的观念束缚，要有勇气追寻自己的梦想。

3. 温斯顿·丘吉尔的《我们应该从不气馁》。

丘吉尔在二战期间发表了这篇演讲，鼓舞了整个英国民众的士气，鼓励人们坚定信念，不气馁，坚持抗战到底。

4. 毛姆的《成功的秘诀》。

毛姆在这篇演讲中分享了他对成功的看法，强调了毅力、决心和不屈不挠的精神对于取得成功的重要性，激励人们不要轻易放弃。

5. 尼尔·阿姆斯特朗的月球漫步演讲。

阿姆斯特朗在这个历史性的时刻发表了这篇演讲，他表达了对人类探索精神的赞美，鼓励人们勇往直前，勇敢探索未知。

6. 约翰·肯尼迪的《问不是问我们能做什么，而是问我们能做什么》。

肯尼迪在这篇演讲中呼吁人们要为社会做出贡献，不要只是关心自己能得到什么，而是要思考自己能为社会做些什么。

7. 纳尔逊·曼德拉的《自由的长路演讲》。

曼德拉在这篇演讲中表达了对自由的渴望，鼓舞了整个南非民众的斗志，激励人们为自由和正义而奋斗。

8. 海伦·凯勒的《克服困难》。

凯勒在这篇演讲中分享了自己作为聋哑盲人所经历的困难和挑战，鼓励人们要坚持不懈，克服困难，追求自己的梦想。

9. 马拉拉·优素福扎伊的联合国演讲。

马拉拉在这个演讲中呼吁人们要关注教育问题，尤其是女性教育问题，她的坚定和勇敢激励着全世界的人们。

桑德伯格TED演讲

桑德伯格TED演讲：为什么女性领导那么少？Facebook COO 谢乐尔·桑德伯格（Sheryl Sandberg）谢乐尔·桑德伯格（Sheryl Sandberg）是全球最大的社交网站Facebook的首席运营官，曾任比尔·克林顿政府的财政部办公室主任，后任Google副总裁，短时间内帮助谷歌实现盈利。

2008年3月，桑德伯格加入新兴社交网络Facebook，担任首席运营官。

3年后，Facebook 的用户数从当初的6000万飙升至如今的7亿，广告收入更是从2008年的3亿美元上涨到2010年的19亿美元，比两年前翻了六倍，而Google的广告收入在这三年增速减缓。

她在演讲中为职场女性提供3条建议：像男性一样坐到谈判桌旁，争取自己能够胜任的职位和应得的薪水；与伴侣有效沟通，共同分担家务和养育孩子的责任；在得到自己想要的职位前“不要提前离场”。

正文：我们先承认我们是幸运的。

我们没有生活在我们母亲和我们祖母生活过的那个世界，在那时，女性的职业选择是非常有限的。

今天在座的各位，大多数人成长于一个女性有基本公民权的世界。

令人惊讶地是，我们还生活在一个有些女性还没有这些权利的世界。

但除上所述，我们还有一个问题，它是一个实际问题。

这问题是：在世界各地，女性没达到任何职业的高管职位。

这些数据很清楚地告诉我们这实情。

190个国家元首里，九位是女性领导。

在世界上议会的总人数中，13%是女性议员。

在公司部门，女性占据高位C级职位，董事会席位高管职位比例占15%，16%。

自从2002年起这数据没变化过有下降趋势。

即使在非营利的行业----我们有时认为这一行业是被更多女性所领导的，女性领导人占20%。

我们还面临着另一个问题，就是女性在职业成功和个人价值实现中所面临的艰难选择。

美国最近一个研究表明，已婚高管人员，三分之二的已婚男性高管人员有孩子，只有三分之一的已婚女性高管人员有孩子。

几年前，我在纽约，出席一个协议，在那种别致的纽约私募投资办事处中的一个你能想象到的。

TED演讲稿中英文3分钟

yang lan: the generation thats remaking china the night before i was heading for scotland, i was invited to host the final ofchinas got talent show in shanghai with the 80,000 live audience in the stadium. guesswho was the performing guest?susan boyle. and i told her, im going to scotland thenext day. she sang beautifully, and she even managed to say a few words in chinese.[chinese]so its not like hello or thank you, that ordinary stuff. it means green onionfor free. why did she say that? because it was a line from our chinese parallel susanboyle -- a 50-some year-old woman, a vegetable vendor in shanghai, who loves singingwestern opera, but she didnt understand any english or french or italian, so shemanaged to fill in the lyrics with vegetable names in chinese. (laughter) and thelast sentence of nessun dorma that she was singing in the stadium was green onionfor free. so[as] susan boyle was saying that, 80,000 live audience sang together. that washilarious.so i guess both susan boyle and this vegetable vendor in shanghai belonged tootherness. they were the least expected to be successful in the business calledentertainment, yet their courage and talent brought them through. and a show and aplatform gave them the stage to realize their dreams. well, being different is notthat difficult. we are all different from different perspectives. but i think beingdifferent is good, because you present a different point of view. you may have thechance to make a difference. my generation has been very fortunate to witness and participate in the historictransformation of china that has made so many changes in the past 20, 30 years. iremember that in the year of 1990,when i was graduating from college, i was applyingfor a job in the sales department of the first five-star hotel in beijing, great wallsheraton -- its still there. so after being interrogated by this japanese managerfor a half an hour, he finally said, so, miss yang, do you have any questions to askme?i summoned my courage and poise and said,yes, but could you let me know, whatactually do you sell? i didnt have a clue what a sales department was about in afive-star hotel. that was the first day i set my foot in a five-star hotel. my life, and i feel proud of that. but then we are also so fortunate to witnessthe transformation of the whole country. i was in beijings bidding for the olympicgames. i was representing the shanghai expo. i saw china embracing the world and viceversa. but then sometimes im thinking, what are todays young generation up to? howare they different, and what are the differences they are going to make to shape thefuture of china, or at large, the world? so making a living is not that easy for young people. college graduates are notin short supply.in urban areas, college graduates find the starting salary is about 400 u.s. dollarsa month, while the average rent is above $500. so what do they do? they have to sharespace -- squeezed in very limited space to save money -- and they call themselvestribe of ants. and for those who are ready to get married and buy their apartment,they figured out they have to work for 30 to 40 years to afford their first apartment.that ratio in americawould only cost a couple five years to earn, but in china its30 to 40 years with the skyrocketing real estate price. so through some of the hottest topics on microblogging, we can see what youngpeople care most about. social justice and government accountability runs the firstin what they demand.for the past decade or so, a massive urbanization and developmenthave let us witness a lot of reports on the forced demolition of private property.andit has aroused huge anger and frustrationamong our young generation. sometimes peopleget killed, and sometimes people set themselves on fire to protest. so when theseincidents are reported more and more frequently on the internet,people cry for thegovernment to take actions to stop this. so the good news is that earlier this year, the state council passed a newregulation on house requisition and demolition and passed the right to order forceddemolition from local governments to the court. similarly, many other issues concerning public safety is a hot topicon the internet. we heard about polluted air, polluted water, poisoned food. and guesswhat, we have faked beef. they have sorts of ingredients that you brush on a pieceof chicken or fish, and it turns it to look like beef.and then lately, people arevery concerned about cooking oil, because thousands of people have been found[refining] cooking oil from restaurant slop. so all these things have aroused a hugeoutcry from the internet. and fortunately, we have seen the government respondingmore timely and also more frequently to the public concerns. while young people seem to be very sure about their participation in publicpolicy-making, but sometimes theyre a little bit lost in terms of what they want fortheir personal life. china is soon to pass the u.s. as the number one market for luxurybrands -- thats not including the chinese expenditures in europe and elsewhere. butyou know what, half of those consumers are earning a salary below 2,000 u.s. dollars.theyre not rich at all. theyre taking those bags and clothes as a sense of identityand social status. and this is a girl explicitly saying on a tv dating show that shewould rather cry in a bmw than smile on a bicycle.but of course, we do have youngpeople who would still prefer to smile, whether in a bmw or [on] a bicycle. so happiness is the most popular word we have heard through the past two years.happiness is not only related to personal experiences and personal values, but also,its about the environment. people are thinking about the following questions: arewe going to sacrifice our environment further to produce higher gdp? how are we goingto perform our social and political reform to keep pace with economic growth, to keepsustainability and stability? and also, how capable is the systemof self-correctnessto keep more people contentwith all sorts of friction going on at the same time?iguess these are the questions people are going to answer. and our younger generationare going to transform this country while at the same time being transformedthemselves.thank you very much.杨澜ted演讲：重塑中国的一代中文演讲稿在来爱尔兰的前一晚，我应邀主持了中国达人秀在上海的体育场和八万现场观众。

Shirley_Sandberg

Shirley Sandberg: The Worthy Queen of Silicon Valley ◎供稿：杨琴雪莉·桑德伯格在2016年伯克利大学演讲道：“生活中总会碰到很多难处的事情，有时错失机会。

