Obviously, we think of sheep as followers.

Normally we think about technology as interactive.

So if we think of our fears as more than just fears but as stories, we should think of ourselves as the authors of those stories.

And if we remove the mystery of life, then I think it is a little bit easier for us to think about how we live, and how perhaps we're not as special as we always think we are.

And we might think of these as abandoned.

If we started to think about food and how we feed our kids as a health initiative, and we started thinking about food as health, then I think we wouldn't have corn dogs as lunch.

We tend to think of emotions as just feelings.

And the article was called As We May Think.

We think of it as a compact urban cell.

Now, we normally think of Tibet as a highland.

And that is, we think of every being as familiar, as family.

We think of it as maybe too silly, too unnecessary.

So obviously when we think about nonverbal behavior, or body language but we call it nonverbals as social scientists it's language, so we think about communication.

And we don't have a birthright to just use that up as fast as we are, I think.

One, it's diverse. We think about the world in all the ways that we experience it. We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinesthetically.

I'm going to try and explain why it is that perhaps we don't understand as much as we think we do.

We can think of ourselves as kind of a noisy channel.

We have to think again about light as a default solution.

We need to think of others as members of our kin, and we need forgiveness.

We experience thunder thunder, thunder. Think, think, think.

And that's going to be the good news dimension of what we need to think about as we think of power in the 21st century.

We think in abstract terms, we think in movement.

When we think about communication, we think about interactions.

And I'm doing her because I think we think of risk, at a conference like this, as a good thing.

We really could think of flu, then, as just a bad cold.

Why? Because they think about problems differently than we do as technologists.

But if we think differently, I think that, in fact, we can have cities that are not only zero emissions, but have unlimited possibilities as well.

But we think of these tools as pointing outward, as windows and I'd just like to invite you to think of them as also turning inward and becoming mirrors.

Why do we have them? Well, as I said, we have them because we think maybe playfulness is important.

But we can also think about it as kind of a large organism.

No. Who do you think we should look at as our role model?

But I think, as a community, we still have a lot to learn.

The first wave of evolution is what we think of as Darwinian evolution.

As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.

So we normally think of programs as being complicated things that we build for very specific purposes.

We don't usually think of our kitchen as an electrical engineering lab or little kids as circuit designers, but maybe we should.

I think the answer is we should honor Feynman by getting as much baloney out of our own sandwiches as we can.

But we need to think broad scale. We need to think globally.

So, I would suggest that we don't think intelligence, we think replicators.

And I think that as we look at culture, we kind of come to understand how we got to where we are.

When we say I, as when Rene Descartes said, I think therefore I am, we mean the head.

I think babies and children are actually more conscious than we are as adults.

Human beings have something that we might think of as a psychological immune system.

Here's a song we like to think of as the future anthem of TED.

I think that, as far as conflict prevention is concerned, we have common interests and many similar concepts.