-
A few years ago, after an interview,
-
the cameramen aside of the journalist
-
hang around to talk to me.
-
He was amazed at the things I said,
-
because he had always heard
something else, on that subject,
-
and he wanted some clarification.
-
So I brought him proof of what I said,
-
showed him how his beliefs
had no scientific ground,
-
and we pleasantly chatted
for half an hour.
-
Eventually, he said,
"I understand, but I don't trust you."
-
I understand, but I don't trust you.
-
Even today, I'm grateful to that person
for the lesson he taught me.
-
That day I realized
that I didn't understand anything,
-
I had it all wrong.
-
I don't know if I've learned
how to communicate.
-
but I've certainly learned how not to.
-
How did I feel? Was that frustrating?
-
Yes, a lot: but also challenging.
-
If the facts are here, and they're proven,
-
I still have to find a way
to communicate them effectively.
-
I mean, in such a way
that they come to help our decisions.
-
So I started studying: I wanted
to understand better, I was curious.
-
The fact is, we all carry on
with our preconceptions,
-
that's how we evolved.
-
They also have a utility:
-
let's say that preconceptions
are prefabricated, ready-to-use ideas
-
that we carry with us.
-
Ready to be used quickly
when we need a quick decisions.
-
However, they also have
a rather serious side effect:
-
they prevent us from considering
new information,
-
especially when these are at odds
-
with the beliefs we already have.
-
They make us less agile, harder for us
to change our minds.
-
Yeah, because changing
your mind is painful,
-
it's admitting that we were wrong.
-
That's how our minds are.
-
This phenomenon is called
"cognitive dissonance",
-
makes us suffer
-
and the mind will do anything to avoid it.
-
We need to know it.
-
But this is annoying:
-
we need to make the right decision,
-
or at least the rightest one
with the information at our disposal.
-
How can we do that?
-
Well, there are tricks to cheat the mind
-
that respect its dynamics
-
but at the same time allow us
to acquire new information
-
and change your mind, if that's the case.
-
For example, a strategy
-
is give points of advantage
to the mind, flatter it.
-
"You did good!
-
The information you had,
the beliefs you had.
-
were correct, acceptable,
knowing what you knew.
-
But now there are new infos.
-
Show how agile you are,
how quick you are to adjust.
-
Things like this: we can afford
to be condescending to ourselves.
-
At this point, you must be wondering
what I was talking about that day,
-
what will ever be so thorny, scary,
-
to be absolutely rejected.
-
Well, I was talking
about agriculture, food,
-
innovations related
to the food production system,
-
genetics, biotechnology.
-
I won't discuss it here today.
-
a TEDx is a cup of tea
that only refreshes for a few minutes,
-
a mouthful of ideas and stimuli.
-
But I want to tell you that I'm worried,
-
because I see how our society is facing
-
decisions related to food production.
-
Since it's a delicate subject,
because it touches our belly,
-
culinary traditions,
-
the environment and its protection,
the landscape, health,
-
is a subject riddled of ideologies,
and therefore of preconceptions.
-
We all think we have the right recipe
for sustainable agriculture.
-
We are all so convinced!
-
And so, when a different idea comes along
-
we lock ourselves in defense,
ready to retaliate to demolish it.
-
The mainstream is really powerful,
-
the dominant narrative
we've heard for years
-
in certain supermarkets ads,
-
for example,
-
or we have seen on certain
television broadcasts,
-
or have read in the stories and articles
-
of some opinionist etc.
-
that dominant narrative
shaped our thoughts.
-
And so, today, by instinct,
it seems good, clean, right to us.
-
We would never question it.
-
This applies to everyone, be careful:
it is a risk that we all take.
-
Faced with a verified fact that shows us
-
that our position has limits,
-
we won't change our minds:
-
rather, we'll find a different reason
-
to keep thinking the same way,
-
maintaining the status quo.
-
This is a proven fact:
there are many years of study,
-
and many scientific works that prove it.
-
That's who we are,
and it's better to know.
-
Democracy also has
to come to terms with it:
-
on the other hand, we come
from a very instructive period.
-
You've heard of "infodemia,"
-
that cacophony of information
-
we have been subjected to
in the last year.
-
It caused us such a discomfort
-
that in some protests
-
billboards with the sentence
"Enough with science" showed up.
-
Which, of course, is absurd.
-
I mean, we can take a stand
against another stand;
-
but science doesn't take a stand,
so what's the point of attacking it?
-
And yet it is a signal
of the frustration, fear
-
that some people feel,
it's understandable.
-
Sometimes, some people ask me:
-
"How do you choose who to trust?"
-
Which journalist, which communicator?
-
I choose those who care
about their reputation.
-
Those who constantly
verifies their sources,
-
because she fears the shame
of writing unverified things.
-
I choose those who can't afford
to lose their reputation,
-
because it's her most precious asset,
-
and then communicates responsibly.
-
Today's theme is "Second Chance".
-
If I met that cameraman today,
what would I tell him?
-
Well, I don't think I'd bother
taking his fears away.
-
I'd leave it to him.
-
I understand, we attach to our fears.
-
No, I think I'd rather show him
what opportunities we're missing.
-
what chances of sustainable
food production
-
which we said no to.
-
Lost benefits.
-
Yeah, I think I'd do that.
-
because I have learned, each of us
has fears to be respected,
-
and we are solely responsible for.
-
So, today, when I need to talk
-
of complex, polarizing,
scary themes, what do I do?
-
Well, I'm thinking of Mrs. Paola,
a lady who follows me.
-
and who wrote to me
after reading my article
-
where I was talking about agriculture,
innovation, environmentalism.
-
That environmentalism that often
forgets its original mission,
-
and rejects innovations that are also
beneficial to the environment,
-
in the name of ideology.
-
Mrs. Paola wrote to me:
-
"I became interested in agriculture
at the tender age of 73,
-
for the love of my grandchildren.
-
Because I understood
-
that much of their future
depends on this branch of science.
-
And speaking of fear marketing,
-
marketing that exploits consumers' fears,
-
she asked me, "Who benefits?
-
I don't want to be a useful idiot
in someone else's hands anymore."
-
I told her, you're not a useful idiot.
-
you are living proof that democracy
is an immense value.
-
You are proof of how valuable
an election vote is.
-
a choice of purchase,
a freedom of thought,
-
a choice of sharing contents
and considerations.
-
What's pushing Mrs. Paola?
-
Curiosity.
-
Which has no age, and is strong enough
-
to push us to look beyond our beliefs.
-
Curiosity is a precious ally
-
to take our fears, our mind by the hand,
-
and start walking again.
-
It's the engine of discovery, of the new.
-
This is not a happy ending story:
this is still an endless story.
-
Yes, we can't live without ideologies.
-
But we can keep looking them in the face,
-
with genuine curiosity.