I think this just felt too true to not share.
I found it on Facebook and I can’t give credit to the creator. Anybody?
(I’ve had this sort of conversation with a few friends.)
Tag: just
Laughter: The Mini BRAIN SCAN
It’s another installment in the HUMOR SERIES.
If you’re new here or late to the series, get started on these previous articles:
1 Intro: Laughing from birth
2. Step 1: Tickle Rats
3. What makes something funny may surprise you
4. Jokers ARE wild: Subversive Humor
How humor works like a mini BRAIN SCAN
(Secular) Biologist Robert Lynch, who also performs as a comedian, sees humor as an adaptive, learned trait; and one that helps us connect with others who share our values.
His theory about humor?
“You laugh because you believe it is true,” says Lynch, and his experiments seem back up his theory, at least partially.
A joke, in other words, is like a little brain scan: When we laugh, we reveal what’s inside us. -Robert Lynch
In an experiment Lynch conducted, a variety of people were video-recorded while watching an edgy comic who joked about gender inequality. The volunteers were then given a psychological test that measured their unconscious gender attitudes. Those with mid-20th century gender views of women being responsible for home and children and men bread-winning laughed harder at that joke than those with more progressive views.
In another experiment, people Lynch terms “self-deceivers” found much less humor in an entire joke reel, in general.
I’m guessing that because Lynch used this “self-deceivers” language to identify reluctant laughers, he probably laughs at just about everything. Naturally, if scientists are self-deceiving they are doing something wrong. Something unreasonable?
I’m betting that to Lynch “self-deceivers” are “other people”. Otherwise, he would term them “discerning” or “wise” or “judicious” or “pensive” or “still thinking about it” or maybe just “unsure”.
So, I wonder if he’s just a bit off the mark.
Could the phenomenon of less laughs be a combination of a few things he hasn’t accounted for?
• Could less laughter be a result of natural personality or temperament traits?
• Fewer habits of deep introspection?
• Previous experiences that predispose infrequent laughers to think quietly instead of giggle aloud?
• Or a mismatch in values? (What sorts of jokes were told? We don’t know because he doesn’t say.)
The subjectivity of laughter producing humor seems to be at play a bit more than his experiments can account for. And that’s no joke.
I do agree with Lynch on this point:
We can conceal our true opinions, but in the moment of unguarded laughter, we reveal our true preferences.
Lynch says that the trait of a sense of humor is desirable and its presence or lack thereof helps us select a mate: A sense of humor is always listed in the top five traits people look for when mate-hunting.
Plus, humor helps us bond with those in our group, or determine who’s outside our group. This does seem clear.
And lest we forget, (the non self-deceived?) Lynch likes to work the crowd at open mic comedy nights. Does this scientist have a formula?
Yes. Sort of. Basically.
Here’s how he does it:
He finds common ground and builds on it. First he works at locating something held in common. Then, he points out a shared opinion or value, and underscores something that rings true to listeners.
It might start with some simple commonality like the geographical location of the place, a sports team preference, or the clientele in attendance.
He’s also snarky. If you like that style you might be amused.
“It’s great to be in New York City again. The coral reef created by sinking subway cars off Manhattan has a 58% higher rate of stabbings than a natural reef.” (or something like that. blah blah blah…you can watch the video on his theory here.)
If I’m writing a joke, often what I do is I look at things that I think are true, that people tend not to admit to, or maybe reluctant to admit to, including myself. -Lynch
Of course, I don’t hold the similar belief that the reason for laughter happened ad hoc and by chance, as Robert Lynch contends. That idea seems more like a punchline to me.
“Why did the cave man laugh? I’ll tell you in ten million years…”
(yes that was mine)
Sure, we adapt using humor, and we always well, but I doubt the source of humor was landed on by sheer mistake or mutation + time. HA-but that’s a good one. You almost had me, Lynch!
What may be the case is something that isn’t so stupefyingly accidental or self-deceiving. Something reasonable.
