I’m rather fond of Benign Violation Theory, as interpreted by Robin Hanson. Basically, funny things are those that benefit people you’re sympathetic with (in particular, raising their social status) by violating existing social norms.
This suggests that humor is linked to a psychological adaptation for updating social norms for one’s coalition’s benefit. Laughing allows people to coordinate change of the norms (you don’t take seriously a norm that is a joke). Humor as art works as superstimulus for this adaptation.
I’m rather fond of Benign Violation Theory, as interpreted by Robin Hanson. Basically, funny things are those that benefit people you’re sympathetic with (in particular, raising their social status) by violating existing social norms.
I find this doubtful. I’ve attended a speech by Ann Coulter, and found some of her lines legitimately funny despite the fact that they were attacks on the status of groups I’m sympathetic to. This doesn’t just fail to fit the model, it seems flat out contradictory of it.
I don’t contest that, but they’re being violated to lower the status of groups I’m sympathetic to, rather than raising it. It’s not a benign violation.
Do you agree with the arguments, or are you sympathetic to people who advance those arguments? If so, you identify with the subgroup that attacks the norms, so it feels beneficial to you (no matter whether it actually is).
A theory I’ve heard that handles this more general class of observations is that laughter specifically marks simply “relief from potentially scary tension” (which covers a very wide class of surprises).
A snap in the forest plus a fluttering of birds… people freeze and look for tigers feeling scared… someone sees that it is a child playing a trick… laughs… everyone relaxes.
Humour is pain. Laughter is a reaction to pain. All jokes are pain, preferably someone else’s. It’s dead babies all the way down. I have thought long and hard for counterexamples.
“Circular reasoning works because circular reasoning fails because....” [arranged in an infinity sign]
I will not yell at Edmund Pevensie, “Who died and made you king?”
It bugs me when I can’t remember the entomology of a word
Come to the Dark Side, we have cookies
Coffee-based lifeform
B-flat, D-flat, and F walked into a bar. The bartender said, “We don’t serve minors.” So D-flat left, and B-flat and F had an open fifth between them.
Perky zombie! It’s a lovely day for BRAINS!
Contains almost 100% recycled organic biomass
Contains 100% recycled stellar debris
I make milk. What’s your superpower?
I was into cryonics before it was cool
I’m not pompous, I’m pedantic. There’s a difference. Let me explain it to you....
Red (written in blue) is the new blue (written in red).
Humor is partly about pain and partly about silliness. I’m not saying the list above is completely pain-free, but the pain element is pretty attenuated on the whole and I would say absent in some of them.
Also, do you have a theory about why only some pain is funny?
Does anyone know whether puns are considered painful in other cultures?
I’m rather fond of Benign Violation Theory, as interpreted by Robin Hanson. Basically, funny things are those that benefit people you’re sympathetic with (in particular, raising their social status) by violating existing social norms.
This suggests that humor is linked to a psychological adaptation for updating social norms for one’s coalition’s benefit. Laughing allows people to coordinate change of the norms (you don’t take seriously a norm that is a joke). Humor as art works as superstimulus for this adaptation.
I find this doubtful. I’ve attended a speech by Ann Coulter, and found some of her lines legitimately funny despite the fact that they were attacks on the status of groups I’m sympathetic to. This doesn’t just fail to fit the model, it seems flat out contradictory of it.
The norms that are thus violated are also norms of your in-group, otherwise they wouldn’t be considered norms.
I don’t contest that, but they’re being violated to lower the status of groups I’m sympathetic to, rather than raising it. It’s not a benign violation.
Do you agree with the arguments, or are you sympathetic to people who advance those arguments? If so, you identify with the subgroup that attacks the norms, so it feels beneficial to you (no matter whether it actually is).
No to both cases, but I still found them funny.
I think you just explained it better than Hanson.
(I read the Hanson piece when published, I didn’t just now re-read it)
I don’t find that convincing as it is insufficiently general: there are so many examples of humor that are difficult to fit into the model.
How does this fit? “If you see a fork in the road, take it.”
Does the humor in that piggyback on the social adaption, and how do you know which had precedence?
I definately think there are rules that might define the bounds of socially precarious humor, but that’s a specialization.
A theory I’ve heard that handles this more general class of observations is that laughter specifically marks simply “relief from potentially scary tension” (which covers a very wide class of surprises).
A snap in the forest plus a fluttering of birds… people freeze and look for tigers feeling scared… someone sees that it is a child playing a trick… laughs… everyone relaxes.
Humour is pain. Laughter is a reaction to pain. All jokes are pain, preferably someone else’s. It’s dead babies all the way down. I have thought long and hard for counterexamples.
These are badges/buttons:
“Circular reasoning works because circular reasoning fails because....” [arranged in an infinity sign]
I will not yell at Edmund Pevensie, “Who died and made you king?”
It bugs me when I can’t remember the entomology of a word
Come to the Dark Side, we have cookies
Coffee-based lifeform
B-flat, D-flat, and F walked into a bar. The bartender said, “We don’t serve minors.” So D-flat left, and B-flat and F had an open fifth between them.
Perky zombie! It’s a lovely day for BRAINS!
Contains almost 100% recycled organic biomass
Contains 100% recycled stellar debris
I make milk. What’s your superpower?
I was into cryonics before it was cool
I’m not pompous, I’m pedantic. There’s a difference. Let me explain it to you....
Red (written in blue) is the new blue (written in red).
Humor is partly about pain and partly about silliness. I’m not saying the list above is completely pain-free, but the pain element is pretty attenuated on the whole and I would say absent in some of them.
Also, do you have a theory about why only some pain is funny?
Does anyone know whether puns are considered painful in other cultures?
That’s funny.