演讲稿具有观点鲜明，内容具有鼓动性的特点。随着社会不断地进步，越来越多人会去使用演讲稿，演讲稿的注意事项有许多，你确定会写吗？下面是范文网小编收集的Ted演讲3篇 精选ted演讲，以供参考。
Ted演讲1
TED演讲:做勇敢的女孩 不做完美的女孩
我们社会一直默认的教育方式是“将女孩养成完美无缺的人，将男孩育成勇敢无畏的人。” 但演讲者Reshma Saujani却否定这样的观点，每一个人都应该有勇气去挑战自己从来就只是想想而不敢尝试的事，男生女生都应该为自己勇敢！TED演讲英文文稿: TED演讲中文文稿: 0:12 So a few years ago, I did something really brave, or some would say really ran :22 For years, I had existed safely behind the scenes in politics as a fundraiser, as an organizer, butin my heart, I always wanted to sitting congresswoman had been in my district had never lost a race, and no one had really even run against her in a in my mind, this was my way to make a difference, to disrupt the status , however, told a very different pollsters told me that I was crazy to run, thatthere was no way that I could :01 But I ran anyway, and in 2012, I became an upstart in a New York City congressional I was going to had the endorsement from the New York Daily News, the WallStreet Journal snapped pictures of me on election day, and CNBC called it one of the hottestraces in the raised money from everyone I knew, including Indian aunties that werejust so happy an Indian girl was on election day, the polls were right, and I only got19 percent of the vote, and the same papers that said I was a rising political star now said Iwasted million dollars on 6,321 't do the was :55 Now, before you get the wrong idea, this is not a talk about the importance of is itabout leaning tell you the story of how I ran for Congress because I was 33 years old and itwas the first time in my entire life that I had done something that was truly brave, where I didn'tworry about being :20 And I'm not alone: so many women I talk to tell me that they gravitate towards careers andprofessions that they know they're going to be great in, that they know they're going to beperfect in, and it's no wonder girls are taught to avoid risk and 're taught tosmile pretty, play it safe, get all A', on the other hand, are taught to play rough, swinghigh, crawl to the top of the monkey bars and then just jump off by the timethey're adults, whether they're negotiating a raise or even asking someone out on a date,they're habituated to take risk after 're rewarded for 's often said in Silicon Valley,no one even takes you seriously unless you've had two failed other words, we'reraising our girls to be perfect, and we're raising our boys to be :20 Some people worry about our federal deficit, but I, I worry about our bravery , our society, we're just losing out because we're not raising our girls to be deficit is why women are underrepresented in STEM, in C-suites, in boardrooms, inCongress, and pretty much everywhere you :45 In the 1980s, psychologist Carol Dweck looked at how bright fifth graders handled an assignmentthat was too difficult for found that bright girls were quick to give higher theIQ, the more likely they were to give boys, on the other hand, found the difficultmaterial to be a found it were more likely to redouble :11 What's going on? Well, at the fifth grade level, girls routinely outperform boys in every subject,including math and science, so it's not a question of difference is in how boys andgirls approach a it doesn't just end in fifth HP report found that men willapply for a job if they meet only 60 percent of the qualifications, but women, women will applyonly if they meet 100 percent of the study is usually invoked asevidence that, well, women need a little more I think it's evidence that womenhave been socialized to aspire to perfection, and they're overly :00(Applause)5:03 And even when we're ambitious, even when we're leaning in, that socialization of perfection hascaused us to take less risks in our so those 600,000 jobs that are open right now incomputing and tech, women are being left behind, and it means our economy is being leftbehind on all the innovation and problems women would solve if they were socialized to be braveinstead of socialized to be :35(Applause)5:39 So in 2012, I started a company to teach girls to code, and what I found is that by teachingthem to code I had socialized them to be , it's an endless process of trial anderror, of trying to get the right command in the right place, with sometimes just a semicolonmaking the difference between success and breaks and then it falls apart, and itoften takes many, many tries until that magical moment when what you're trying to build comesto requires requires :21 We immediately see in our program our girls' fear of not getting it right, of not being Girls Who Code teacher tells me the same the first week, when the girls arelearning how to code, a student will call her over and she'll say, “I don't know what code towrite.” The teacher will look at her screen, and she'll see a blank text she didn't knowany better, she'd think that her student spent the past 20 minutes just staring at the if she presses undo a few times, she'll see that her student wrote code and then deleted tried, she came close, but she didn't get it exactly of showing the progressthat she made, she'd rather show nothing at or :13 It turns out that our girls are really good at coding, but it's not enough just to teach them :21 My friend Lev Brie, who is a professor at the University of Columbia and teaches intro to Javatells me about his office hours with computer science the guys are strugglingwith an assignment, they'll come in and they'll say, “Professor, there's something wrong with mycode.” The girls will come in and say, “Professor, there's something wrong with me.” 7:44 We have to begin to undo the socialization of perfection, but we've got to combine it with buildinga sisterhood that lets girls know that they are not trying harder is not going to fixa broken can't tell you how many women tell me, 8:00 "I'm afraid to raise my hand, I'm afraid to ask a question, because I don't want to be the onlyone who doesn't understand, the only one who is we teach girls to be braveand we have a supportive network cheering them on, they will build incredible things, and I seethis every , for instance, two of our high school students who built a game calledTampon Run--yes, Tampon Run--to fight against the menstruation taboo and sexism the Syrian refugee who dared show her love for her new country by building an appto help Americans get to the a 16-year-old girl who built an algorithm to help detectwhether a cancer is benign or malignant in the off chance that she can save her daddy'slifebecause he has are just three examples of thousands,thousandsofgirlswhohave been socialized to be imperfect, who have learned to keep trying, who have learned whether they become coders or the next Hillary Clinton or Beyoncé, they willnot defer their :26 And those dreams have never been more important for our the Americaneconomy, for any economy to grow, to truly innovate, we cannot leave behind half have to socialize our girls to be comfortable with imperfection, and we've got todo it cannot wait for them to learn how to be brave like I did when I was 33 years have to teach them to be brave in schools and early in their careers, when it has the mostpotential to impact their lives and the lives of others, and we have to show them that they will beloved and accepted not for being perfect but for being so I need each of youto tell every young woman you know--your sister, your niece, your employee, your colleague--to be comfortable with imperfection, because when we teach girls to be imperfect, and we helpthem leverage it, we will build a movement of young women who are brave and who will build abetter world for themselves and for each and every one of :44 Thank :45(Applause)Thank :56 Chris Anderson: Reshma, thank 's such a powerful vision you have a me how it's many girls are involved now in your program? 