What is the science behind
Comedy/Humor?
About: 3 Main Theories
The first theory is the superiority theory. The general idea is that a person laughs about misfortunes of others, because these misfortunes assert the person's superiority on the background of shortcomings of others. It was put forth by Plato and Aristotle, and was widely believed for a very long time. It was basically that we find things funny if it comes at the expense of others. Lots of things like playfully making fun of someone or laughing at a funny mistake are parts of this theory, but obviously there is a very thin line that some believe was crossed long ago. Many believe that now it leads to bullying and suppressing ideas.
The second is the relief theory. It says that that laughter is a homeostatic mechanism by which psychological tension is reduced. This was put forth by Sigmund Freud. This theory includes things like random jokes and other types of jokes that are used to lighten the mood or ease tensions. It isn't believed fully, but many people agree that it is a part of the main and true theory. It doesn't encompass everything, but it does fill a void that would be there without it.
The last major theory is the incongruity theory. This says that humor arises when things that do not normally go together replace logic and familiarity, like knock-knock jokes. This was put forth by a team of researchers and philosophers, and is considered to be the theory that covers the most. The majority of people who have tried answering what the science is behind comedy consider the answer to be a mixture of all three of these theories, but that the incongruity theory makes up the most of it.
3 Lines of argument:
1. Comedy is often used as a way to poke fun at someone or something, but recently is has come under fire for being "mean and offensive, a notion that has many people divided on the future of humor. In past generations’ times, humor and jokes could be aimed and about anyone on anything. Now that we live in a more sensitive society, people argue that comedians should be more sensitive to people that have been targeted in past humor. This argument fits in most with the superiority theory. They both claim that we laugh at the shortcomings of others because it makes us feel better about ourselves. In recent years, a lot of comedians have been catching a lot of problems for jokes they made in the past. Whether it be about minorities, or women, or people with disabilities, they are being held accountable for their past decisions. Some argue that they should be forgiven because of their apologies or history of helping people who actually are a group they’ve joked about., and others argue that they shouldn’t be forgiven and instead be “cancelled” because of their questionable history. Socrates said that the ridiculous was characterized by a display of self-ignorance. For Aristotle, we laugh at inferior or ugly individuals, because we feel a joy at feeling superior to them. Obviously, these lines of thought are not even remotely acceptable in today’s society, but the question becomes if we should punish people for thinking that way in a society where It was acceptable. People not only need to consider what happens to past comedians like Kevin Hart, but also new ones and what kind of content they will be putting out. Obviously, comedians and jokes are looked at differently nowadays, so while some people argue jokes should be more sensitive and more careful not to offend anyone, while others believe it should return to what it was.
2. Comedy has always been used as a way to help people deal with troubling or negative things happening in their lives, yet that dynamic seems to be changing now. This argument fits with the relief theory, which states that humor is used mainly to overcome sociocultural inhibitions and reveal suppressed desires. Relief Theory is also used in movies and plays we watch, especially plots that deal with thriller and adventure. It is a technique used like when an audience in a movie or play is experiencing high tensions, the plot will include comic relief at the right times. Humor may thus for example serve to facilitate relief of the tension caused by one's fears. In the past, it has been used as an escape where people can go to laugh out their problems and be more open to facing them when finished. Now, we see a record amount of people disrupting or walking out of comedy shows as soon as the subject turns to something they may not agree with. A major problem in the comedy world right now is they don’t know what they can and cannot joke about. In this argument, jokes were made as a way to release pent up emotions and feelings, but now it seems like jokes only seem to make those emotions worse. Things like awkward jokes, or saying funny things to "lighten the mood" have been around for such a long time and have helped people break the ice, feel better about mistakes, and helped in a bad situation.
3. Modern society can't decide whether comedy should be what it once was or if it should adapt to the current climate and be sensitive with jokes, making comedy - not the comedians themselves - something to be further looked in to. This argument ties mostly to the incongruity theory. The theory states that when we receive jokes from others, our minds and bodies are already anticipating what is going to happen and how it is going to end. But our minds find it funny when something different happens from what we predicted the outcome would be. This is the hardest question and the most popular theory. Jokes such as knock-knock jokes and off-the-cuff remarks are great examples of this theory, because what is said is almost completely different and what we expected. Comedians have to decide whether they want to adapt to the current society, where every joke they tell will be closely inspected, or if they want to stick with what worked. Since many people are split on this issue, there is not really a “right answer”. Comedians are comedians, that doesn’t change, but the real question is whether society should change their jokes, or their jokes should change society. Many think that if people could return to being able to "take a joke" it will better society and give them a thicker skin. On the other hand, many people think that people shouldn't have to feel oppressed or marginalized even a little bit when all they want to do is go out and laugh.
Comments
1. Recent generations have liked comedy because they never knew what it was like to be on the receiving end of those jokes. Now that we live in a more open and diverse society, people have a lot of shared experiences and don't find anything about the misfortunes of others funny. There needs to be a certain extent as to how far the jokes go.
2. Comedy always makes people feel better, especially when they are having a bad day. As they say, "laughter is the best medicine" and can truly lighten someone's day.But joking about things about people that they can't change is wrong, and makes people uncomfortable in a place where they just wanted to have a good time.
3. No way should comedy be changing. Jokes that have been found funny work and there's no reason comedians should have to change their jokes for a society that will judge their worth based solely on what little mistakes they might have made. People like Hart who have admitted their past mistakes and have apologized and gown to be a better person because of them should be forgiven.