Loading ...
Daniel M
Wouldn’t it be nice to know the answer to that question?
I try not to give too much credence to any definitions of laughter because I don’t want to limit it. However, I came across an explanation at the start of the summer that I can’t stop thinking about:
Laughter is the process by which the brain rids itself of things that it doesn’t want to be.
It seems a bit too simple at first glance, but it just works. Think about it. You laugh at America’s Funniest Home Videos because you don’t want to be kicked in the nuts. You laugh at puns because you don’t want to be confused by language any more. You laugh at Blue Collar Comedy Tour because you don’t want to be Larry the Cable Guy.
After watching this video of the rampant, shameless dishonesty in the Texas Legislature, I couldn’t stop laughing. It doesn’t change the substance of any political debate, but it is something that I never want to think about again. I guess I’ll just laugh instead.
For the record, I would not be surprised if other states have similar problems. I’ll be pleasantly surprised if my pathetic state is free from such foolishness. Don’t get me wrong, I love Texas. It’s one of my favorite countries. That’s not my point.
Some of my friends complained that this view was unnecessarily cruel. Perhaps they’re right, but I think that the beauty of comedy lies in its cruelty. You watch the world with a sideways glance and quietly catalog everything that doesn’t seem to add up. You laugh away every injustice, and then you look into the mirror and laugh at yourself for thinking that you have a right to judge injustice. You go spelunking into your soul and find the deepest, darkest demons you can dredge up. Most people stop looking around the crapper.
Sure, it may be cruel, and it’s probably a bit harsh, but what are you going to do instead? I’m selling all the catharsis of crying with none of the tears.
But it’s quite possible that I’m wrong. I like to be challenged. Post counter-examples in the comments.
8 responses so far ↓
1 Ben Dubroc // Sep 30, 2007 at 4:01 am
Hmm…what of laughter when one is happy? Have you not burst into joyful laughter before? Perhaps if you saw joy as absurd and in reality just a prelude to pain, well then maybe that would follow your definition.
Hey, just trying to make it work for you.
Me, I enjoy laughing simply when having a good time. And I think/hope that my brain is not trying to rid me of the good times and happiness. That would make us inherently self-destructive beings, wouldn’t it? Although doomed to the grave, we also tend to procreate, so I don’t think that we are, as humans, purely about self-destruction. It would be pretty sweet if our brains were okay with us being happy.
But I also enjoy dark humour.
So, you’re right, we can’t really limit laughter with our semantics.
2 Numeraphile // Sep 30, 2007 at 12:36 pm
This freaking blew my mind. They look like children scrambling for Easter eggs….Easter eggs that control the lives of my gunslinging neighbors. My guess is that Louisiana politicians are WAY more corrupt, just subtly so.
When I first heard this definition of laughter it kinda blew my mind. I remember one time in PE when we were sharing the gym with the school dancers and one of them fell. This guy laughed at her and the teacher called him out. But really, I found it funny, too. I started thinking why sadistic things like that were funny. Why is America’s Funniest Home Videos funny? Because we’re relieved that we’re not those people, perhaps? Makes sense to me.
Oh, sometimes you laugh because people tickle you. Loophole?
3 Meredith // Oct 1, 2007 at 4:41 pm
I’ve heard that laughter (and other traits particular to humans, like love) are actually evolutionary… I found this article:
http://cedros.globat.com/~thebrites.org/News/Laughter.html
It doesn’t really give a reason for laugher except that early man that laughed more adapted better to societal pressures and had better health. But it’s still pretty interesting…
“Evolutionary social anthropologists now know that World War II was won largely because the Allies had a better sense of humor than the Nazis and Imperial Japan.”
4 Daniel M // Oct 2, 2007 at 2:57 am
I don’t know, Ben. I’m not sure that I ever laugh out of sheer joy. I can think of several times when I have laughed in triumph, but to be honest these have only been while considering other’s failures or considering my own conquered shortcomings. It’s possible that I am just not thinking of anything that applies, and it’s also possible that I am just a broken human being. You are talking to the same person who spent a sizable portion of his summer trying to cry because he couldn’t remember the last time that he had done it.
Until I read some more opinions, I’ll just say that this definition only applies to certain instances and not waste any more time thinking about it.
5 Daniel M // Oct 2, 2007 at 2:58 am
Nice loophole with the tickling, Dustin.
That seems to be a completely separate affair.
6 Daniel M // Oct 2, 2007 at 3:10 am
I like the evolution line of thought, Meredith. In theory there could have been one pre-human that laughed with his companions when his companion was eaten by a sabre-tooth tiger and one that paid it little heed. I can see the bores getting gored shortly thereafter.
Plus, witty people are uber-attractive. Who wouldn’t want to have their babies?
I was kind of disappointed by the article you linked to, though. I would have liked to have seen that WWII quote substantiated. Clearly, there were more factors at play than merely humor. Silly Brites.
There’s probably an article somewhere on the internet that tells me how Charlie Chaplin helped the allies win, but it’s far too late for me to find it.
7 Cameron // Nov 2, 2007 at 12:54 am
Let’s look at this a different way. If laughter is the process by which the brain rids itself of things it doesn’t want to be, then why are there so many things that we don’t want to be that we don’t laugh at? Surely we don’t want to be subject of tragedies that we see on TV or read in books, but we don’t laugh at them. We don’t want to be crappy comedians, but we don’t laugh at those either. Does that say something about that alleged definition of laughter, or about whether our brain wants to get rid of those thoughts?
Also, Daniel, didn’t you tell me that laughter from getting tickled is a release of nervous energy? Does that mean that laughter could be the release of many types built up thoughts or pent-up energy?
8 Daniel M // Nov 4, 2007 at 3:35 am
Good objections, Cam.
Clearly, the brain doesn’t always let go of things that it doesn’t want to be with laughter. It would be distasteful to make 9/11 jokes, but perhaps this is because, on a deeper level, as much as we might want to, we know that it’s not right to not feel bad about 9/11 yet.
As for the bubonic plaque, laugh it up.
Also, I’m forced to wonder if crying works along similar lines. Perhaps it makes you let go of negative energy as well. We all know that crying and laughing are related. To quote Regina Spektor, You can both laugh until you cry, and cry until you laugh. Perhaps one is just a more pleasant version of the other?
I’m tired of thinking about this.
Leave a Comment