工作不合适、遭遇疾病或事故，因而一切瞬间改变。

有时尊严尽失，刻薄的偏见常常刺痛人心。

有时缘尽人散，亲密关系一旦破碎就难重圆。

人生不仅要面临生活，还要面临死别。

”雪莉的人生历经坎坷，但她用一次次行动证明：即便悲伤或空虚，或是面对巨大挑战，你仍然可以选择快乐和有意义的生活。

雪莉·桑德伯格：当之无愧的硅谷女王Track 7Life style/人物志Shirley Sandberg, now Facebook’s chief operating officer, is known by the media as “Facebook’s first lady”, and is the first female member of Facebook’s board. She is No.5 on the 2011 Forbes list of powerful women, one of the top 50 “most powerful” businesswomen elites on the Forbes list. In 2013, she appeared on the cover of Time magazine and was rated as one of the most influential people in the world by Time magazine.As a successful woman with countless great 1)halos and labels, what behind her is a journey of great 2)frustration and inspiration.Shirley Sandberg, was born in 1969 in a Jewish family in Washington, D.C., a typical middle-class family. Her father, Joel, is an 3)ophthalmologist, and her mother, Adele, teaches French at a college. Her parents are both senior 4)intellectuals. They 5)instilled their traditional educational ideas from childhood. They not only pay attention to her academic achievements, but also hope that she can fulfill her life-long task and be a good wife and good mother.In 1987, Shirley was admitted to Harvard University. In Harvard, where there are so many talented people, she still graduated from Harvard economics department as the first prize and top student. After graduation, she settled down in Washington, and soon met a suitable marriage partner, a Washington businessman. Like completing a historical mission, she got the 6)certificate without 7)hesitation.But because of her husband’s incomprehension of her career, they divorced after only one year together. After her marriage failed, she put all her heart into her work.One year after the divorce, Sherry was invited to serve as the chief of staff for her 8)mentor1)halo［̍he I ləʊ］n. 光环2)frustration［frʌ̍stre Iʃn］n. 挫折3)ophthalmologist［̩ɒfᶱæl̍mɒlədʒI st］n. 眼科医师4)intellectual［̩I ntə̍lektʃuəl］n. 知识分子5)instill［I n̍st I l］v. 灌输6)certificate［sə̍t I f I kət , sə̍t I f I ke I t］n. 证书，文凭 7)hesitation［̩hez I̍te Iʃn］n. 犹豫8)mentor［̍mentɔː(r)］n. 指导者，导师Summers, who became Vice Treasury Secretary of thethen US President Bill Clinton’s administration. At thistime, Shirley was only 29 years old and had alreadymade her mark in the political circle of Washington.1. In the future, there will be no female leaders. There will just be leaders.在未来，将没有女性领导人,只会有领导人。

桑德伯格提纲

桑德伯格提纲
1.身份资料
姓名：
性别：
年龄：
职业：
收入：
婚姻：
地址：
出生日及地点：
宗教信仰：
教育：
文化水平和背景：
2.来就诊的原因和对治疗的期望
3.现在及近期状况
居住条件：
活动场所：
日常活动内容：
近几月来变化：
4.对家庭的看法
5.早年回忆
6.出生和成长
7.健康及身体状况
8.教育及培训
感兴趣的科目：
困难的科目：
校外学习情况：
9.工作记录
对工作的态度：
是否改过职业：
10.娱乐
感兴趣的事：
使愉快的事：
11.性欲的发展
第一次意识到性问题：
各种性活动：
对自己近期性生活的看法：
12婚姻及家庭资料
家庭中发生的重要事件：
家庭现状：
13.社会基础
社交网和社交兴趣所在：
与自己交谈次数最多的人：
能给与帮助的人：
14.自我描述
长处（优点）：
短处（弱点）：
想象力：
创造力：
价值观：
理想：
15.生活的转折点和选择
16.对未来的看法
愿意看到明年发生的事情：
五年里希望发生的事情：
十年里希望发生的事情：
（对时间的现实感，抓重点的能力）17.求助者附加资料。

ted演讲稿大全

TED演讲稿大全摘要TED（Technology, Entertainment, Design）是一个非营利性组织，致力于传播创新思想和思想领导者的演讲。

自1984年成立以来，TED已经成为全球范围内著名的演讲平台，吸引了无数杰出人士和创新者来分享他们的观点和理念。

本文将介绍一些经典的TED演讲，涵盖了各种话题，从科技和设计到人文和社会问题，能够为读者带来启发和思考。

1. 德克·内格尔《热情的力量》德克·内格尔是一位心理学家和积极心理学的创始人之一。

他的演讲《热情的力量》讨论了如何培养热情、积极心态和幸福感，以及它们对个人和社会的积极影响。

内格尔分享了他的研究结果和实践经验，并提出了一些实用的建议，帮助人们在生活中获得更多的快乐和满足感。

2. 罗伊·坎宁安《每天告别那10分钟》罗伊·坎宁安是一位心理学家和行为学家，他的演讲《每天告别那10分钟》探讨了如何通过积极的思维方式来改变我们的日常生活。

他提出了“每天告别那10分钟”的方法，即每天花10分钟记录和反思感恩的事情，以增强幸福感和满足感。

坎宁安通过个人经历和科学研究支持了这个方法，并鼓励观众在日常生活中实践。

3. 亚当·格兰特《成功和失败之间的逆向逻辑》亚当·格兰特是一位组织心理学家和畅销书作者。

他的演讲《成功和失败之间的逆向逻辑》谈到了成功和失败之间的关系，以及如何从失败中学习和成长。

格兰特提出了他的研究结果，指出失败对于个人和组织来说都是一个重要的学习机会，并且提供了一些实践建议，帮助人们重新定义成功和失败。

4. 莫妮卡·阿里《困境下的领导力》莫妮卡·阿里是一位领导力专家和企业家。

她的演讲《困境下的领导力》探讨了领导者在面对挑战和困境时如何保持冷静和有效地应对。

阿里分享了她在创业和领导过程中的经验，并提出了一些成功的领导原则和策略。

她强调了团队合作和信任的重要性，并鼓励观众在面对困难时保持积极的领导能力。

哈佛教授桑德尔北大演讲

哈佛教授桑德尔北大演讲：金钱与公正孰更重要
中新网北京12月13日电 (记者马海燕)首个哈佛免费公开课讲授者、美国著名哲学家迈克尔·桑德尔今晚在北京大学演讲时表示，货币和市场在我们的社会生活中到底起到什么作用，这不仅是经济问题，也是一个道德问题；我们是否应当生活在一个全部都是用金钱购买的环境里值得商榷，有些东西是金钱买不到的。

这些观念引起了中国年轻观众的共鸣。

桑德尔带着最新力著《金钱不能买什么：金钱与公正的正面交锋》来到北大。

该书探讨了当下最大的道德伦理问题之一：一个万物都明码标价的世界是否有错？如果是的话，那么在我们当前的社会里，金钱和市场理应扮演怎样的角色？桑德尔说，不只是发展中国家，其实发达国家也面临着同样的问题。

在与年轻一代的交流中，他发现年轻人对宏观问题和社会未来命运投入了比以往更多的关注，这是一件令人欣喜的事情。

桑德尔是自1980年起教授政治哲学，当代西方社群主义最著名的理论代表人物，是哈佛大学“最受欢迎的课程讲席教授”之一。

《华盛顿邮报》认为他“或许是全美最杰出的大学教授”；美国《新闻周刊》称之为“最受欢迎的在世哲学家”和“摇滚巨星级别的道德学家”；美国杂志《新共和》则誉之为“全世界最著名的哲学讲授者”。

桑德尔备受赞誉的“公正”课程，哈佛有史以来累计听课人数最多的课程，每周都有超过1000人走进桑德尔的课堂，其网络课程视频已有超过1000万人次
点击观看，在全球掀起了一波“公正”热。

ted十大著名演讲稿

ted十大著名演讲稿TED 演讲以其思想的深度、创新的观点和精彩的表达，吸引了全球无数观众。

以下为您盘点十大著名的 TED 演讲稿：1、《学校如何扼杀创造力》（Ken Robinson）肯·罗宾逊在演讲中深刻地指出，当前的教育体制往往在不经意间扼杀了孩子们的创造力。

他认为，创造力和文化知识同样重要，我们应该重新审视教育的方式，为孩子们提供更能激发创造力的环境。

他以幽默风趣的语言和生动的例子，让人们深刻反思教育的本质和目标。

2、《脆弱的力量》（Brené Brown）布琳·布朗探讨了脆弱性的力量。

她通过深入的研究发现，敢于展现脆弱并不是弱点，而是一种勇气和连接人与人之间的关键。

这个演讲鼓励人们接受自己的不完美和脆弱，从而建立更真实、深厚的人际关系。

3、《伟大的领导者如何激励行动》（Simon Sinek）西蒙·斯涅克提出了“黄金圈法则”，强调伟大的领导者都是从“为什么”开始思考，而不仅仅是“做什么”和“怎么做”。