11:06 Reshma Saujani: in 2012, we taught 20 year we'll teach 40,000 in all :15 And that number is really powerful, because last year we only graduated 7,500 women incomputer , the problem is so bad that we can make that type of change :29 CA: And you're working with some of the companies in this room even, who are welcominggraduates from your program? 11:35 RS: Yeah, we have about 80 partners, from Twitter to Facebook to Adobe to IBM to Microsoftto Pixar to Disney, I mean, every single company out if you're not signed up, I'mgoing to find you, because we need every single tech company to embed a Girls Who Codeclassroom in their :52 CA: And you have some stories back from some of those companies that when you mix in moregender balance in the engineering teams, good things :01 RS: Great things mean, I think that it's crazy to me to think about the fact that rightnow 85 percent of all consumer purchases are made by use social media at arate of 600 percent more than own the Internet, and we should be building thecompanies of I think when companies have diverse teams, and they haveincredible women that are part of their engineering teams, they build awesome things, and wesee it every :24 CA: Reshma, you saw the reaction 're doing incredibly important wholecommunity is cheering you power to :32
Ted演讲2
罗兹·萨维其：只身横渡大西洋的现代传奇
假如你要知道自己的人生该怎么走，不妨在你年轻的时候就给自己写一份讣告。这是只身划船横渡大西洋的罗兹·萨维其（Roz Savage）的做法。
Roz在还年轻的时候是在英国当管理咨询顾问，但她一直感到那不是她一生要追求的东西，因为她更喜欢当一位探险家。当她过了35岁之后，有一天给自己写了两份讣告。一份是按照自己希望过的生活形态来写的，另外一份是按照现有的生活规律来写的。写完后，Roz认真读了两份讣告，她感到假如自己是按照现有的生活方式生活下去的话，无疑会像第二份讣告里所描述的那样度过自己未来的五年、十年，乃至余生。这样的生活也很如意，但就是缺了点什么。Roz觉得第一份讣告所记述的人生才是她所认同的人生。她说，那天我看着这两份讣告，我在想，天啊，我现在走的是完全错误的道路啊。后来，她辞掉了工作，又经过一番挣扎，最后决定跳出常规思维的局限，并下决心要坐一只小船，拿着双桨划行大西洋。
也许经常看探险片的人马上会想到粗胡子大汉独自一人闯荡大海的影像。但是，Roz是一个普普通通的女子，她也不是职业探险家，更不曾有过特别的经历。但是，她还是决定试一试。
2005年，Roz出发了。非常不幸的是，她选的时间刚好是大西洋上气旋特别活跃的时期，小船出行甚为困难。另外，她所准备的4对船桨都相继折断，在茫茫的大海中，没有人能帮到她，Roz唯一能做的，就是用船上的工具把船桨修补好，继续前行。
在大海上的划行给Roz带来了巨大的心理和生理挑战，她甚至在想，以每个小时2英里的速度来划行，要到哪个牛年马月才能完成3000英里的征途？但她没有办法，只能一步一步的前进。经过103天的努力，Roz终于顺利到达彼岸。在岸上，她得到了现场诸多粉丝的热烈欢迎，她说，那种感觉就像是当上了电影明星。同时也印证了一个讲法，险阻越大，克服困难后最终得到的成果也越大。从大西洋回来后，Roz又开始计划她的太平洋划行之旅。现在，她已经完成了太平洋旅程（约9000至英里）的三分之二。她回头反思，总结出大海划行给她带来的一些启示：
首先，我们给自己讲述的故事会影响我们的态度。开始时，Roz也认为只有那些粗胡子的大汉才有能力划行大海。但事实并非如此。同样道理，我们一直认为石油是比不可少的。但实际上，除了石油之外是有很多其他可持续的选择的，我们也有这样的自由意志去作出恰当的选择。
其次，是关于一点一滴的个体行动本身。我们会以外单独的个体就是大海中的一滴水，无足轻重。但正是很多人的坏决定之累计使得我们所有人走向灾难之边缘。而假如我们可以换个角度去思考，可以试想，假如每个人都能做出智慧的抉择，我们就有可能走向更可持续的未来。并且我们将会是与很多人一道来做这样的事
情，假如我们都开始做智慧的抉择，那么也许未来到超市购物使用塑料袋就会被大众认为是愚蠢的抉择。而这也仅仅是其中一个例子。
最后，整个过程都是关乎承担责任的。Roz曾一直以为只有当她有了好房子、好车、好男人之后，快乐就会自然降临到她身上。但当她写完了那两份讣告之后，她似乎懂得了一点什么。她知道自己不能被动的去等待。另一方面，即使能够活到90岁，但是，生活在一个有饥荒和干旱的地球而祈求获得快乐也是非常困难的事情，更不能指望在这样的环境下生活会让人健康长寿了。于是，Roz决定发起一个叫EcoHeroes的倡导活动，帮助人们记录生活中的环境友好行为。也许单纯换一个灯泡不能带来太多改变，但这样的精神却是拯救地球所必须的一种态度。
我们站在历史上非常关键的时刻，我们曾被关爱的，也曾被诅咒。我们还能选择一个绿色的未来——唯需每个人一点一滴的努力。——Roz Savage
Ted演讲3
TED演讲|激励人心的领导力 西蒙·斯涅克:伟大的领袖如何激励行动
How do you explain when things don't go as we assume? Or better, how do you explain when others are able to achieve things that seem to defy all of the assumptions? For example: Why is Apple so innovative? Year after year, after year, after year, they're more innovative than all their yet, they're just a computer 're just like everyone have the same access to the same talent, the same agencies, the same consultants, the same why is it that they seem to have something different? Why is it that Martin Luther King led the Civil Rights Movement? He wasn't the only man who suffered in a pre-civil rights he certainly wasn't the only great orator of the him? And why is it that the Wright brothers were able to figure out control-powered, manned flight when there were certainly other teams who were better qualified, better funded, and they didn't achieve powered man flight, and the Wright brothers beat them to 's something else at play here.各位，当事情不是我们料想的那样时，你如何解释？当别人能够成就的事实似乎推翻了过去所有的假设的时候，你如何解释？举个例子，为什么苹果如此具有创新能力？一年又一年，一年又一年，他们比竞争对手更加创新。而且，他们只是一家电脑公司。就像每个电脑公司一样，他们能招到的人才，获得的资源，找到的顾问，采访的媒体都和别人一样。那为什么他们好像总是能够拿出一些不同的东西来？同样，为什么是马丁·路德·金来领导民权运动？他不是唯一遭受运动前社会歧视的黑人，他也肯定不是那个时代唯一伟大的演说家。那为什么是他领导民权运动？还有，为什么是莱特兄弟能够研制出动力控制的载人飞机？当时还有其他团队比他们兄弟俩更有能力，更多资金，他们却没能实现人力飞行，莱特兄弟打败了他们。一定还有一些什么别的因素在起作用。