Namely, that One beyond our comprehension designed and equipped us purposefully with a sense of humor and in a way that we can better socially bond in positive ways…because we inherently need each other.
In a future post, I will go a bit further and pose a kind of theory for the purpose of humor and the reason for laughter based on some work from different researchers and my own educational background.
The takeaway:
If you want to know what someone is really like and what they really think, pay attention to what and whom they laugh at. Laughter is a kind of brain scan.
And examine what makes you laugh.
Dig deeper and find out more about yourself and what needs improving.
I hope you’ve liked this series.
Tell me which has been your favorite post so far.
Come back for “funny friday” and the rest of the series!
xo
-Lisa
For the latest info on my humor related projects sign up here.
HUMOR SERIES: On Subversive Laughter-Jokers are Wild
Whether it’s an Episode of Saturday Night Live, a late night tv host monologue, a webisode, or humor website, one of the many uses of humor one is to prove a point. People who find themselves funny may often aspire to more elevated forms of comedy:
Satire, wit, or something that seems noble.
If not fully noble, then at least something useful for creating meaningful change.
And if not that, then a comic may just try for old fashion notoriety. But, plenty of people simply settle for infamy.
Cuss words, crude jokes, and whatnot. But, in an effort to avoid thorough banlality the aim might be satire.
In the dearth of well-formed, well-put, well-placed, and well-timed, first-rate satire, many hope their wild comedic jabs will do the trick. They don’t.
True and artful satire is really rare; just like true brilliance is rare.
sat•ire (sătˈīrˌ)
►
-
n.A literary work in which human vice or folly is attacked through irony, derision, or wit.
-
n.The branch of literature constituting such works. See Synonyms at caricature.
-
n.Irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose folly, vice, or stupidity.
On Satire
Besides that, the difference between satirical prowess and just being mean is more of a fine line. One that rests in the subjective ear of the hearer. Vary the audience and you have a flop. Get it right and you can have an impeachment.
I asked my friend Doug to elucidate us on some of the finer points of comic relief.
If any one put this sort of thing on the map, it was Shakespeare.
(Not Billy Crystall, Whoopi Goldberg, and Robin Williams…which was a fund raising thing.)
Either way, I’m soon out of my depth.
• So, what’s the point of (Shakespearean) COMIC RELIEF?
• How does it work, or not work.
• Does it work now?
A modern audience of non-English majors might not get Elizabethan wordplay…a lot of the problem is that people begin with the general idea that this is serious literature and therefore one is not supposed to laugh.
Not true. Sometimes it gets lost in translation.
While many think of comic relief as a literary ploy to give the audience a break from the latest dramatic event (a murder, beheading, or suicide etc), there is more to it.
For starters, says Doug, take the Fool in “King Lear.”
Cambridge poet and scholar Malcolm Guite asserts that, “Shakespeare, with a true understanding of the cross, always puts his greatest wisdom in the mouths of his fools.”
Throughout the early parts of the play the little fellow offers repeated jabs at Lear’s stupidity in attempting to step down from his throne but retain his power.
The idea of “royal retirement” amuses the Fool. Like a standup comedian with no “off” switch, he shoots out one-liners until several different people threaten to have him beaten.
He’s funny. He’s even funny in the howling storm when Lear begins to lose his mind and Edgar pretends to lose his and we do indeed need a break. But the humorous bait conceals a serious barb, both for the characters and the audience. The fool sees what the wise men miss.
Drawing on the common usage of court jester in that day, Shakespeare can deliver a message of great import.
Shakespeare here draws on the origins of the trade. Wealthy people in the medieval world sometimes kept mentally impaired people around because their antics amused their betters.
They could say or do anything and get away with it, basically, on the insanity defense.
Eventually a few very clever people figured out that such a role would allow them to engage in serious political critique without the usual inconveniences of getting exiled or sent to the Tower of London.