他以苹果、马丁·路德·金等为例，清晰地阐述了这一理念，为人们提供了全新的领导力视角。

4、《内向性格的力量》（Susan Cain）苏珊·凯恩为内向者发声，打破了社会对内向性格的偏见。

她指出，内向者拥有独特的优势，如深度思考、专注和善于倾听。

这个演讲让人们更加理解和尊重内向性格的人，也让内向者更加自信地发挥自己的特质。

5、《肢体语言塑造你自己》（Amy Cuddy）艾米·卡迪的研究表明，肢体语言不仅影响着别人对我们的看法，更能改变我们对自己的感觉和表现。

她分享了一些简单而有效的肢体语言技巧，帮助人们提升自信和影响力。

6、《我们为什么快乐？》（Dan Gilbert）丹·吉尔伯特探讨了人类追求快乐的本质。

他通过科学研究和有趣的故事，揭示了我们对快乐的误解以及如何真正获得长期的幸福感。

7、《你的不合理信念正在毁掉你》（Albert Ellis）阿尔伯特·埃利斯强调了不合理信念对我们情绪和行为的负面影响。

雪莉桑德伯格在哈佛2014年毕业典礼上的演讲

雪莉桑德伯格在哈佛2014年毕业典礼上的演讲雪莉桑德伯格在哈佛2014年毕业典礼上的演讲祝贺所有人～你们做到了。

我指的不是大学毕业～而你们成功出席今天的毕业典礼。

如果我没记错～某些同学虽然昨晚在香港具厅喝了太多蝎子碗调酒～但今天还是来了。

由于天气～这种哈佛还没有弄清如何控制的现象～还胡同学正在温暖的地方喝热可可饮料。

所以～你们有很多为今天出席毕业日活动感到自豪的理由。

祝贺你们的家长～你们花了很多钱～让子女能够说自己是从波士顿附近的这所“小学校”毕业的。

还要感谢2014届毕业生邀请我来到这次盛典。

这对我价值巨大。

看到过往演讲者的名单让人有些敬畏～我肯定没有艾米波乐那么搞笑～但我至少比特雷萨修女更幽默。

25年前～一个当时还不认识～但以后成为我丈夫的男人戴夫～从在你们现在从的地方。

23年前～我从在你们现在从的地方。

戴夫和我这个周末～带着可爱的子女回校～我们都有相同的三角:哈佛的篮球队太棒了:站在校园中～回忆泉涌。

1987年的秋天～我从迈阿密来到这里～怀揣着伟大的梦想～还胡更夸张的发型。

我被分配到哈佛伟大建筑的一座历史丰碑~卡纳迪楼～我是说真的～我当时穿着牛仔裙～白色暖裤袜套～运动鞋～还有一件弗罗里达羊毛衫。

因为当时我的父母告诉我～所有人都会认为来自弗里达的人很酷。

至少～我们那时没有。

对我而言～哈佛给了我很多第一次～包括我的第一件冬装～在迈阿密没有人需要冬装。

我的第一份10页的论文～高中没有人会布置这么长的作业。

我第一次得C～这之后～我的学监告诉我说～她在招生委员会～她招我进来不是因为我的学术潜能～而是因为我的品性。

我在寄宿学校看到的第一个人～我就觉得这个人会是个大麻烦。

我还碰到了第一个名字同整座建筑一样的人～这个人名字叫做萨拉威格尔斯沃斯～她和那栋宿舍楼没有关系～当时我很震惊～知道她和宿舍楼没有关系后～我松了一口气。

之后～我还碰到了其他人～弗朗西斯斯特劳斯～詹姆斯威尔斯～杰西卡科学中心B。

我第一们爱～第一们让我心碎的人。

雪莉桑德伯格演讲翻译

原文：It’s an honor to be here today to address HBS’s distinguished faculty, proud parents, patient guests, and most importantly, the class of 2012.Today was supposed to be a day of unbridled celebration and I know that’s no longer true. I join all of you in grieving for your classmate Nate. There are no words which can make this better.Though laden with sadness, today still marks a distinct and impressive achievement for this class. So please join me in giving our warmest congratulations to this class. When Dean Nohria asked me to speak here today, I thought, come talk to a group of people way younger and cooler than I am? I can do that. I do that every day at Facebook. I like being surrounded by young people, except when they say to me, “What was it like being in college without the internet?” or worse,” Sheryl, can you come here? We need to see what old people think of this feature.”When I was a student here 17 years ago, I studied social marketing with Professor Kash Rangan. One of the many examples Kash used to explain the concept of social marketing was the lack of organ donors in this country, which kills 18 people every single day. Earlier this month, Facebook launched a tool to support organ donations, something that stems directly from Kash’s work. Kash, we are all grateful for your dedication.SANDBERG’S HARVARD SECTION TRIED TO HAVE THE SCHOOL’S FIRST ONLINE CLASSIt wasn’t really that long ago when I was sitting where you are, but the world has changed an awful lot. My section, section B, t ried to have HBS’s first online class. We had to use an AOL chat room and dial up service. (Your parents can explain to you later what dial-up service is.) We had to pass out a list of screen names because it was unthinkable to put your real name on the internet. And it never worked. It kept crashing. The world just wasn’t set up for 90 people to communicate at once online. But for a few brief moments, we glimpsed the future –a future where technology would power who we are and connect us to our real colleagues, our real family, our real friends.It used to be that in order to reach more people than you could talk to in a day, you had to be rich and famous and powerful. You had to be a celebrity, a politician, a CEO. But that’s not true today. Now ordinary people have voice, not just those of us lucky to go to HBS, but anyone with access to Facebook, Twitter, a mobile phone.This is disrupting traditional power structures and leveling traditional hierarchy. Control and power are shifting from institutions to individuals, from the historically powerful to the historically powerless. And all of this is happening so much faster than I could have imagined when I was sitting where you are today –and Mark Zuckerberg was 11 years old.‘WE WOULDN’T EVEN THINK ABOUT HIRING SOMEONE LIKE YOU’As the world becomes more connected and less hierarchical, traditional career paths are shifting as well. In 2001, after working in the government, I moved out to Silicon Valley to try to find a job. My timing wasn’t really that g ood. The bubble had crashed. Small companies were closing. Big companies were laying people off. One CEO looked at me and said, “we wouldn’t even think about hiring someone like you.”After a while I had a few offers and I had to make a decision, so what did I do? I am MBA trained, so I made a spreadsheet. I listed my jobs in the columns and my criteria in the rows. One of the jobs on that sheet was to become Google’s first Business Unit general manager, which sounds good now, but at the time no one thought consumer internet companies could ever make money. I was not sure there was actually a job there at all; Google had no business units, so what was there to generally manage? And the job was several levels lower than jobs I was being offered at other companies.So I sat down with Eric Schmidt, who had just become the CEO, and I showed him the spreadsheet and I said, this job meets none of my criteria. He put his hand on my spreadsheet and he looked at me and said, “Don’t be an idiot.”EXCELLENT CAREER ADV ICE: ‘GET ON A ROCKET SHIP’Excellent career advice. And then he said, “Get on a rocket ship. When companies are growing quickly and having a lot of impact, careers take care of themselves. And when companies aren’t growing quickly or their missions don’t matter as much, that’s when stagnation and politics come in. If you’re offered a seat on a rocket ship, don’t ask what seat. Just get on.”About six and one-half years later, when I was leaving Google, I took that advice to heart. I was offered CEO jobs at a bunch of companies, but I went to Facebook as COO. At the time people said, why are you going to work for a 23-year-old?THE METAPHOR FOR A CAREER IS NO LONGER A LADDER; IT’S A JUNGLE GYMThe traditional metaphor for careers is a ladder, but I no longer think that metaphor holds. It just doesn’t make sense in a less hierarchical world. When I was first at Facebook, a woman named Lori Goler, a 1997 graduate of HBS, was working in marketing at eBay and I knew her a bit socially. She called me and said, “I want to talk with you about coming to work with you at Facebook. So I thought about callingyou and telling you all the things I’m good at and all the things I like to do. But I figured that everyone is doing that. So instead I want to know what’s your big gest problem and how can I solve it?”My jaw hit the floor. I’d hired thousands of people up to that point in my career, but no one had ever said anything like that. I had never said anything like that. Job searches are always about the job searcher, but n ot in Lori’s case. I said, “You’re hired. My biggest problem is recruiting and you can solve it.” So Lori changed fields into something she never thought she’d do, went down a level to start in a new field. She has since been promoted and runs all of People Operations at Facebook and is doing an extraordinary job.Lori has a great metaphor for careers. She says they’re not a ladder, they’re a jungle gym.LOOK FOR GROWTH, IMPACT AND MISSION. MOVE SIDEWAYS, DOWN, ON AND OFFAs you start your post-HBS career, look for opportunities, look for growth, look for impact, look for mission. Move sideways, move down, move on, move off. Build your skills, not your resume. Evaluate what you can do, not the title they’re going to give you. Do real work. Take a sales quota, a line role, an ops job. Don’t plan too much, and don’t expect a direct climb. If I had mapped out my career when I was sitting where you are, I would have missed my career.You are entering a different business world than I entered. Mine was just starting to get connected. Yours is hyper-connected. Mine was competitive. Yours is way more competitive. Mine moved quickly, yours moves even more quickly.As traditional structures are breaking down, leadership has to evolve as well – from hierarchy to shared responsibility, from command and control to listening and guiding. You’ve been trained by this great institution not just to be part of these trends, but to lead.As you lead in this new world, you will not be able to rely on who you are or the degree you hold. You’ll have to rely on what you know. Your strength will not come from your place on some org chart, but from building trust and earning respect. You’re going to need talent, skill, and imagination and vision. But more than anything else, you’re goi ng to need the ability to communicate authentically, to speak so that you inspire the people around you and to listen so that you continue to learn each and every day on the job.‘MOMMY, WHAT IS GROWING IN YOUR BUTT?’If you watch young children, you’ll im mediately notice how honest they are. My friend Betsy from my section a few years after business school was pregnant with her second child. Her first child was about five and said, “Mommy, where is the baby?” She said, “The baby is in my tummy.” He said, ‘Aren’t the baby’s arms in your arms?” She said, “No, the baby’s in my tummy.” “Are the baby’s legs in your legs?” “No, the whole baby is in my tummy.” Then he said, ‘Then Mommy, what is growingin your butt?”As adults, we are never this honest. And that’s not a bad thing. I have borne two children and the last thing I needed were those comments. But it’s not always a good thing either. Because all of us, and especially leaders, need to speak and hear the truth.The workplace is an especially difficult place for anyone to tell the truth, because no matter how flat we want our organizations to be, all organizations have some form of hierarchy. This means that one person’s performance is assessed by someone else’s perception.This is not a setup for honesty. Think about how people speak in a typical workforce. Rather than say, “I disagree with our expansion strategy” or better yet, “this seems truly stupid.” They say, “I think there are many good reasons why we’re entering this new line of business, and I’m certain the management team has done a thorough ROI analysis, but I’m not sure we have fully considered the downstream effects of taking this step forward at this time.” As we would say at Facebook, three letters: WTF.