About three and a half years ago I made a discovery, and this discovery profoundly changed my view on how I thought the world it even profoundly changed the way in which I operate in it turns out--there's a pattern--as it turns out, all the great and inspiring leaders and organizations in the world, whether it's Apple, or Martin Luther King or the Wright brothers, they all think, act and communicate the exact same it's the complete opposite to everyone I did was codify it's probably the world's simplest call it the golden circle.大概三年半前，我有了一个发现，这个发现从根本上改变了我对世界是如何运作的看法，甚至也根本改变了我运作的方式。事实显示，有这么一个模式，这个世界上所有伟大的激动人心的领导者和组织，不管它是苹果，或者马丁·路德·金，或者莱特兄弟，他们思考，行动和沟通的方式完全一样！而对其他人，则正好反其道而行之。我所做的就是把它整理出来，这可能是世界上最简单的一个观念。我称之为“黄金圆环”。
（板上画了三个圆环，中心是“为什么why”, 第二个环是“怎么做how”，最外面的环是“是什么what”）
Why? How? What? This little idea explains why some organizations and some leaders are able to inspire where others aren' me define the terms really single person, every single organization on the planet knows what they do, 100 know how they do it, whether you call it your differentiated value proposition or your proprietary process or your very, very few people or organizations know why they do what they by “why” I don't mean “to make a profit.” That's a 's always a “why” I mean: what's your purpose? What's your cause? What's your belief? Why does your organization exist? Why do you get out of bed in the morning? And why should anyone care? Well, as a result, the way we think, the way we act, the way we communicate is from the outside 's go from the clearest thing to the fuzziest the inspired leaders and the inspired organizations, regardless of their size, regardless of their industry, all think, act and communicate from the inside out.为什么？怎么做？是什么？这个黄金圆环解释了为什么有的组织和领导者能够激发行动，而其他的不能。让我很快地给这些词下个定义。这个地球上每个人，每个组织都知道自己在做什么，百分之百的。其中有的知道他们该怎么做，不管你称作差异价值定位，或是你的独有工艺，或是你的独特卖点都行。但是非常非常少的人和组织才知道他们为什么做手头的事情。这里我说的“为什么“不是什么“赢利”。那只是结果，一直都是结果而已。说“为什么”我的意思是：你的目标目的是什么？你的原因是什么？你的信念是什么？你的机构为什么存在？你每天早上为什么起床？你起不起床对别人有什么不同，别人为什么要在乎？作为结果，我们思考的方式，我们行动的方式，和我们沟通的方式，在这个黄金圆环上都是从外到内的。我们从最清楚的再到最模糊的。但是激励型的领导者和组织，不管他们大小规模，不管他们所在行业，都从内到外地思考，行动，和沟通。
Let me give you an use Apple because they're easy to understand and everybody gets Apple were like everyone else, a marketing message from them might sound like this.”We make great 're beautifully designed, simple to use and user to buy one?“ that's how most of us 's how most marketing is 's how most sales are that's how most of us communicate say what we do, we say how we're different or how we're better and we expect some sort of a behavior, a purchase, a vote, something like 's our new law have the best lawyers with the biggest always perform for our clients who do business with 's our new gets great gas has leather our it's uninspiring.让我给您举个例子。我用苹果电脑，因为它易于理解，每个人都能上手。如果苹果和其他竞争对手一样，他们的广告语可能就会这样写：“我们制造出色的电脑，它们设计精美，使用简单，界面友好。想要买一台吗？”不想！这就是我们大部分人沟通的方式。这也是大部分公司的市场推广方式。这也是大部分销售完成的方式。我们说我们要做什么，我们是怎样与众不同或者更好，然后我们就等着别人被打动或者掏腰包，投票，诸如此类。比如，你对客户说，这是我们新的律师事务所，我们有最好的律师，最大的客户，我们总是为我们的客户竭尽全力。再比如，这是我们推出的新车型，非常省油，又有皮座垫，快来买我们的车吧──这些都无法激励我们。
Here's how Apple actually communicates.”Everything we do, we believe in challenging the status believe in thinking way we challenge the status quo is by making our products beautifully designed, simple to use and user just happen to make great to buy one?“ Totally different right? You're ready to buy a computer from I did was reverse the order of it proves to us is that people don't buy what you do;people buy why you do don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.苹果实际上是这样沟通的，“我们所做的每件事情，我们都相信要打破现状，以不同的角度思考。我们打破现状的方式就是让我们的产品设计精美，使用简单，界面友好。我们只是碰巧制造电脑而已。想要买一台吗？”味道完全不同，对吧！你已经准备要向我订购了。我所做的就是反转信息的顺序。事实已经向我们证明，顾客不是购买你所做的产品；顾客购买你制作它的理由。
