An attempt to actively discuss how humor works, and also I am trying out "Branch" so hey guys whats up.

Wooooow this is pretty cool. You just type stuff?? So I'm trying to think about how being ticklish fits into how laughter is involuntary. Also apparently there's a whole field of study on the development of humor.

Yeah, you just have a conversation I guess! I found out about it and thought this would be a good excuse to try it.

So what humor is, and my argument thus far is "Humor is a method for human minds to deal w/ dissonance. when something not only doesn't make sense but actively defies attempts to be figured out, whether that be a simple attempt (puns) or incredibly complex we find humor in things that unite seemingly impossible-to-unite things.

Is this a uniquely human thing? If so, why, and what happens when other creatures experience dissonance?

Also: What I know about ticklish fits - supposedly it's an automatic reaction to the feeling of being covered in bugs, and is a lot like panic. Not sure why laughing happens, though!

Aww jeeze, I dont think I have much to add beyond what Greggo already said, but maybe our laughing has something to do with our ability to assess threats? Like, with tickling your brain is going "Holy Shit Im Covered In Bugs" but you know its not bugs so youve got all this panic energy that comes out as "Hahahahahaha"

I agree that humor is from dissonance (wikipedia says "incongruity" but it's basically the same thing), but I'm also trying to figure out the social aspects that even allow that dissonance and difference of fact vs. reality to occur. There must be a level of communication needed for two individuals to have the same reaction to an event, word, sentence, stimuli etc.

I know other species communicate, and many communicate very well, but humans seem to take it a step further. Enjoyment seems to differently expressed than humor. Many animals show enjoyment or contentment (cats purring, dogs wagging their tails), but I've never known about other species grasping anything similar to humor and "laughing."

I am not a "TV Tropes Guy" but something on it stuck with me: Enjoyment (and I would argue humor) comes from a mix of the routine and surprise. Total routine is cliche, total surprise is alienating.
tvtropes.org

So that sort of ties into why reactions are the same (and different): if two people experience the same thing, but put their own twist on it, they will find humor in it. This explains inside jokes.

I am willing to bet dolphins laugh, for what it's worth. There's lots of talk about their "emotional depth" and whatnot.

In response to Mr. Chalmers, do you think ticklishness is also social? Let's say person A tickles person B. A knows this isn't harming B and B knows they aren't being harmed other than some alarm and surprise. So instead of screaming/fight/flight or another panic response, B laughs. This is recognized by A as socially positive and even though it's uncomfortable for B, B doesn't get too terribly freaked out by panic stimuli. I guess it's like how you can't tickle yourself? It's like a social "everything is A'ok" response to something that would otherwise cause panic (like being covered in bugs)

Regarding animal laughing, this article says a lot but sure doesn't cite anything remotely concrete. wisegeek.com

I read that animal one too! I think there's a big difference between being happy or feeling excitement and finding something humorous. I certainly feel a difference? I've laughed as a kid just running around and interacting, but it wasn't as if it was a joke or "funny." I believe that animals playing can be excited and happy and have a depth of emotions, but is that actually funny? I won't limit animals to jokes, but it seems like humor is almost pre-meditated and can be crafted.

Also, if we want to get on a tangent: Babies laugh about 10x more than adults. Why do babies laugh so much?!

it might be that the idea that tickling is harmless fun is a social one? Cuz I know some people who will actually freak out Fight Or Flight mode when they get tickled

Maybe babies laugh so much because of that Routine/Suprise thing Greg was talking about? Theyve got this stable base of Mom/Dad/Whatever and everything else is a total mindblow for them

@Diana: because babies are fucking dumb as shit and don't understand anything ever. (about 60% serious; i mostly just think it's really funny to be aggressively mean re: the topic of babies (the dissonance: why would anyone ever be mean to a baby, they don't know no better (because they're dumb as shit)))

I'm still not convinced jokes, if not humor in total, is something any creatures besides humans have. I think maybe there's just processes humor uses that are purely higher-level thinking.

@Chris: I am one of those people, please never tickle me.

Yeah babies are just really excited with novelty and their entire life is new stuff so they cope by laughing instead of crying a lot. Probably because parents found laughing more endearing and were more likely to take care of cute laughing little manipulative babies than crying jerks.

I really agree humor is a almost completely human trait. I really like the idea of this theory: "The benign violation theory (BVT) predicts that humor occurs when three conditions are satisfied: 1) something threatens one’s sense of how the world “ought to be,” 2) the threatening situation seems benign, and 3) a person sees both interpretations at the same time" It requires a level of communication and understanding to see two different ideas at once

I mostly really like the Benign Violation Theory you just presented: that sounds super accurate to me, with a couple exceptions.

I have totally found something hilarious and simultaneously mindblowing, that changed my view on stuff entirely. So "benign" may not be the word, so much as "non-lethal"

The other thing is, I think a lot of humor also comes from creative affirmation of something that maybe hasn't been noticed. Observational comedy, I guess. This manages to combine the routine (the observed) with the surprising (the observation). It doesn't really threaten anything, even benignly: it just points out something you maybe didn't notice in a novel way.

Oh yeah! Observation and spreading of observation has to be a huge part of humor. Otherwise there'd be nothing new to "threaten" us.

There have been studies on the origin of laughter (just the physical laughter as a response to some stimuli) like this one: cosmosmagazine.com that say that laughter is a signal of enjoyment of some kind and that it's expressed in many animals and in humans.

But what I want to know is how the reaction to dissonance or "non-lethal" threatening situations or just novel observations became enjoyable or exciting to humans (as expressed through laughter). Why do we like it when things aren't the way they are supposed to be? Why do we enjoy that shift in perspective or creativity?

(ps. I gotta sleep soon)

"Why do we like it when things aren't the way they are supposed to be? Why do we enjoy that shift in perspective or creativity?"

Well we are getting way into my personal philosophy but I think we are, at an evolutionary level (and cosmic level and atomic level, all levels possible) predisposed toward progress. Survival instinct is often brought up as "the reason we do most things" and survival is great, but perhaps mostly in that it allows us to continue progress.

Define progress as you like, I guess. Branch has a char. limit, so I can't go TOO into my views of it.

also: go to bed! this will still be here.

Questions I don't want to forget:

Why is laughter contagious?
Endorphins from laughter as a positive feed-back loop for human social interaction.

((We may have to branch off of this discussion into another thread but I'd really like a definition of progress because I sort of oppose the idea that human history is about progress in a "everything is getting better and there's an apex of development" sort of way. If that's not your meaning, ignore that and please elaborate on your definition. ))

goodnight!