‘TRUTH IS BETTER USED BY USING SIMPLE LANGUAGE’Truth is better used by using simple language. Last year, Mark decided to learn Chinese and as part of studying, he would spend an hour or so each week with some of our employees who were native Chinese speakers. One day, one of them was trying to tell him something about her manager. She said this long sentence and he said, “simpler please.” And then she said it again and he said, “no, I still don’t understand, simpler please”…and so on and so on. Finally, in sheer exasperation, she burst out, “my manager is bad.” Simple and clear and very important for him to know.People rarely speak this clearly in the workforce or in life. And as you get more senior, not only will people speak less clearly to you but they will overreact to the small things you say. When I joined Facebook, one of the things I had to do was build the business side of the company and put some systems into place. But I wanted to do it without destroying the culture that made Facebook great. So one of the things I tried to do was encourage people not to do formal PowerPoint presentations for meetings with me. I would say things like, “Don’t do PowerPoint presentations for meetings with me. Instead, come in with a list of what you want to discuss.” But everyone ignored me and they kept doing their presentations meeting after meeting, month after month. So about two years in, I said, “OK, I hate rules but I have a rule: no more PowerPoint in my meetings.”About a month later I was about to speak to our global sales team on a big stage and someone came up to me and said, “Before you get on that stage, you really should know everyone’s pretty upset about the no PowerPoint with clients thing.” So I got on the stage and said, “one, I meant no PowerPoint with me. But two, more importantly,next time you hear something that’s really stupid, don’t adhere to it. Fight it or ignore it, even if it’s coming from me or Mark.”A good leader recognizes that most people won’t feel comfortable challenging authority, so it falls upon authority to encour age them to question. It’s easy to say that you’re going to encourage feedback but it’s hard to do, because unfortunately it doesn’t always come in a format we want to hear.‘BEING PART OF MY TEAM MEANT THAT I HAD TO KNOW YOU’When I first started at Google, I had a team of four people and it was really important to me that I interview everyone. For me, being part of my team meant I had to know you. When the team had grown to about 100 people, I realized it was taking longer to schedule my interviews. So one day at my meeting of just my direct reports, I said “maybe I should stop interviewing”, fully expecting them to jump in and say “no, your interviews are a critical part of the process.” They applauded. Then they fell over themselves explaining that I was the bottleneck of all time. I was embarrassed. Then I was angry and I spent a few hours just quietly fuming. Why didn’t they tell me I was a bottleneck? Why did they let me go on slowing them down? Then I realized that if they hadn’t told me, it was my fault. I hadn’t convinced them that I wanted that feedback and I would have to change that going forward.When you’re the leader, it is really hard to get good and honest feedback, no many how many times you ask for it. One trick I’ve discovered is that I t ry to speak really openly about the things I’m bad at, because that gives people permission to agree with me, which is a lot easier than pointing it out in the first place. To take one of many possible examples, when things are unresolved I can get a tad anxious. Really, when anything’s unresolved, I get anxious. I’m quite certain no one has accused me of being too calm. So I speak about it openly and that gives people permission to tell me when it’s happening. But if I never said anything, would anyone who works at Facebook walk up to me and say, “Hey Sheryl, calm down. You’re driving us all nuts!” I don’t think so.‘WHEN YOU GET HONESTY BACK, WILL YOU REACT WITH ANGER OR WITH GRATITUDE?’As you graduate today, ask yourself, how will you lead. Will you use simple and clear language? Will you seek out honesty? When you get honesty back, will you react with anger or with gratitude?As we strive to be more authentic in our communication, we should also strive to be more authentic in a broader sense. I talk a lot about bringing your whole self to work—something I believe in deeply.Motivation comes from working on things we care about. But it also comes from working with people we care about. And in order to care about someone, you have to know them. You have to know what they love and hate, what they feel, not just what they think. If you want to win hearts and minds, you have to lead with your heart as well as your mind. I don’t believe we have a professional self from Mondays throughFridays and a real self for the rest of the time. That kind of division probably never worked, but in today’s world, with real and authentic voice, it makes even less sense. CRYING AT WORK: YES, SHE’S DONE IT BUT NOT EXACTLY ON ZUCKERBERG’S SHOULDERI’ve cried at work. I’ve told people I’ve cried at work. And it’s been reported in the press that ‘Sheryl Sandberg cried on Mark Zuckerberg’s shoulder’, which is not exactly what happened. I talk about my hopes and fears and ask people about theirs. I try to be myself – honest about my strengths and weaknesses – and I encourage others to do the same. It is all professional and it is all personal, all at the very same time.I recently started speaking up about the challenges women face in the workforce, something I only had the courage to do in the last few years. Before this, I did my career like everyone else does it. I never told anyone I was a girl. Don’t tell. I left the lights on when I went home to do something for my kids . I locked my office door and pumped milk for my babies while I was on conference calls. People would ask, “what’s that sound?” I would say, “What sound?” “I hear a beep.” “Oh, there’s a fire truck outside my office.”But the lack of progress over the past decade has convinced me we need to start talking about this. I graduated from HBS in 1995 and I thought it was completely clear that by the time someone from my year was invited to speak at this podium, we would have achieved equality in the workforce. But women at the top — C-level jobs — are stuck at 15-16 percent and have not moved in a decade. Not even close to 50% and no longer growing. We need to acknowledge openly that gender remains an issue at the highest levels of leadership. The promise of equality is not equality. We need to start talking about this.‘AS A WOMAN IS MORE SUCCESSFUL IN YOUR WORKPLACES, SHE WILL BE LESS LIKED’We need to start talking about how women underestimate their abilities compared to men and how for women, but not men, success and likeability are negatively correlated. That means that as a woman is more successful in your workplaces, she will be less liked. This means that women need a different form of management and mentorship, a different form of sponsorship and encouragement than men.There aren’t enough senior women out there to do it, so it falls upon the men who are graduating today just as much or more as the women, not just to talk about gender but to help these women succeed. When they hear a woman is really great at her job but not liked, take a deep breath and ask why.We need to start talking openly about the flexibility all of us need to have both a job and a life. A couple of weeks ago in an interview I said that I leave the office at 5:30 p.m. to have dinner with my children. I was shocked at the press coverage. One of my friends said I couldn’t get more headlines if I had murdered someone with an ax. This showed me this is an unresolved issue for all of us, men and women alike. Otherwise, everyone would not write so much about it.‘WE NEED MORE WOMEN NOT JUST TO SIT AT T HE TABLE, BUT TO TAKE THEIR RIGHTFUL SEATS’And maybe, most importantly, we need to start talking about how fewer women than men, even from places like HBS, even likely in this class, aspire to the very top jobs. We will not close the leadership gap until we close the professional ambition gap. We need more women not just to sit at the table, but as President Obama said a few weeks ago at Barnard, to take their rightful seats at the head of the table.One of the reasons I was so excited to be here today is that this is the 50th anniversary of letting women into this school. Dean Noria, who is so passionate about getting more women into leadership positions, told me that he wanted me to speak this year for that reason. I met a woman from that first class once. She told me that when they first came in, they took a men’s room and converted it to a woman’s room. But they left the urinals in. She thought the message was clear –‘we are not sure this whole woman thing is going to work out and if not, we don’t want to have to reinstall the urinals.’ The urinals are long gone. Let’s make sure that no one ever misses them. FOUR THINGS SANDBERG WISHES FOR HARVARD’S GRADUATING CLASS OF 2012As you and your classmates spread out across the globe and walk across this stage tomorrow, I wish for you four things: First, keep in touch via Facebook. This is critical to your future success! And since we’re public now, why you are there, click on an ad or two. Two, that you make the effort to speak as well as seek the truth. Three, that you remain true to and open about your authentic self. And four, that your generation accomplishes what mine has failed to do. Give us a world where half our homes are run by men and half our institutions are run by women. I’m pretty sure that would be a better world.I join everyone here in offering my most sincere congratulations to the HBS Class of 2012. Give yourselves a huge round of applause.译文：今天很高兴来到哈佛商学院为各位老师，家长，贵宾，尤其是各位2012届同学做演讲。