This explains why every single person in this room is perfectly comfortable buying a computer from we're also perfectly comfortable buying an MP3 player from Apple, or a phone from Apple, or a DVR from , as I said before, Apple's just a computer 's nothing that distinguishes them structurally from any of their competitors are all equally qualified to make all of these fact, they few years ago, Gateway came out with flat screen 're eminently qualified to make flat screen 've been making flat screen monitors for bought came out with MP3 players and they make great quality they can make perfectly well-designed nobody bought fact, talking about it now, we can't even imagine buying an MP3 player from would you buy an MP3 player from a computer company? But we do it every don't buy what you do;they buy why you do goal is not to do business with everybody who needs what you goal is to do business with people who believe what you 's the best part.这就解释了为什么在这个大厅里的每个人都觉得购买苹果电脑挺好的，但是我们也觉得买苹果的MP3播放器(指iPod)挺好的，或者是苹果出品的电话(iPhone)，或者是苹果的数字录像设备(Apple TV)。但是，就像我前面说到，苹果只是一个电脑公司。没有什么可以把苹果和竞争者截然分开。那些竞争对手们也能生产品质很好的所有这些产品。实际上，他们也尝试了。几年前，Gateway公司推出了一款平面电视机。他们制造电视机的水平很高，在此之前他们做液晶显示器已经很多年了。但他们推出的平板电视机无人问津。戴尔电脑也推出了自己的MP3播放器和PDA，他们的产品品质也很优秀，也设计良好。同样没有人买。想想吧，我们都难以想像，从戴尔买一台MP3播放器是怎么一回事。你干嘛要从一家电脑公司买一台MP3播放器呢？但我们每天就是这么做的。顾客不会购买你的产品，他们会买你制作它的理由。商业的目的不是和那些他有求你有供的人做生意，是和那些信念相同的人做生意。这就是我的主要论点。
None of what I'm telling you is my 's all grounded in the tenets of psychology, you look at a cross-section of the human brain, looking from the top down, What you see is the human brain is actually broken into three major components that correlate perfectly with the golden newest brain, our homo sapien brain, our neocortex, corresponds with the ”what“ neocortex is responsible for all of our rational and analytical thought and middle two sections make up our limbic our limbic brains are responsible for all of our feelings, like trust and 's also responsible for all human behavior, all decision-making, and it has no capacity for language.我所说的没有一个是我的观点，都是生物学的观念。对，不是心理学，是生物学。如果从上方俯视大脑的横截面图，你所看到的是人的大脑分为三个主要的部分，正好和与黄金环的三个部分对应。我们最新的脑部，即我们智人（生物学概念，指有了现代智慧的人种）的脑部，或者说我们的大脑皮层(neocortex)，对应着“是什么”这个环。大脑皮层负责我们所有的理性和逻辑的思考和语言组织。中间的两个部分是我们的边脑(limbic brain)，边脑负责我们所有的情感，比如信任和忠诚，也负责所有的人体行动和做出决策。同时，这部分没有语言功能。
In other words, when we communicate from the outside in, yes, people can understand vast amounts of complicated information like features and benefits and facts and just doesn't drive we can communicate from the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the brain that controls behavior, and then we allow people to rationalize it with the tangible things we say and is where gut decisions come know, sometimes you can give somebody all the facts and figures, and they say, ”I know what all the facts and details say, but it just doesn't feel right.“ Why would we use that verb, it doesn't ”feel“ right? Because the part of the brain that controls decision-making, doesn't control the best we can muster up is, ”I don't just doesn't feel right.“ Or sometimes you say you're leading with your heart, or you're leading with your , I hate to break it to you, those aren't other body parts controlling your 's all happening here in you limbic brain, the part of the brain that controls decision-making and not language.换句话说，在这个黄金圆环上当我们从外向内沟通时，我们可以让人们理解大量复杂的信息，比如特点，好处，事实，还有图表，但就是无法激发他们的行动。当我们可以从内向外沟通时，我们就是在直接与大脑中控制行动的部分沟通，然后人们再理性地考虑我们所说和做的“怎样”和“什么”。这就是那些勇敢大胆决定的来源。你可能也知道，有时候你给了别人所有的事实和图表，然后他们说，“我知道所有的事实和细节是怎么回事，但就是感觉不对。” 我们为什么要用这个词，“感觉”不对？因为控制行动的那部分边脑，不控制语言，所以当边脑这部分拒绝的时候，我们想来想去只好说，“我不知道为什么，就是感觉不对。”有时候，你会说自己是在用心去带领，或者用灵魂去引导，嗯，我不愿意打断你，但这些都不是控制你行为的身体部分。控制你行为的是大脑的边脑部分，它控制了你做的决定，而不是语言。
But if you don't know why you do what you do, and people respond to why you do what you do, then how you ever get people to vote for you, or buy something from you, or, more importantly, be loyal and want to be a part of what it is that you , the goal is not just to sell to people who need what you have;the goal is to sell to people who believe what you goal is not just to hire people who need a job;it's to hired people who believe what you always say that, you know, if you hire people just because they can do a job, they'll work for your money, but if you hire people who believe what you believe, they'll work for your you with blood and sweat and nowhere else is there a better example of this than with the Wright brothers.如果你自己都不知道所作所为的理由，而人们需要这样的理由，你如何赢得大家对你的支持，从你这里下单购买，或者，更重要的，忠诚并且想成为你行动的一分子呢？再说一次，目标不是向那些有求于你的人销售，目标是向那些相信你所坚信的人销售，他们将为你付出热血，汗水和泪水。对于这一点，没有比莱特兄弟的故事更说明问题的了。
Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont back in the early 20th century, the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the was trying Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume, to be the recipe for mean, even now, you ask people, ”Why did your product or why did your company fail?“ and people always give you the same permutation of the same three things, under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market 's always the same three things, so let's explore Pierpont Langley was given 50,000 dollars by the War Deptartment to figure out this flying was no held a seat at Harvard and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely knew all the big minds of the hired the best minds money could the market conditions were New York Times followed him around everyone was rooting for how come you've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley? 绝大部分人都没有听说过塞缪尔·兰利这个人。在二十世纪早期，对载人飞行的探索的热情，就像今天对建立网络公司的热度一样。每个人都在尝试。塞缪尔·兰利有着我们大家所谓的成功的所有要素。是什么意思呢？比如今天，你要是问别人，“你的产品或公司为什么会失败？” 那人一定会给出同样三样事情的同样组合──资本不够，用人不善，市道不佳。总是这三个原因，那么让我们且来探讨一番，究竟如何。塞缪尔·兰利获得国防部五万美元投资，让他研制载人飞机。所以对他来说，资金不是问题；他又在哈佛有一个职位，并在Smithsonian博物馆工作，人脉很广很深。他也认识当时所有该领域的专家学者。他用手里的资金可以雇佣当时最好的专家。如果研制出来载人飞行器，市场前景更是无可限量。除此之外，《纽约时报》记者整天跟在他屁股后面等新闻──每个人都支持他。那么你今天怎么会从来没有听说过塞缪尔·兰利呢？
A few hundred miles away in Dayton Ohio, Orville and Wilbur Wright, they had none of what we consider to be the recipe for had no paid for their dream with the proceeds from their bicycle a single person on the Wright brothers' team had a college education, not even Orville or the New York Times followed them around difference was, Orville and Wilbur were driven by a cause, by a purpose, by a believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, it'll change the course of the Pierpont Langley was wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be was in pursuit of the was in pursuit of the lo and behold, look what people who believed in the Wright brothers' dream, worked with them with blood and sweat and others just worked for the they tell stories of how every time the Wright brothers went out, they would have to take five sets of parts, because that's how many times they would crash before they came in for supper.与此同时，在俄亥俄州戴顿市几百里外，奥维尔·莱特和维尔伯·莱特兄弟，他们俩没有任何我们认定的成功要素──他们资金匮乏，研制经费都来自于兄弟俩开的自行车铺的微薄利润；他们团队里的人没有一个上过大学，连他们俩自己也没上过；《纽约时报》记者更是不沾他们的边。不同的地方是，奥维尔和维尔伯有一个理由，一个目标，一个信仰驱使着他们去做这些事情。他们相信，如果他们能研制出来载人飞行器，将会改变世界。塞缪尔·兰利就不同了。他想要成名，想要发财。他追求的就是这两个结果。事情如何发展呢？ 那些相信莱特兄弟梦想的人，与他们同甘共苦，同洒热血泪水和汗水。其他人只是为工资单工作，而且他们还对外人讲述他们是怎么样在莱特兄弟出去的时候不得不偷偷拿走零件，因为他们晚餐都无以为继，生活濒于崩溃。
And, eventually, on December 17th, 1903, the Wright brothers took flight, and no one was there to even experience found out about it a few days further proof that Langley was motivated by the wrong thing, the day the Wright brothers took flight, he could have said, ”That's an amazing discovery guys, and I will improve upon your technology,“ but he didn' wasn't first, he didn't get rich, he didn't get famous, so he 年12月17日，莱特兄弟进行试飞成功，当时无人在场见证，而外界几天之后才知晓。后来事情进一步证实，塞缪尔·兰利动机不纯，因为在莱特兄弟试飞成功后，他退出了。他本来可以说：“干得真棒，伙计们！让我们在你们的技术基础上做个更好的！” 但是他没有。他是第一个投入研制的，却没能第一个成功，看来他没能成名，也无法借机发财，于是他放弃了。
