Park University Philosophy of Humor Discussion Questions
1.What are the key differences and contrasts in the four main theories of humor Morreall lists in Comic Relief? Your answer MUST be original and must discuss the ethical issues and/or comparisons between each theory. Answer all parts of the question in at least 3-4 substantive paragraphs.
2.In Unit 1, we discussed Grice’s Rules of Conversation. In your own words, list and briefly explain the theories, and discuss how humor can violate the rules. Answer all parts of the question in at least 3-4 substantive paragraphs.
3.We have discussed several humor theories. What type of humor do you personally most enjoy or prefer? Which theory or theories most relate(s) to your humor preferences? Why do you think you like this type of humor? Answer all parts of the question in at least 3-4 substantive paragraphs.
4.Martin (Psychology of Humor) lists several types of jokes or uses of humor. Choose two (2) of his examples and discuss which theory or theories they most reflect. DO NOT write an actual joke. Your answer must DESCRIBE the type(s) of humor, a pun, for example, and the theory or theories they might use.
here is the answer for the first question
At the point when individuals are asked what’s significant in their lives, they regularly notice humor. Couples posting the qualities they prize in their mates typically put “sense of humor” at or close to the top. Philosophers are worried about what is significant throughout everyday life, so two things are astonishing about the thing they have said about humor.
The first is the manner by which little they have said. From antiquated occasions to the twentieth century, the most that any remarkable rationalist expounded on chuckling or humor was a paper, and a couple lesser-referred to masterminds, for example, Frances Hutcheson and James Beattie composed that much. The word humor was not utilized in its present feeling of amusingness until the eighteenth century, we should note, thus conventional conversations were about chuckling or satire. The most that significant logicians like Plato, Hobbes, and Kant expounded on giggling or humor was a couple of passages inside a conversation of another point. Henri Bergson’s 1900 Laughter was the main book by a prominent rationalist on humor. Martian anthropologists looking at the measure of philosophical composition on humor with what has been composed on, say, equity, or even on Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance, may well infer that humor could be avoided with regards to human existence absent a lot of misfortune.
On the off chance that self-examination and abrupt greatness are excessive for chuckling, nor are they adequate for laughter. Hutcheson says that we can feel better than lower creatures without giggling, and that “some ingenuity in dogs and monkeys, which comes near to some of our own arts, very often makes us merry; whereas their duller actions in which they are much below us, are no matter of jest at all.” He additionally refers to instances of pity. A courteous fellow riding in a worn out mentor poor people in the road, for instance, will feel that he is in an ideal situation than they, yet such sentiments are probably not going to delight him. In such circumstances, “we are in greater danger of weeping than laughing.”
To these counterexamples to the Superiority Theory we could add more. Now and again we chuckle when a comic person shows amazing abilities that we need. In the quiet motion pictures of Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd, and Buster Keaton, the saint is frequently caught in a circumstance where he looks damned. Yet, then, at that point he escapes with a cunning gymnastic trick that we would not have considered, significantly less had the option to perform. Snickering at such scenes doesn’t appear to necessitate that we contrast ourselves and the saint; and in the event that we do make such a correlation, we don’t get ourselves prevalent.
The Relief Theory is a hydraulic clarification in which laughter does in the sensory system what a pressing factor help valve does in a steam evaporator. The hypothesis was portrayed in Lord Shaftesbury’s 1709 exposition “An Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humor,” the main distribution wherein humor is utilized in its advanced feeling of entertainment factor. Researchers at the time realized that nerves associate the mind with the receptors and muscles, yet they believed that nerves conveyed “animal spirits”— gases and fluids like air and blood. John Locke (1690, Book 3, ch. 9, para.16), for example, portrays creature spirits as “fluid and subtile Matter, going through the Courses of the Nerves.”
Shaftesbury’s clarification of laughter is that it discharges creature spirits that have developed pressing factor inside the nerves.
The second record of humor that emerged in the eighteenth century to challenge the Superiority Theory was the Incongruity Theory. While the Superiority Theory says that the reason for giggling is sensations of predominance, and the Relief Theory says that it is the arrival of anxious energy, the Incongruity Theory says that it is the impression of something mixed up—something that disregards our psychological examples and assumptions. This methodology was taken by James Beattie, Immanuel Kant, Arthur Schopenhauer, Søren Kierkegaard, and numerous later logicians and clinicians. It is presently the predominant hypothesis of humor in way of thinking and brain research.