The Fool is such a double-dealer, offering a needed message disguised as “mere” comic relief.
Just as it happens today, comedy and the use of humor serves many purposes. Entertainment may be the first one, but a lot more may happen in the process.
In excavating the sites of Elizabethan theaters, archaeologists have found the shattered remains of pottery boxes into which theater patrons would drop their admission fee.
At the end of the night the company would smash the container – like a kid breaking his piggy-bank – and divvy up the night’s take. (This, by the way, is the origin of the term “box office.”)
This little factoid is a reminder that Shakespeare did not so much write for the ages as for the commercial stage. As a professional playwright he had to produce shows that people would pay to see.
His diverse audience wanted action, politics, poetry, and, yes, humor. But with each of these elements he did more than met the eye. His “comic relief” is like drinking sea water: It briefly relieves our thirst for wholeness only in order to make us crave the real thing even more.
It would seem that comic relief still has its place. Jokers ARE wild.
But, whether a comic gives the challenge due diligence is another question.
What’s been your favorite bit of satire, recently?
I hope you’re enjoying this series.
ox
-Lisa
Here are the other related articles.
1. (humor at birth)
2. (Humor studies: Step 1-Tickle Rats)
3. (On comedic distance-funny to whom?)
For the latest info on my humor related projects sign up here.
The Science and Spirituality of Humor [SERIES]: Is Humor a HUMAN thing?
Read the 1st post of the humor series here. 
Is humor human?
Do animals laugh and why should we care?
One of the first things that comes up when you start to study what people find funny, and why they do, is the issue of purpose.
“What’s it all for?”
And when you start asking those questions invariably you need to see if humor is a uniquely human quality or if other creatures have some of it too and why might they.
Some animals experience emotions in ways humans do. Anger, pleasure, fear, and sorrow are a few commonalities.
For instance, pachyderms express grief at the death of a member of their parade. House cats don’t give a crap about the death of anyone (usually), but they are certainly spiteful on par with the cunning and potency of humans.
So why not the emotion of humor…?
It turns out that science has tried to measure that. The results, in my opinion, are mixed and even a bit unsavory. But, I’ll get to that in a minute.
Noises of Play
Plebeian anecdotes of laughing dogs or snickering nonhuman primates circulate and seem to indicate that something akin to genuine laughter or maybe some sort of sense of humor could be at work. Yes?
For a number of years scientists have discerned what seems to be jolly noises coming from chimps at play. These sounds mimic the intonations of young children at play and keg parties.
And then there’s the business of rodents.
Rats, actually.
I told you it would get unsavory.
Laughter in the Lab
Apparently, scientists can get grant money to tickle rats.
You heard me right.
See, if they just use the phrase “heterospecific hand play” on their proposal, a grant check comes in the mail.
The phrase sounds sophisticated and science-y, and no one in the grant issuing department considers it perverted.
With grant money in hand, scientists use their other hand and go about tickling rats of different ages, in different settings, at different times, and sometimes (I’m guessing) on the couch near a cozy fire in the fireplace and atmospheric candlelight as Barry White music plays softly in the background. It’s all very clinical.
The Results
Older (married?) rats don’t seem to respond, but juvenile rats, foolish to the wiles of scientists, make high frequency chirping sounds as they encounter “heterospecific hand play”.
The sounds are somewhat comparable to staccato laughing of human children at play. Human children playing but also gnawing at garbage in a dumpster, perhaps. Or, perhaps the panicked sounds of high anxiety.
The strange result is that the young rats then seek out the human that tickled him or her for plenty more of the same. (This convinces the scientists that the impressionable rats are enjoying the interaction and not developing strange and unhealthy co-dependency issues sourced in dubious psychologically damaging tickle abuse.)
In fact, the rats grow closer to their ticklers socially, and perhaps hope for an engagement ring one day.