People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do if you talk about what you believe, you will attract those who believe what you why is it important to attract those who believe what you believe? Something called the law of diffusion of if you don't know the law, you definitely know the first two and a half percent of our population are our next 13 and a half percent of our population are our early next 34 percent are your early majority, your late majority and your only reason these people buy touch tone phones is because you can't buy rotary phones anymore.人们不会为你所做的买单；他们为你这么做的理由买单。如果你讲述你的信念，你会吸引那些与你具有同样信念的人。为什么吸引和你信念相同的人这么重要呢？是因为一个革新扩散的法则在起作用。如果你没有听说过这个法则的话，你肯定知道这个概念。在这个社会里，%的人是革新者，接下来的%的人是我们早期的采用者，后面的34%是早期的主流，后面还有晚期的主流，以及最后拖后腿的人，这些拖后腿的人购买按键电话的唯一原因是因为他们再也买不到转盘电话了。
(Laughter)（笑）
We all sit at various places at various times on this scale, but what the law of diffusion of innovation tells us is that if you want mass-market success or mass-market acceptance of an idea, you cannot have it until you achieve this tipping point between 15 and 18 percent market then the system I love asking businesses, ”What's your conversion on new business?“ And they love to tell you, ”Oh, it's about 10 percent,“ , you can trip over 10 percent of the all have about 10 percent who just ”get it.“ That's how we describe them, 's like that gut feeling, ”Oh, they just get it.“ The problem is: How do you find the ones that get it before you're doing business with them versus the ones who don't get it? So it's this here, this little gap, that you have to close, as Jeffrey Moore calls it, ”crossing the chasm.“ Because, you see, the early majority will not try something until someone else has tried it these guys, the innovators and the early adopters, they're comfortable making those gut 're more comfortable making those intuitive decisions that are driven by what they believe about the world and not just what product is available.在这个刻度上，我们不同的时候处在不同的区间内，但是革新扩散法则告诉我们，如果你想要大众市场的成功，或是大众市场接受一个观念，你只有到达15%到18%这个市场份额的转折点的时候才会发生。我总是问企业，“你的新业务什么时候开始转变？” 他们喜欢告诉我说，“噢，大概10%。” 很自豪地说。好吧，算你可以遍访10%的客户。我们都有10%的客户已经“接受”了。那是我们怎样描述他们，那就像那种勇敢的感觉，“哦，他们刚刚接受了。” 问题是，在你和他们做生意之前，你怎样找到那些接受了的人而非那些不接受的人呢？所以就是这儿，就是这条小沟，你必须弥补，就像杰夫瑞·摩尔说的，“跨越鸿沟”。因为，你看，那些早期的主流人群不会尝试新事物，直到别人先尝试过了。而这些人，这些革新者和早期采用者，他们勇于尝试新事物，他们更易于凭直觉做决定，靠的是他们对世界的信念，而非只是市场上有什么样的产品。
These are the people who stood on line for six hours to buy an iPhone when they first came out, when you could have just walked into the store the next week and bought one off the are the people 40,000 dollars on flat screen TVs when they first came out, even though the technology was , by the way, they didn't do it because the technology was so did it for 's because they wanted to be don't buy what you do;they buy what you do what you do simply proves what you fact, people will do the things that prove what they reason that person bought the iPhone in the first six hours, stood in line for six hours, was because of what they believed about the world, and how they wanted everybody to see were don't buy what you do;they buy why you do it.就是这样的人，当iPhone推出的时候愿意排上六个小时的队，第一时间买到手，哪怕一个星期后，你就可以轻松走进店里随意从货架上拿一个下来。就是这些人，在平板电视刚推出的时候，愿意花费四万美元购买，即使技术还没完全成熟。对，顺便提一句，他们这么做不是因为产品的技术有多么伟大。他们是为自己而购买。因为他们就是想喝头羹汤。所以还是那句话，人们不因你所做的而买单，他们因你所做的理由而买单，你的行动就证明了你的信念。实际上，人们会做那些证明他们信念的事情。那些在iPhone开售前排队6个小时的人，是因为他们对世界的看法──智能手机和移动计算将是业界的未来，于是他们排队证明给世人看，他们将是第一批走向这个未来的人。人们不为你的行为买单，他们为你的信念买单。
So let me give you a famous example, a famous failure and a famous success of the law of diffusion of , the famous 's a commercial we said before, a second ago, the recipe for success is money and the right people and the right market should have success at the time TiVo came out, about eight or nine years ago, to this current day, they are the single highest-quality product on the market, hands down, there is no were extremely conditions were mean, we use TiVo as TiVo stuff on my piece of junk Time Warner DVR all the time.关于革新扩散理论，让我给你一个著名的例子，一个著名的失败和一个著名的成功例子。首先，著名的失败例子，是在商业领域内的。像我前面提到的，成功的要素是资金充裕，用人为善，市道正好。没错，这样你就可以享有成功了。那么看看TiVo吧。从八、九年前TiVo问世，直到今天，他们都是市场上唯一品质最高的产品。（对听众）不用举手，这没什么可争议。他们资金极为充裕，市场需求非常好。我们几乎把TiVo当作日常用语了──我一直把东西TiVo在我那时代华纳的垃圾DVR里面。
