Thoughts on Descartes

In article 124, laughter is described as a bodily reaction to a rush of blood plus an increase of air in the lungs which leads to explosive laughter (Descartes 21-22). Meanwhile, article 125 explains that laughter stems from joy and awe or joy and hatred. For example, being pleasantly surprised or being at awe of the level of hatred you have towards something. Joy does not stem from a topic, rather it’s an involuntary reaction of excess air and blood in lungs (Descartes 22). This associates laughter with a violent image of death and survival. Essentially, laughter is a necessity for survival 

In article 126, Descartes states that, in laughter there is either admiration and joy or wonder and joy; which increases blood flow that causes an inflation in the lungs. Additionally, too much joy causes a violent reaction- laughter. Another cause for an abundance of laughter may be liquor, an increase of liquor causes thick blood to be rushed by hatred to the heart. The fluctuation of blood and oxygen causes an “adrenaline crash”; after the explosive laughter, an individual will immediately feel sadness (Descartes 22-23).

Then, article 127 explains that laughter stems from anger and annoyance at unfair treatment. For example, laughing due to intense anger you feel because of an unfair situation. Essentially, it's the contrast between an individual’s emotion and their physical reaction. Additionally, it can be caused by the intense joy of not being harmed by the “evil”; the “evil” is incapable of harming the individual (Descartes 23). An example of this is Irby not allowing herself to be hurt by others by making self-deprecating jokes. Irby is taking the power back from negative words that are supposed to cause pain, but because she deconstructs its meaning, the words no longer cause her any harm. 

Afterwards, article 178 discusses the foundation of scorn. Scorn is rejecting something because it’s considered worthless. Descartes explains that joy and hatred create scorn because the person did something “evil” or has “evil” in themselves; an individual hates this “evil” so they believe that the “evil person” deserves the negative action/ situation that occurred (Descartes 24) The idea of “an evil person” is generally subjective because it’s based on an individual's perception of good morals; it may also be seen as flaws in others. This raises the question: is someone “evil” or their action is “evil” because you see a flaw in them that you possess? Essentially, an individual hates that they used to think like the “evil person” or still do.

In article 179, an individual that is not able-bodied tends to mock others the most because they desire to see others degraded (Descartes 24). Descartes' definition of mockery aligns somewhat with the concept of karma. This parallels David and Peg mocking others' ignorance, which highlights the importance of intention because in the end, Peg gives thanks to those that helped them. While some people were justly mocked for their blatant disrespect, others seem to solely be ignorant with good intentions. Therefore, should all ignorant people be mocked or just the ones with ill-intentions?

In Article 180, Descartes explains that the purpose of ridicule is to make an individual aware of their vices and that by not laughing you are demonstrating restraint and virtue. By this definition, ridiculing is viewed as good and, to an extent, virtuous. (Descartes 24). Lastly, article 181, explains that an individual can laugh at a jest as long as they are not the ones jesting. If an individual laughs at a jest they made, it ruins its intention (Descartes 25).