I’d also like to note that so far I’m finding no such experiments are conducted where rats are allowed to tickle scientists and whether the rats or the scientists laugh because of it. This seems like a gross oversight. It would also be interesting to know if the scientists found the rats attractive in different outfits and vice versa. Or, maybe not.
I don’t know whether to be proud of the these discoveries or terribly embarrassed for the scientists.
The Purpose of Humor
What laughter–or its nonhuman equivalent–appears to do in the animal world is to build social bridges through appropriate positive interactions.
Positive, mutual, social responses build bonds, trust, and cooperation. Everyone wins.
Rats, dogs, and chimps are all highly social creatures, and maybe this is needed for things to go well.
The exception is the occasional instance where rats eat their young.
• This seems to indicate that some tickling just isn’t funny, or that kids can be a real pain sometimes.
Humor and Spirituality
I’m proposing that humor remains invaluable to human flourishing, not just for healthy social bonding, but ultimately for the vital element of identity, and this is the territory of spirituality. We’ll get into the reasons of why more deeply as we continue.
Like those laughing animals, humans are social too. When they are not socially healthy, bad things happen: murder, sexual assault, arson, random violence, and strange behavior on Facebook.
But, unlike animals, scientific experiments show that humans have three main reasons for laughing besides a tickling episode, according to work by psychologist Diana Szameitat. Here are the other three:
1. Laughing in joy.
2. Taunting laughter. Laughing at someone in contempt.
3. Schadenfreude laughter. Laughing at another person who encounters something unfortunate, like falling down. The Germans have just the precise word for it too, which is not surprising.
I think there are several more, but that’s for future posts.
Funny Things are Seriously Complex
Humor and laughter comprise a whole system of complex emotions for humans, compared to animals.
And as anyone who’s been tickled for too long knows, sometimes humor includes mixed emotions like discomfort, fear, apprehension, or wanting to slap a scientist for creepy “heterospecific hand play”.
We’ll learn much more about the complexity of humor as we go. In future posts I’ll also cover the dubious reputation of humor among early philosophers, the fascinating aspect of humorous sarcasm and mockery, plus the latest compelling humor research theory that explains both the good and bad reasons why we find things funny.
Anything for a laugh.
To sum up, humor is both uniquely human and shared among certain other creatures in a lesser way.
Read the next one in the series here.
Are you enjoying this series? I’d love to know.
Thanks for reading!
-Lisa
Upcoming SERIES: The Science & Spirituality of HUMOR
No, I’m not kidding.
This is happening.
So, what makes something funny?
There’s a whole science behind finding this out. It’s not merely about personal taste.
The science behind might be the butt of the joke, in some ways, but my new series will provoke thought and attempt to answer some questions:
How and why do we find things funny?
What difference can it make to our development and well-being?
How you can get 16-31% funnier.
Why humor helps heal, learn, and grow.
Why and when does humor fail to be funny? and does it matter?
How to develop your sense of humor so unfunny people won’t drive you crazy.
Does a sense of humor reflect something of God in us?
Why do legions of cat video exist?
and plenty of other things.
So far, in researching the science of humor I’ve learned that even babies find things funny.
Okay. That was not a surprise.
I already knew this. For instance, when I would rip junk mail in front of my 6 month old daughter, she’d go into hysteric fits of hilarious laughter. I kept ripping and she kept laughing. Later, when she could talk she mentioned that it wasn’t because of the paper at all. She was thinking of something else that was funny from earlier in the day.
Something filthy.
There’s a biological reason for babies laughing at paper shredding…
The unformulated concept object permanence?
Maybe, or maybe they are just thinking of something filthy.
So, yes, I am starting with baby steps, as it were.
FACT: Humor is universal and germane to humans even at infancy.
(Picture Stone Philips saying that.)
So, yes. In the end, so to speak, babies think peek-a-boo is funny because they are super immature. (like this baby)
More in the SERIES here–
Thanks for reading.
xo,
-L
For the latest info on my humor related projects sign up here.