Francois Tremblay

It seems that is what spirituality exists for. I guess we do define "pitiful" differently, though. But my initial point still stands : we don't find as many pitiful things funny as we do absurd things. My point about evolution was only to show why a sense of the absurd and wanting to acquire absurdities might arise.

elwoodblues

"But I would have prefered you just telling me instead of refering me to a book. For all I know you may be an idiot and the book may have one sentence on page 143 that talks about humor.
Not that I really suspect that, no offense intended."

I don't actually have a copy on me. It happens more than half-way through, after all the courtroom fun. It's in a zoo, and a few scenes immediately after. The idea is also explored (at least in the new, unedited version) through the rest of the book.

emphryio

Maybe instead of pitiful it is more correct to say:
That which does not work correctly that is not worth even taking into consideration. Either because it is such a unique thing that such a situation should arise(maybe in other words an absurdity), or because it is such as easy "thing", it's an understood that it should always work correctly(maybe in other words, it is pitiful if it doesn't work).

So call the above the pitiful and absurd?

Then say, "Man laughs when a wrong thing happens which is yet another example of how all existence is pitiful and/or absurd."

I'm not going out of my way to be pessimistic.
(In case it looks that way). What is, is.

So what about when you get tickled?

What is that about?
To me, I think your sense of touch is overloaded when someone moves their fingers back and forth quickly over your stomach. (Most people's sense of touch, that is).
I personally have the same sometimes with armpits.
And then with feet and the backs of my legs, if someone very lightly touches me there I find it ticklish. I think such light touches are also based on my sense of touch not being able make sense of the information (what's happening on the surface of my skin).
So "tickles" are a result of your sense of touch not being able to adequately describe to your brain sensory information.
Of course most people consider it wrong when your sense of touch can't work adequately.
Is it pitiful or absurd? I'd say definitely pitiful.

So my funny definition stands up to tickles.
I wish some people would offer various examples of humor. And let me see if I can either show or not show how they apply to my definition. I think I'll be having a little free time in the next week or so to come back and check if anybody's interested.
If not, Oh well.

Laurentius

Emphryio says:
On what grounds? I know there is a human urge to unify everything that seems particular into a higher and universal principle that governs a slice of reality. But it may only be a psychological need rather than an inference based on observation.
Perhaps I tend to grasp human matters too evolutionarily.

Here is a differnt approach:
Aristotle: contradictory things are comical.
Painless contradiction is comical. Lack of pain translates in ability of finding a way out of the contradiction. Laughter comforts, and I don't think it would if things seemed inherently pitiful. Contradictions do not provoke laughter if they appear to have no way out. Where there is no way out, pain settles, and tragedy starts. One may even say that it is tragedy that emhysize pitifulness, but tragedy clearly does the opposite.

But laughter has a social dimension too that is obvious in babies' smiling and laughing.

I have always related humor to wit, and considered irony a way of detaching myself from both the reality and my own subjectivity in order that I should not take things emotionally.
Laughter is caused by pitifulness only if reality at large seems pitiful to the laugher. My detachment from reality does not necessarily dwarfs it to the point where it becomes pitiful. It would unjustifiably flatter me.
AVE

[ February 16, 2002: Message edited by: Laurentius ]</p>

RandomGuy

Humor is whenever I fucking laugh. That's the norm. Deal with it.

Laurentius

Someone randomly said:
Um... Sorry, the paramedics have taken it as a psychotic spasm and locked you up in this institution. Deal with them.

emphryio

Laurentius I don't think you quite "got" what I said.
I think it may be hopeless to bother.
Well I'll go ahead and say a few things but I think this thread is about dead.

When I said, "it seems unlikely there could be mulitple different valid explanations", I wasn't asserting there definitely weren't. It just seems unlikely, look at quantum phsyics. Last I checked there were two completely different explanations that worked. (I'm not talking about something I know much about). Isn't there wave theory and something else? They both work. Does that mean scientists think, "Well, that's good we figured it out twice."?
No, it indicates there's probably something wrong or incomplete possibly with both theories. In the same vein I say, "It seems unlikely there both equally (and completely) correct."

Concerning your saying, "Laughter is caused by pitifulness only if reality at large is pitiful to the laugher.":
My whole point is people don't really understand why they laugh. They don't realize it is because they momentarily are taking into account the pitifulness of life.
You say, "Laughter comforts and I don't think it would if things seemed inherently pitiful."
My reply is the same as above. They aren't consiously realizing, "Hey, this is pitiful." They start to and then laugh instead. That is how it comforts.
Ahh, what's the point. Not a single person got it.

I wonder why not?
Am I an idiot? Do I have bad comm skills? Is understanding a thing like why people laugh of little importance? Is my idea too radical for people to wrap their minds around?

Well, I guess I'll put this aside for awhile. But I will bring it up in a year or two if I don't drop dead in the meantime. Maybe someone else with some new ideas will come along.

Laurentius

Emphryio, you sound too disappointed, really.
I don't think there is anyone who said that people actually plan to laugh - that laughter is basically a voluntary reaction. At least, I didn't - not even when I was talking about wit. That was only a comment upon my personal relation with humor, an interpretation of my reactions, knowing that laughter arises differently in different people, and it ocupies a slightly different part of every individual's personality. My final point was that I would not go as far as to consider laughter a natural reaction at reality's pitifulness just because I feel so (reactions, even instincts, can be selfeducated), especially since this theory would unjustifiably flatter me.

I agree that you need more qualified answers. Laughter being an involuntary reaction, an instinctive one, you will need either psychological arguments or anthropological ones. Anything else is likely to stand next to crap.

And maybe you are right to be unsatisfied with what you've got so far. I definitely agree that you should try again some other time. Related to this, my friends have a saying: "Put off for tomorrow what you have to do today - maybe it will no longer be necessary_ "

1sec

No, it's different.

"Don't put off for tomorrow what you can do today; put it off for thedayaftertomorrow - it may no longer be necessary."

Isn't really any cool site on humor so that sound ideas could be brought into discussion?

emphryio

I'm sorry if it seemed I was trying to "win" an argument. I never come to the secular web for that. I'm just a little annoyed that no one seems to truly even comprehend what I'm talking about.

I do think this subject is of importance, and I will put it off for today.
And I WILL still come back to it in the future.

Also I will look at your seemingly negative post as a result of your assuming I was just trying to "win" an argument by any means.

I'm not trying to win an argument/debate. Nor am I putting it aside because I secretly think I've "lost" and I need to "retreat".
But I admit, it apparently needs work.
I'll think about it for awhile. Maybe my idea is wrong?

Truly I had thought of this maybe half a year ago and hesitated to even bother putting it out there in the first place, because I doubted anyone would understand what I was trying to say.

Thanks to those few who thought it was of enough interest to bother with.