ted最值得看的10个演讲

ted最值得看的10个演讲摘要：1.马特·沃克：如何掌控你的自由时间2.肖恩·阿克尔：我们如何塑造了自己的未来3.瑞·达里奥：成功的原则4.蒂姆·伯纳斯- 李：万维网的发明与未来5.雪莉·桑德伯格：为什么我们缺少女性领导者6.尼古拉斯·尼葛洛庞帝：21 世纪的教育7.杰夫·贝索斯：选择塑造人生8.罗伯特·西奥迪尼：说服力的艺术9.吉尔·博尔特·泰勒：如何建立一个更好的工作场所10.克里斯·安德森：创造力的起源正文：TED 是一个汇聚了全球顶级思想领袖与实干家的平台，他们通过精彩的演讲分享自己的经验和见解。

以下是TED 最值得看的10 个演讲：1.马特·沃克：这位时间管理专家分享了他对于如何掌控自己的自由时间的研究与思考。

他提出，我们需要将时间视为一种有限的资源，并学会有效地规划和利用它。

2.肖恩·阿克尔：这位未来学家探讨了人类如何通过自己的选择塑造未来的世界。

他鼓励我们要敢于梦想，勇于行动，以期创造一个更美好的未来。

3.瑞·达里奥：作为全球最大的对冲基金公司创始人，达里奥分享了他的成功原则。

他主张，我们要敢于面对现实，勇于承认错误，并从中学习。

4.蒂姆·伯纳斯- 李：万维网的发明者为我们揭示了互联网的起源与未来。

他强调了网络的开放性和互连性对于人类社会的重要性。

5.雪莉·桑德伯格：这位Facebook 的首席运营官讨论了为什么我们社会缺少女性领导者，并提出了自己的解决方案。

她认为，我们需要鼓励女性更多地参与职场，为她们创造更多的机会。

6.尼古拉斯·尼葛洛庞帝：这位著名未来学家和麻省理工学院教授分享了21 世纪教育的挑战与机遇。

他认为，我们需要培养学生的创造性思维和问题解决能力。

7.杰夫·贝索斯：这位亚马逊创始人分享了他对于选择塑造人生的见解。

向前一步谢丽尔·桑德伯格

2004年夏天，我怀上了第一个孩子，那时，我正在负责管理谷歌公司的线上销售与运营团队。

我是在3年半以前加入谷歌公司的，当时它刚刚起步，前景模糊，员工不过100多人，在一栋破烂的写字楼里办公。

这次怀孕很辛苦。

一般只在头三个月才会发生的晨吐，我在孕期的每一天都在经历。

这期间我的体重增加了差不多70磅，双脚肿胀得大了两个码，形状变得很怪异，而且我只有将脚搭在咖啡桌上才能看到它们。

一位颇具幽默感的谷歌工程师说，我正在酝酿一个“巨鲸”项目。

一天早晨，在对着马桶吐了半天之后，我开车赶去见一个重要的客户。

谷歌的快速成长导致员工的停车问题成了大麻烦，通常我能找到的停车位都相当偏远。

我以孕妇“冲刺”的速度穿过公司停车场，胃里越发感到恶心。

进入会场时我不停地祈祷：待会儿从嘴里冒出来的，除了与销售业务相关的内容之外，千万不要有别的什么东西。

那天晚上，我向丈夫戴夫（Dave）大倒苦水。

当时还在雅虎公司工作的戴夫告诉我，雅虎在每座办公楼前都为公司的准妈妈们专门预留了停车位。

第二天，我摆起了示威的架势（其实就像是鸭子那样摇摇摆摆），走进了谷歌的两位创始人拉里·佩奇（Larry Page）和谢尔盖·布林（Sergey Brin）的办公室。

只见地板上到处散落着玩具、小零碎和衣服。

在房间的角落里，谢尔盖正努力地保持着一个瑜伽姿势。

我大声地向他们声明：公司需要孕妇停车位，而且越快越好！他抬起头看看我，立刻就同意了，还说他以前从来没有考虑到这一点。

直到今天，我仍然觉得难为情，因为只有在亲历了孕期双脚的肿痛后，我才意识到公司需要为孕妇预留停车位。

作为谷歌的女性高管之一，我难道不是更有责任去考虑这个问题吗？但是，和谢尔盖一样，我压根儿就没想到过这些。

公司里其他的准妈妈们对于这种情况，肯定都是在默默忍受，却从没想过要求特殊待遇；或者说，也许她们缺乏自信或自认为没有资历去要求解决这个问题。

然而，如果高层管理人员中有一个孕妇（哪怕看起来像头巨鲸），情况就会有所不同。

ted十大著名演讲稿

ted十大著名演讲稿TED（技术、娱乐、设计）是一个国际性的非盈利组织，致力于传播思想、分享创意和激发灵感。

自1984年成立以来，TED演讲已经成为世界范围内的热门话题。

在众多精彩的演讲中，有十次特别令人印象深刻的演讲，它们从不同的角度探讨了人类的智慧、创造力和潜力。

1. 肯·罗宾森：改革教育的急需肯·罗宾森的这次演讲将教育的创新思维引入视野，他深入探讨了教育模式对于发展个体潜力的限制，并提出了改革教育体系的必要性。

2. 比尔·盖茨：致力于全球健康比尔·盖茨关注全球健康问题，他的这次演讲深入探讨了如何通过科技、物流和全球合作来解决世界上一些最严重的健康问题。

3. 吉尔斯皮·陈：个体与社会的关系陈吉尔斯皮通过他的个人经历，分享了自己对于个体与社会关系的思考与体悟，引发了人们对于社会公义和团结的深刻思考。

4. 斯蒂夫·乔布斯：三个字改变整个世界乔布斯的这次演讲被认为是TED史上最经典的演讲之一，他分享了自己的人生哲学、创业故事和产品创新理念，激发了无数人的创造力和激情。

5. 纳西姆·尼古拉斯·塔莱布：黑天鹅理论塔莱布以系统性的思维和独特的视角，阐述了黑天鹅事件在世界演变中的重要性，引发了人们对于不确定性和未知事物的思考。

6. 爱丽丝·丽弗斯：暴力行为的若干可能解决方案丽弗斯从个体到全球的角度，以她在儿童健康和反暴力方面的研究为基础，提出了一些解决暴力问题的可能途径，呼吁人们共同努力。

7. 大卫·希弗：统计的力量希弗用幽默和温馨的语言，向人们介绍了统计学的魅力和实用性，引发了人们对于数据和信息处理的思考。

8. 基恩·罗宾逊：才能的快乐罗宾逊通过幽默和感人的故事，传达了每个人都是独特的，每个人都有自己的才能和潜力，鼓励人们追求自己的兴趣和热情。

9. 萨拉·基耶莉尼：我们所惧怕的穷人基耶莉尼以她在计划生育和贫困问题上的工作经验，深入探讨了如何理解和帮助世界上那些极度贫困的人群。

桑德尔公开课观后感

桑德尔公开课观后感桑德尔（Sandel）教授的公开课一直备受关注，以其深刻的思想和引人入胜的讲解而闻名于世。

在观看了他的公开课之后，我深受启发，思绪万千，不禁有许多感慨涌上心头。

桑德尔教授的公开课着眼于伦理学和政治哲学领域，通过对社会公正、个人权利以及道德选择等议题的探讨，引导我们审视日常生活中的伦理困境和社会问题。

他犀利的逻辑推理和跨学科的思考方式让我受益匪浅。

在课堂上，桑德尔教授总是以提问的方式引导学生思考，他的问题往往直指问题的本质，让人不得不停下来思索，从而使我们在探讨复杂议题时能够更加明晰地表达自己的观点。

观看桑德尔教授的公开课，我最深刻的收获之一是学会了如何理性地进行辩论。

桑德尔教授在课堂上经常组织学生进行讨论，他鼓励学生就特定议题展开辩论，并善于引导他们从多个角度去思考问题。

他强调辩论不仅仅是为了争论，更重要的是通过辩论来增进对问题的理解，培养包容多元观点的思维习惯。

这种开放包容的辩论氛围让我受益匪浅，也使我意识到辩论不应该是简单的对立，而应该是相互倾听、相互尊重的过程。

此外，桑德尔教授的公开课还让我重新审视了自己对公正与道德的理解。

在课堂上，他通过案例分析和伦理学理论向我们展示了各种现实生活中的伦理困境。

这些案例不仅让我深刻认识到伦理决策的复杂性，也促使我反思自己在面对道德选择时的行为倾向。

我开始更加关注自己的行为是否符合伦理道德，也更加愿意去理解他人的选择，尊重他人的观点。

总的来说，桑德尔教授的公开课给我留下了深刻的印象。

他的教学方法和思想观念都对我产生了积极的影响。

通过观看他的课程，我不仅学到了伦理学和政治哲学方面的知识，更重要的是培养了理性思考和辩论的能力，增进了对公正与道德的认识。

我期待着能够在今后的学习和生活中，继续践行桑德尔教授所倡导的理性思考和包容多元的价值观，成为一个有担当、有情怀的公民。

留学生必看facebook女高管雪莉·桑德伯格UCB的毕业演讲稿中英对照

留学生必看facebook女高管雪莉·桑德伯格UCB的毕业演讲稿中英对照美国大学每年的名校毕业典礼上都会邀请业内政治、商业、科技等领域的风云人物进行演讲，为本校的毕业生们传授经验。

