Theories Response

Compared to the other theories we read, Descartes, Spencer, and Freud are all far more interested in the physiological explanation for laughter. Laughter is a release of pressure (in one way or another) for each of them. This obsession with figuring out why laughter bubbles up in ones body is interesting given our knowledge of laughter through modern science now. Laughter and laughing increases our bonds with others because it release endorphins. Although Descartes states that laugher does not accompany the greatest joy—laughter actually releases joy and pleasure hormones. On that point, I wonder if children are included in his rationalization of laughter as not coming from joy. Would children laughing as they play on swings not count or (to bring it back to adulthood) I know plenty of people who laugh at the rush of joy and excitement that riding a roller coaster brings (even after they get past the wonder of riding it for the first time). I think for these theories to really work, you have to put a really restrictive definition on what counts as funny/humorous/worthy of laughter. I don’t think we can define it so simply: people find all different kinds of things funny—humor is subjective. 

I think perhaps the reason most of these theorist focus on laughing in scorn/hate is because it is laughter that is easy to find the origin for as opposed to just people being harmlessly silly. Additionally, from my life experience—societies sense of humor has been getting kinder and more empathetic (comedies from the 2000’s are borderline unwatchable). So, maybe people really were only laughing in mean ways before, but we are finding new ways to laugh and find humor. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Final Reflections

Principles of Uncertainty

Tyler Perry’s Madea