What Makes Something Funny?
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- funny
Dorian Gray
Hypocrisy Detector
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2002
- Messages
- 20,366
Interesting that you don't find puns funny, and you say that.
I think that the cliched puns are reflexive and simple, but that it takes a sophisticated level of intelligence to construct a good and new pun. Puns that are spontaneous are funny as well:
I had a girlfriend that swore she would never touch beer unless it came from a bottle. I said 'How uncanny!'
Not all humor involves pain, but if it doesn't, it involves something unexpected. Here's one with both:
What's the difference between Neil Armstrong and Michael Jackson? Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, but Michael Jackson molests little boys.
The unexpected humor often involves stream-of-consciousness delivery, like Stephen Wright's:
I bought some batteries, but they weren't included, so I had to buy them again.
And Jack Handey's:
It takes a big man to admit he's wrong, but it takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man.
epepke
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2003
- Messages
- 9,264
Dorian Gray said:
I tend to like jokes that go like this:
Q: How many Dadaists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: Fish!
Q: How is an elephant like a grape?
A: They're both purple, except for the elephant.
A priest, a rabbi, and a string walk into a bar. The bartender says, "What is this, some kind of a joke?"
However, all of these can be force-fit into the making-fun-of category, by declaring "joke-tellers" the category that is made fun of. Maneuvers like this seem to make it tautological to claim that all humor is based on discomfiting someone, real or imagined.
I would say that the sine qua non of humor is irreducible cognitive dissonance, and that humor is a reaction that involves giving up on trying to reduce the cognitive dissonance.
There are only five reasons why a joke is funny, and only five.
1. Because it is a pun
2. Because it is an exageration (big or small)
3. Because it is out of place (silly or ridiculous)
4. Because it is unexpected
5. Because it is a put down
1. Because it is a pun
2. Because it is an exageration (big or small)
3. Because it is out of place (silly or ridiculous)
4. Because it is unexpected
5. Because it is a put down
aerosolben
Evil Genius
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2001
- Messages
- 2,269
Many things that are not funny also meet some of these criteria.Christian said:
stamenflicker
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 869
This is an interesting topic... I tend to think about words and our understanding of them by figuring out what their opposite is-- most things have a good antithesis. But the opposite of funny is ????
1) Sad? No, the opposite of sad is "Happy"
2) Dull? Not really-- a better binary would be "lively" or something along those lines.
3) Boring? Can't go there either-- "Stimulating would be an appropriate opposite.
4) "Not funny, humorless, et. al." That is hardly an acceptable concept. It's like saying something is "not red." It tells us something, but not much at all.
What kind of things are descriptors without solid opposites? Colors, shapes, ????
Is the opposite of funny -- tragic or pain? I just don't know. Looking for feedback.
BTW-- I prefer puns too and humor that involves a language twist. Like:
Why is a man who invests all your money called a "broker?"
Have you ever imagined a world with no hypothetical situations?
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure that's true.
I once had a psyhic girlfriend but she broke up with me before we met.
You get the idea...
Flick
1) Sad? No, the opposite of sad is "Happy"
2) Dull? Not really-- a better binary would be "lively" or something along those lines.
3) Boring? Can't go there either-- "Stimulating would be an appropriate opposite.
4) "Not funny, humorless, et. al." That is hardly an acceptable concept. It's like saying something is "not red." It tells us something, but not much at all.
What kind of things are descriptors without solid opposites? Colors, shapes, ????
Is the opposite of funny -- tragic or pain? I just don't know. Looking for feedback.
BTW-- I prefer puns too and humor that involves a language twist. Like:
Why is a man who invests all your money called a "broker?"
Have you ever imagined a world with no hypothetical situations?
I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure that's true.
I once had a psyhic girlfriend but she broke up with me before we met.
You get the idea...
Flick
Ladewig
I lost an avatar bet.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2001
- Messages
- 28,828
Johnny Carson got a lot of mileage from the definition. He'd tell Abraham Lincoln assassination jokes and when the audience reacted poorly, he'd turn to Ed and say, "make a note, Ed, it's too soon for Lincoln jokes."
As for the clowns, I laugh when they all get out of that little car, but I don't think that is degrading.
The last time we got a blanket statement like this on this thread, it was Wrath with "all funny is pain". This turned out to be his personal opinion, based on his admittedly biased personal experience. So...Christian...would you like to trot out your evidence or sources for this? Would you like to add a simple "in my opinion" to the beginning of it? Or are you speaking ex cathedra?Christian said:
#1 may be covered by 3 or 4.
#2 may be covered by 3 or 4.
#3 seems that it must be covered by 4.
Your analysis also does not tell us what sort of exaggeration (#2) will be funny. It does not tell us what aspects, if out of place (#3), would be funny. It does not define unexpected (#4). It certainly does not explain why Wrath is pained by puns, whereas I enjoy them.
Your claim is, in my opinion, a pretty decent place to start looking at humor. It is not a place where we can claim this, and only this makes something funny.
Wrath of the Swarm
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2004
- Messages
- 1,855
It's a very old problem.
I can think of many things that are out of place without being funny, as well as things that are unexpected without being funny. So while those traits might be associated with humor, they can't explain humor.
The only constant attribute I can identify is that humorous situations must make us uncomfortable in some way.
I can think of many things that are out of place without being funny, as well as things that are unexpected without being funny. So while those traits might be associated with humor, they can't explain humor.
The only constant attribute I can identify is that humorous situations must make us uncomfortable in some way.
richardm
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2001
- Messages
- 9,248
Wrath of the Swarm said:
I wouldn't say it was a constant. I might suggest that in some cases a humorous situation makes us feel good because we're in a group of people laughing at the same thing. It gives us a nice social feeling.
If you watch a comedian on stage with just you in the audience, you may well laugh at his jokes. With an audience, you will tend to laugh all the more - the audience sort of eggs each other on.
To me, the biggest question of humor is "why these individual differences?" You don't like puns (or more precisely, find them painful), I love them. My sister loathes disparagement humor, but considers herself to have a very good sense of humor ("those things just aren't funny; they're mean!"....and btw, why is it that a solid majority of individuals report themselves as having a better-than-average sense of humor? In my classes, as many as 80% have claimed a better-than-average sense of humor, in anonymous surveys.) Some people love the Stooges, others hate them. Some "just don't get" Monty Python, or Lenny Bruce, or Jim Carrey, or...the list goes on, of course.Wrath of the Swarm said:
I designed a study (never ran it, sadly) that used the humor cue of limerick form to test inappropriate humor (as in "that's not funny, that's sick"), another to look at unexpected juxtapositions (e.g., Monty Python's "oh, molluscs! I thought you said bacon!") which, I would argue, don't involve discomfort in any way. (I suppose one could shoehorn a discomfort explanation to it...but I would have to be convinced.) In both cases, my own personal interest was in what sort of variability we would get between subjects...in other words...are there any truly universally funny things?
BTW--good point, RichardM; there has been quite a bit of study on the social facilitation of laughter, and of course comedians have known and exploited this effect very nicely...