下面来说说facebook女高管雪莉·桑德伯格UCB的毕业演讲稿中英对照。

她被美国媒体誉为“硅谷最有影响力女人”，身居福布斯百强女性榜第5名，《时代周刊》的封面人物，并被评为全球最具影响力的人物。

但当她的事业蓬勃发展的时候，他的丈夫却撒手人寰。

这对常人来说，是难以承受的打击，但她坚强的挺过来，并且在加州大学伯克利分校UCB的毕业演讲中，为大家分享，她言到“最终塑造你的是你走过的那些艰难。

”以下是她在UCB的研究稿节选：I learned that in the face of the void—or in the face of any challenge—you can choose joy and meaning.我明白了，即便悲伤至空虚，或是面对巨大挑战，你仍然可以选择快乐和有意义的生活。

Thank you，Marie. And thank you esteemed members of the faculty，proud parents，devoted friends，squirming siblings.谢谢玛丽。

谢谢尊敬的老师们、自豪的父母、忠诚的朋友们，各位同仁。

Congratulations to all of you…and especially to the magnificent Berkeley graduating class of 2016！祝贺所有人……尤其是伯克利2016级的毕业生们！It is a privilege to be here at Berkeley， which has produced so many Nobel Prize winners，Turing Award winners，astronauts， members of Congress，Olympic gold medalists….and that’s just the women！在伯克利求学是一件幸事，这里出过众多的诺贝尔奖得主、图灵奖获得者、宇航员、国会议员和奥运会金牌得主……而且都有女性！Today is a day of thanks. A day to thank those who helped you get here—nurtured you，taught you，cheered you on，and dried your tears. Or at least the ones who didn’t draw on you with a Sharpie when you fell asleep at a party.今天应该感谢。

桑德伯格提纲可以

桑德伯格提纲可以
桑德伯格提纲（Sandberg's Manifesto）是Facebook首席运营官谢丽尔·桑德伯格（Sheryl Sandberg）在2013年提出的一份文件，旨在推动女性在科技行业和领导职位上的平等。

这份提纲包括10个要点，强调了女性在职业发展中所面临的挑战，并提出了解决这些问题的措施。

桑德伯格提纲的主要内容如下：
1.女性应该被鼓励追求自己的职业目标，而不是仅仅满足于稳定的工作。

2.女性应该得到与男性同等的薪酬和晋升机会。

3.女性应该被支持在家庭和工作之间取得平衡。

4.女性应该得到更多的机会担任领导职位，以便提高其在社会和经济领域的影响力。

5.女性应该被支持参加各种社交和职业活动，以便建立联系并扩展人脉。

6.女性应该得到更多的机会接受教育和培训，以便提高自己的技能和知识。

7.女性应该被鼓励尝试新事物和冒险，以便提高自己的创造力和创新能力。

8.女性应该得到更多的机会参与决策过程，以便提高其在组织和
社会中的地位。

9.女性应该得到更多的机会表达自己的意见和想法，以便提高其在组织和社会中的话语权。

10.女性应该得到更多的机会接受健康和心理方面的支持，以便更好地应对工作和生活中的压力。

桑德伯格提纲引起了广泛的关注和讨论，被认为是推动性别平等的重要文件之一。

它对于鼓励女性在职场中追求更好的机会和发展具有重要的意义。

ted最值得看的10个演讲

ted最值得看的10个演讲摘要：1.TED简介2.精选10个最值得看的TED演讲a.史蒂夫·乔布斯- 如何将理念变成现实b.比尔·盖茨- 我们的能源未来c.肯·罗宾逊- 教育的挑战与机遇d.雪莉·桑德伯格- 为什么我们缺少女性领导者e.吉尔·伯特- 情绪的魔力f.里德·霍夫曼- 职场关系网络的重要性g.克里斯·安德森- 创想的力量h.大卫·布鲁克斯- 建立信任的社会i.伊丽莎白·霍姆斯- 颠覆血液检测j.丹·平克- 幸福的生产力3.TED演讲的价值和启示正文：TED（Technology, Entertainment, Design）是一个全球知名的分享思想和创意的平台。