But TiVo's a commercial 've never made when they went IPO, their stock was at about 30 or 40 dollars and then plummeted, and it's never traded above fact, I don't even think it's traded above six, except for a couple of little you see, when TiVo launched their product, they told us all what they said, ”We have a product that pauses live TV, skips commercials, rewinds live TV and memorizes your viewing habits without you even asking.“ And the cynical majority said, ”We don't believe don't need don't like 're scaring us.“ What if they had said, ”If you're the kind of person who likes to have total control over every aspect of your life, boy, do we have a product for pauses live TV, skips commercials, memorizes your viewing habits, etc., etc.“ People don't buy what you do;they buy why you do what you do simply serves as the proof of what you believe.但是TiVo是个商业上的大失败。他们从未盈利。当他们上市时，他们的股票价格大约30到40美元，然后就直线下跌，而成交价格从没超过10美元，实际上，我记得就没有超过6美元，除了几次价格小涨起落。为什么？因为你看，当TiVo发布产品的时候，他们告诉我们顾客的是他们的“what是什么”。他们说，“我们有一个产品，可以暂停直播电视节目，跳过广告，倒回节目开始，记住你的观看习惯，甚至你都不用设置。” 而挑剔的大众回答，“我们不相信你，我们不需要这个东西，我们也不喜欢它，你在唬人。” 市场反应如此糟糕！要是他们像下面这样说会怎样呢，“如果你是那种喜欢全面掌控生活每个方面的人，伙计，我们这儿为你量身打造一款产品，它可以暂停直播电视节目，跳过广告，倒回节目开始，记住你的观看习惯，等等等等。” 人们不因你所做的而买单，他们因你所做的理由而买单，你的行动就证明了你的信念。
Now let me give you a successful example of the law of diffusion of the summer of 1963, 250,000 people showed up on the mall in Washington to hear sent out no invitations, and there was no website to check the do you do that? Well, wasn't the only man in America who was a great wasn't the only man in America who suffered in a pre-civil rights fact, some of his ideas were he had a didn't go around telling people what needed to change in went around and told people what he believed.”I believe,“ he told people who believed what he believed took his cause, and they made it their own, and they told some of those people created structures to get the word out to even more low and behold, 250,000 people showed up on the right day, at the right time, to hear him speak.现在我再给你一个革新扩散法则的成功例子。1963年夏天，25万人汇集华盛顿DC，聆听马丁·路德·金博士的演讲。没有什么邀请信，没有什么网站让你查演讲日期。怎么做到（汇集这么多人）的？ 金博士并非美国唯一伟大的演说家，他不是唯一饱受社会歧视之苦的人。实际上，他的部分观点很糟糕。但他有一个天分。他没有巡回告诉人们要做什么去改变美国。他巡回演讲告诉人们他的信念。“我相信有一天……我相信……我相信……” 他告诉人们。
How many of them showed up for him? showed up for 's what they believed about America that got them to travel in a bus for eight hours, to stand in the sun in Washington in the middle of 's what they believed, and it wasn't about black versus percent of the audience was believed that there are two types of laws in this world, those that are made by a higher authority and those that are made by not until all the laws that are made by man are consistent with the laws that are made by the higher authority, will we live in a just just so happened that the Civil Rights Movement was the perfect thing to help him bring his cause to followed, not for him, but for , by the way, he gave the ”I have a dream“ speech, not the ”I have a plan“ speech.而那些和他怀有同样信念的人接受了他的理由，把它们变为自己的观念，再告诉别人。还有人进一步构建信念把话语传给更多的人，结果，25万人在那天准时出现，聆听他演讲。有多少人是为金博士而来？没有谁是。他们为自己而来，是他们自己对美国的信念把他们带上大巴，跋涉八个小时，在八月夏日的太阳底下来到华盛顿。这是他们的信念，这信念无关黑人与白人，现场听众有25%是白人。金博士相信世间有两种法则，一种是上帝制定的，一种是世人制定的。直到世人制定的法律和上帝制定的律法相符合，我们才真正生活在公义的世界里。只是碰巧民权运动是帮他将信念付诸实现的最佳载体。我们跟随他，不是为了他，是为了我们自己。顺便说一句，他的演讲是“我有一个梦想”，不是“我有一个方案”。
(Laughter)（大笑）
Listen to politicians now with their comprehensive 12-point 're not inspiring there are leaders and there are those who hold a position of power or those who lead inspire they're individuals or organizations, we follow those who lead, not because we have to, but because we want follow those who lead, not for them, but for it's those who start with ”why" that have the ability to inspire those around them or find others who inspire them.听听今天的政治人物提出的综合12点方案，对听众而言真是毫无激动人心之处。有两种人，一种是领导，一种是能领导的人。领导只是处在有权力或权威的位置。但能领导的人才能激励我们，不论他们是个人还是组织。我们跟随那些能领导的人，不是因为我们不得不，而是因为我们想要。我们跟随那些能领导的人，不是为他们，是为我们自己。正是那些从“为什么”开始的人，有能力激励他们周围的人，或者找到那些能激励他们的人。
Thank you very much.非常感谢！
Ted演讲3篇 精选ted演讲相关文章：
★ 杨澜TED演讲中英文对照3篇(杨澜ted演讲稿中英文对照)
★ TED演讲观后感—为什么快乐3篇(ted我们为什么快乐观后感)
★ 2022ted演讲稿6篇 致敬,展望,我们一起努力演讲稿
★ TED演讲：如何掌控你的时间――2（TED演讲如何掌控你的时间）
★ NO.27遇见｜《TED演讲的秘密》（《遇见》主题演讲稿）