每年，来自各行各业的杰出人物在TED舞台上分享他们的见解、经验和创新。

在这个舞台上，我们可以看到许多精彩绝伦的演讲，为我们带来了无尽的启示。

本文将为你精选10个最值得一看的TED演讲，希望对你的思考和成长有所帮助。

1.史蒂夫·乔布斯- 如何将理念变成现实苹果公司创始人史蒂夫·乔布斯在TED舞台上分享了他对设计、创新和领导力的独到见解。

他强调了坚持自己理念的重要性，以及将复杂事物简单化的力量。

2.比尔·盖茨- 我们的能源未来微软创始人比尔·盖茨探讨了能源领域的挑战和机遇。

他认为，我们需要找到一种能够满足全球能源需求、同时减少温室气体排放的解决方案。

3.肯·罗宾逊- 教育的挑战与机遇英国教育改革家肯·罗宾逊强调了教育的重要性和当前教育体系的挑战。

他提出，我们需要培养学生的创造力、批判性思维和创新能力，以应对未来的挑战。

4.雪莉·桑德伯格- 为什么我们缺少女性领导者Facebook首席运营官雪莉·桑德伯格关注女性在职场中的地位和角色。

她分析了女性领导者不足的原因，并提出了鼓励女性参与领导工作的建议。

十三邀之许知远对话桑德尔英文字幕

Xu：So why the dialogue and debating so important for the society?Sandel: It’s how we come to identity the meaning of justice and common good for society. We have to ask the question, what is justice? What is a good society? What is the meaning of a good life? What city virtue should we seek to cultivate? So if we care about bringing about justice and the common good, then we're kind of propelled into a dialogue about what justice and good life really are. But of course, as there has always been competing ideas about the meaning of justice and common good. That's why the great philosophers of the past, Plato, Confucius, Aristotle, and so on. They had different ideas, and those who followed, in the western tradition, including John Lock, and John Stuart Mill, and Kant and Hagel and Marx, they all had different conceptions of the meaning of justice, and questions of the good life in the civic virtue. If they disagreed, it's not surprising that we disagree, and yet what interesting is,we have a sense that those arguments, though they seemingly impossible to finally resolve, they keep going, and they keep attracting our attention, and we want in each generation to figure out for ourselves, what means to seek a just society, what means to aspire to the common good.Xu: So if we were in this stage, I mean those great souls, like Kant, Marx，they all alive actually ,interact with each students, with you.Sandel: Well, that's the idea. That's the fundamental idea that these great philosophers are not just episodes in the history of ideas. They're not just museum pieces. They are episodes in arguments in which we are still engaged today, so if I do my job well in teaching philosophy to this generation of students, they will feel as they are in conversation with Plato and Aristotle and Kan. Because philosophy is a tradition of thought, an argument that builds upon and refers always to the past.Xu: Using one public philosophy is so important for society.Sandel: Public philosophy, is an attempt to find meaning together, that its not purely technocratically, not purely practical, not only about economic question, but about a larger questions too, because we've been so preoccupied with GDP, with markets, with economic growth and with technology, and it creates a moral vacuum. Unless it's filled with deliberation about public questions, it will be filled by narrow and intolerant, dangerous ideologies , and that’s my worry. Let me give you one recently example of this, during the pandemic, in many ways the pandemic highlighted inequalities that exists before the pandemic. A great many of us have the luxury of being able to work from home during the pandemic, to teach from home to work from home to write from home. Delivery workers, grocery store clerks, warehouse workers, truck drivers, nursing assistance, home health care providers, child care works. Now, these are not the most and best paid,or the most honourable workers in our society, but for a moment, during the pandemic, we call them essential workers. We applauded them at the end of the day, we put up signs, thanking them. This could have been a moment for a broader public debate about how to bring their pay and recognition into better alignment with the importance of thecontributions they made. But it didn't happen. Pandemic proceeded, never really had that moment, and now we gone back to the business as usual.Xu: So you think the meritocracy is part of the reason.Sandel: I think the answer to that question is connected too. The way to the widening inequalities of recent decades and also to the changing attitudes towards success that have accompanied the widening inequalities. Over the past half century really, those who landed on top have coming increasingly to believe that their success is their own doing, the measure of their merit, and therefore they deserve the bounty that the market bestowed upon them. And by implication, that those who struggle, those left behind, must deserve their fate as well. It produces a kind of hubris among the winners, and humiliation among those losers. It teaches the winners that I believe that I achieve whatever I achieved through my own efforts, through my own doing, because everything was fair, then I’m likely to inhale too deeply to my own success, to forget the luck and good fortunate that helped me on my way, to forget my indebtedness, to those who make my achievements possible, and so this is what I called the tyranny of merit.This way of thinking about success has deepened and divided that between winners and looser. It has led the successful to look down on those who struggle. And it has led many working people who do not have merit credit credentials, or fancy university degrees, to feel that the work they do is not valued, is not respected, in a way perhaps it once was, to feel that in a highly technological, professionalized, credentialized society, that leads to look down on them. This is always been present, always been part of the American story, but it's been at least at a times kept contained underground, at the periphery, the brighter ideals and aspirations predominated.When I was growing up，in the sixties for example, the civil rights movement, and the fight for racial justice, and the protests against the war in Vietnam, and the attempt to combat the poverty with a great society , but from 2016 it became elevated with the presidency of Donald Trump. We've struggled more directly and more conspicuously more frontally with the dark side finding public expression on the stage. Now on the stage, public expression rather than kept at the margins and periphery, and finding voice in the media, and in social media especially, And now in a presidential campaign, that will be a rematch of the one from last time. We've seen as a backlash against elites, especially against well educated elite, professional elite. Donald Trump has been very effective at tapping into the grievances of people who feel that have been left behind and looked down upon. The political humiliation, it’s this sense of humiliation I think, that opened the way, for the politics grievances that Donald trump has been able to explored. In US today, and in many parts of the world, is a politics of anger, resentment, and grievance, without mutual recognition, without recognizing the value of the contributions that people make from different ones of life, we will not really begin to address the resentment that now reflect out politics, and have accentuated some of the darkest strands in the social life.Xu: Even facing the same concept, such as justice, you see the difference from differentcountry?Sandel: It prompted me to reflect on why there are these differences when I encountered them. When I had these conversations with young people in China in the 2000, what struck me was first they did have a very strong prone market moral intuition, as I mentioned. And I would put a lot of examples to students and to the audience, asking them whether they think this or that social practice should be governed by money or by other norms. So I put questions like this. What struck me was the moral intuitions about buying and selling was similar in the US and in China, in eastern Europe, it was similar in Poland, for example. Most European countries, it was quite different. You think why? I think it's because especially in the early 2000 that the China had experienced, that the young generation had grown up with the market reforms, and it had been a period of tremendous economic growth.Xu: It is kind of freedom for them.Sandel: Yeah, yeah. It was an expression of freedom and rising affluence, but especially freedom But at the same time, they were looking for meaning that markets could not provide. And so the search for meaning persisted even after the market triumphalist moment, and I think that one of the reasons that people were drawn to the justice book, it was in the sense that there are moral meanings that lie beyond market, beyond economics. What do you think?Xu：Maybe we're facing two choices of different choices. We can't choose the best one. There is no best ones, just less evil. It is less evil one maybe.Sandel: But I wouldn't regard these as closed alternatives. I would ask a different question. How is it possible to combine the benefits of market arrangements and technological innovations with sources of meaning. The liberation dialog reflection that can answer to higher human purposes and ends. Our mistake is not to use markets to organize economic activities. Our mistake is not to hope that technological innovations will deliver real improvements to the way we live our lives. Our mistake is the tendency to think that markets and technology by themselves can define human purposes and ends. They can't. And when we put too much faith in them, when they become a kind of faith that almost a kind of religious faith, markets and technology, then, we are bound to be disappointed, and when the disappointment comes, the disappointment may take harsh, dangerous forms.Xu：So the situation is so complicated. What kind of solution we can provide? We tried, right? Very difficult.Sandel：I think we need to focus less on arming people for a merit credit competition and focus more on contending with inequalities of income and wealth, but also inequalities of honor recognition and esteem. And this means we have to renew the dignity of work, wehave to broaden our conception about what counts as a valuable contribution to the common good. And we need the kind of class mixing institutions and civil society that will lead us to encounter one another, to be in one another presence, not only on our phone, all the more so when our societies are divided and polarized because the people we encounter, I tend to people only like ourselves. We need to overcome that.Xu: But every solution every theory always has it’s own flaw, so how about your solution, you attack meritocracy but maybe your theory, your books, still have kind of flaw, that you must overcome. What kind of flaw it is.Sandel：What flaws you identified, let’s start with that.Xu: I don’t know,maybe too idealistic.Sandel：Too idealistic, you think so . So what I just suggested is really too much to hope for. I don’t think that reducing inequality, renewing the dignity of work and creating a greater equality of condition and recognition will happen anytime soon. They're not easy projects to undertake. So I want to be realistic about that.Xu: Do you think should philosophy be more responsible for the historical consequence or not, idea and reality? Russell, Hegel, they talk about inequality, virtue. But the consequences may be this one, extremely opposite. How how do you see the paradox.Sandel: If one thinks as I do，that philosophy is always situated in the world, that philosophy should attend to the world, then philosophy cannot be indifferent. And the philosopher cannot be indifferent to the way in which various people or parties or movements implement philosophical ideas. So there's always an interplay between political practice and the philosophical ideas that inform it. And often they can go off the rails, they can go into a very dark directions that the philosopher may never have wanted or anticipated. That's always a danger. That's why that's one of the persistent dangers of philosophy. The part of Hegel that has led political practice straight in wrong direction that teaches that history has a single ultimate destination. And that it takes a certain shape that has contributed to some of the dangerous movements in history who may have been inspired by the idea, the history points in a certain direction. And that is our responsibility either to let history unfold or to help history unfold, to reach that final destination once and for all. I think the phrase or the idea once and for all is a deeply dangerous idea. And I think it's an odds with the philosophical spirit of questioning, contesting, offering competing interpretations.Xu: In your mind, in our time, which idea is the most dangerous idea.Sandel: I would say, that the forces today that are most dangerous are the versions of religious fundamentalism or hyper-nationalism or ideological purity that all draw in one way or another on the idea that moral truth and human truth are singular, that there isonly one way interpreting our past, there is only one historical end of destination, there is only one true way of interpreting religious and spiritual traditions. Because what this misses, well at least dangerous politics, but it also misses the deep pluralism of the human experience.Xu: So how about the silicon valley philosophy , that technical driven ideology.Sandel: Well, I would say it’s a version of this because the most extreme versions of silicon valley, techno utopianism, some have more specific term of trans humanism, or singularity, because they too think that history is on their side, they too think that as technology develops, and it has generated of AI develops, we will be transcending the messy, contentious, pluralist human project in arriving at a kind of singularity where perhaps our minds will meld with machines. And the very idea that going to the moon or to Mars, is kind of a natural outgrowth of this way of thinking, where they can start a new, it's ambitious really to start from scratch with a clean state, to begin a new unfettered,uncomplicated by disagreement, contestation, challenge, dialogue, controversy, where they can start a new and build a society from scratch. That is not as they might see it weighted down by the controversies that arise whenever human beings gathered in society. So there is something fantastical, but it's also dangerous. and hubristic, because it implies that they are the advertisers，they are the pioneers，the initiators of this new frontier, that breaks free from the the messy, need to negotiate, to discuss, to disagree, which is essential to the human experience.Xu：So could you imagine maybe in the coming years, everyone has that set here to emigrate into the meta verse, what should philosopher do in that new era ?Sandel: Take the glasses off, that’s the philosopher should do . You should take off the glasses . So it would be the mission of philosophy in a meadow verse. If it ever came to be, to try to take, to persuade people to take those goggles off. To imagine a world in which the line between what's virtual and what's real blurs to the point of vanishing. And here's the question. Would such a world be recognizable as a human world, a world in which had lost even. Well, we no longer cared even to ask the question, how to locate the line between the virtual and the real. And I think it's the deepest threat in human terms posed by the age of AI is that we will confuse virtual community and connection with the real thing, and it will represent a great loss.Xu: How to fight, or to deal with the trend. It seems unstoppable.Sandel: You think it’s unstoppable?Xu: YesSandel: And why it's worth asking in figuring out how to stop it? It's worth asking why it seems unstoppable, what do you think.Xu: Because too less debate, and discussion about it, I mean most people just follow the trend.Sandel: Right. But it I could feel in believe the connection I have through my phone, scrolling and swiping and texting and posting, that connection people half a world away is the same as valuable as my personal connections, family, friends, neighbors, classmates. What would you say to them.Xu：I don’t now......Sandel: Why would that represent a loss?Xu: I'm curious about it because you know, my phone. It's the most intimate things we have. We touch it every day, very intimate, we spend more time with it. Even you through the social media, you talk with so many people even most of the time, because we live in different places, we saw it. But still feel very intimate that someone is with me face to face. So it's a new community. I'm not so sure about it's less important than more concrete community before or similar. I'm so confused about how to understand that change.Sandel: Well let me ask you this question. We're talking about intimacy. Intimacy is an important aspect of this. There are now AI equipped devices, little robot that you can buy. Let's say you have an aged parent or grandparent, who's living alone, maybe in a nursing home, and who's lonely. You visit them from time to time, but you can't be there every day. You can buy one of these robotic companions, and the robotic companion will carry on a conversation with your loved one, your grandmother, let's say, and let's suppose that your grandmother comes to regard that robotic AI driven companion as a friend, as an actual friend, sharing intimacy, asking advice. And suppose this release the loneliness of your grandmother and makes her happier. She considers this her friend. Would that bother you? Or would you welcome that?Xu: Welcome.Sandel: You would welcome. It doesn't it doesn't bother you at all.Xu: Maybe not at all. Uh, maybe a little, but I accept it.Sandel: You would accept it, but what is the little about it.Xu: Maybe just because it's a new things and needs some time and space to understand it, to accept it.Sandel: If you are granted, this goes back to what we were discussing about virtual and real. Now your grandmother no longer recognizes, we're assuming, the difference between a robotic friend and actual friend. Does that bother you? Do you think there is a loss?Xu: I think the new friend is a toy for her. It's spring because some books are our friends, even if it's just papers, books.Sandel: Ah, books. So if the grandmother or if you or I were absorbed in a book...Xu: Yeah even some old books, it's like friends. It spend many childhood years with you.Sandel: Well I agree that a book can be a friend and a source of, I would say, genuine companionship. But does it matter that when I'm reading a book and absorbed in a book, I engaged in a kind of exchange with, a kind of dialogue with the human author at back . Whereas when your grandmother is spending her day conversing with the robot, she isn't.Xu: We talking about Socrates, Plato even it's 2000 years ago. still can't be your friend. so why not the toy?Sandel: Because it’s a machine, can it engaged in dialogue. We've been talking a lot about dialogue, or put it this way, take a simple example when we ...Xu: maybe the toy speaks like Socrates. So many Information about Socrates in the toy.Sandel: Like a chatbo, Socrates chatbot.Xu：We can imagine Socrates from the book, from his dialogue from the paper book , maybe she can imagine something similar from the toy . The toy is just like different book. Because the book is more sophisticated than we think, even a book. It's more than two different layers. We can touch several layers but still there are more layers that we cant touch ..Sandel: Maybe. If the toy becomes a sophisticated chatbot, that is programmed on Socrates or Dostoevsky. Well, let me ask you this. Suppose your grandmother passes away, but she has left all of her digital data, all of her emails or social media recording of her experiences, and created a digital avatar, using machine learning, so that you, you're mourning the loss of your loved one , but you can still carry on conversations with her, and so can your children, and so can their children, with their great great grandmother, and ask her advice, can introduce her to a new boyfriend or girlfriend, ask her opinion. Now in principle machine learning AI generated chat bots, as they become perfected,could it provides a kind of virtual immortality, in which case the line it's being blurred. It is not only between the virtual and the actual, but between living and not living. What about that? Would you want to speak to the virtual digital avatar of your great grandmother?Xu: Maybe I will. Because those days we see picture of the, there are letters and photo , remember them. It's still kind of dialogue with the photo with the letters .Sandel: So virtual immortality, you would welcome virtual immortality？Xu: I don't know. Actually, I don't know. I think I will. It’s like, maybe in the studio of book, the bookshelf around your room. You can see different names. The AI robot virtual reality. Maybe it's kind of new thing like books.Sandel: In that case would you no longer, would we no longer grief or feel sad? When someone dies, a loved one dies?Xu: Sure, we have.Sandel: But why? If we can continue to know them and speak to them and be with them，then why should we even grieve their passing.Xu: We Still can see the very thin line of the different.Sandel : And if we no longer could even find the line, would that be better?Xu: I don't think so.Sandel: It wouldn't be better, because?Xu: if we human being can feel lost. May be part of us will disappear. Someone some new party will emerge. I don’t know...Sandel: But loss is an interesting aspect of humanity. Your intuition that loss is somehow essential, lost which is connected to memory . Maybe this is another way of describing what would be lost if the line between the virtual and the real, we're all together blurred. Sandel: So what can we do.Xu : What's your choice? That's the same question. What's your choice?Sandel: I think there would be a loss.Xu: Will you accept this? I mean,Sandel: Would I go to speak to the virtual avatar grandmother? Maybe as a curiosity to see how the machine works, but not thinking that this was being in the presence of my grandmother, in fact the idea of human presence and why it matters is one of the most important questions posed by new technologies and AI. It's another way of asking the questions we've been discussing just now. What is there about human presence that matters, I thought about this in connection with teaching. Because as you know, we did an experiment some years ago in filmed and put the justice class online, and we did it as an experiment. We did it to show that higher education should be a public resource not just a private privilege. We had no idea what would come up with it . We certainly didn't imagine that tens of millions of people would want to watch it, which is what happened, to watch lectures about philosophy. But it did raise the question then about what am I doing here in sanders theatre at Harvard? If people can watch online, is there a difference between attending a class or a discussion or a dialogue virtually online and in person. And now it may depend on the subject. Some of my colleagues have made attendance that there are lectures optional. If they have video recorded ones, they say, well, you can watch it and get the content, you can learn the Information from the lecture, sitting at home in your pajamas in bed, as well as those sitting in the classroom. I don’t see it this way, at least from my subject, because being here, sitting here and listening and engaging and wondering and puzzling and laughing and responding, I see that as something that is very difficult to replicate digitally. And yet I'm interested in doing more and more experiments to see if we can create platforms for public discourse and dialogue, including global public discourse. I think we should explore that, in part because if we don't do it deliberately,then this entire technological apparatus and social media will simply be what we have today, which is a highly polarizing. mind numbing commercially driven, form of communication that takes us further and further away from a healthy civic life. So I want to do experiments to create platforms for global discussion, using the internet using new technologies. But I don't think it will ever be possible fully to replace the human presence that learning at its best, and dialogue at its best require. Do you think that's just a traditional old fashioned view maybe?Xu: but it's paradox BECAUSE you mentioned it in the classroom. in the theater. Yeah, you mentioned that an interview said, in Beijing, a taxi driver told you he watched your video. Sandel: Yeah He told my colleagueXu: You know maybe for the Bejing taxi driver, for that moment, even it’s a very long distance from here，but he feel so intimate with you with your point of view , may be more that one of the students here, maybe. Yeah.Sandel: Well, this was a thrilling when I heard this story that a Beijing taxi driver had been watching my lectures on justice. And he said his family was watching with him. This for me, this single story was a reward to, one of the greatest rewards I've experienced since we did this project. And so I think it's important to use technology to open access to promote discussion and learning and mutual learning, and to try to go further to create a back and forth dialogue, not just disputing material , but enabling people to discuss across great distance. And yet, if that all there was to human connection, then I think we would lose something. In fact, I would go further. I think part of what makes watching justice online compelling, for that taxi driver in Beijing or anyone else is that what they are watching is not just me standing giving a lecture, they are watching actual engagement in person. And that's part of what makes it compelling.Xu: Yeah. You are quite right.Sandel: Even though, it holds about a thousand people and it feels intimate. Do you see what I mean? Because it’s bend and people who are speaking can see one another. And it feels intimate. It feels like a seminar almost. And that's what I love about it.Xu: What kind of role intimacy played in the thinking and debating, how important it is.Sandel: It’s very important. Because it allows for dialog. What the intimacy create is a sense of community and gradually building trust where people can disagree with one another, but still with civility and mutual respect. And learn together, that’s really the idea to learn together. I put a questions to students. It's a kind of journey together, but there is no guarantee that the student who raises her hand or his hand will offer the argument or the idea I’m expected, sometimes the unexpected can leading very interesting direction, other times..Xu: sometimes chaos.Sandel: Yeah sometime chaos.Xu: which part is the most difficult? I mean it's a journey, and sometimes journey is boring, sometimes it's very exciting and sometimes dangerous.Sandel: Yes. Well, the most dangerous, that's the easier part. The most dangerous moments, but in some way it’s the most important moments, are the one where the questions we are discussing come closest to the personal feelings，in conviction of the students, and those dangerous moments, they can also be the most revealing and clarifying moments. What I try to do when I teach is to bring philosophy down to earth, to show students how they have a stake in what famous philosophers of the past. Philosophy, it does not only reside in the heavens far beyond the world in which we live.，it happens to the city, it forms our everyday life.。

2016桑德伯格演讲

世界十大经典励志演讲稿

桑德伯格TED演讲

TED演讲稿中英文3分钟

Shirley_Sandberg

桑德伯格提纲

ted演讲稿大全

哈佛教授桑德尔北大演讲

ted十大著名演讲稿

雪莉桑德伯格在哈佛2014年毕业典礼上的演讲

雪莉桑德伯格演讲翻译

ted最值得看的10个演讲

向前一步 谢丽尔·桑德伯格

ted十大著名演讲稿

桑德尔公开课观后感

留学生必看facebook女高管雪莉·桑德伯格UCB的毕业演讲稿中英对照

桑德伯格提纲可以

ted最值得看的10个演讲

十三邀之许知远对话桑德尔英文字幕

向前一步谢丽尔·桑德伯格