Quest for Meaning, Fall 2006

The Comic Self: Why Do We Laugh?

Why do we Laugh? Given the evidence is so strong that laughter is good for your health,
then the next step is to find out why we laugh. In addition to this, most of the things we do have a
purpose. So what is the purpose of laughter and why do we do it?
In laughing, the brain forces us to do two simultaneous things. One is visual consisting
of specific facial gestures. The second is a phonic one with the production of certain sound.
During exuberant laughter, there is a change in many parts of the body even the arm, leg and
trunk muscles.
There are three traditional theories that attempt to explain why we laugh and none of
them are only about jokes. While they still contain elements of what we call humor, it highlights
the distinction between a "joke" as such and myriad of "humorous situations that surround us".
The three traditional theories are the superiority theory, the incongruity theory and the relief
theory.

1. The superiority theory:

This is one of the oldest theories regarding the cause of laughter. It was first proposed by Plato.
Many other forms of this theory have been suggested since then.
This theory suggests that we laugh because a particular person or character has a defect or is at a
disadvantage. This occurs for example when a famous person such as Bill Gates gets a pie thrown
in his face.

Another theory by Jose Antonio Jaurega focuses on humans as social creatures. According to
Jaurega, we laugh every time we receive information through the sensory channels that breaks the
normal code of behaviour. These can be social codes or natural codes. Nature has designed us as
social creatures and provided an automatic response when the wrong thing is done so that we
signal to the person as well as to others around that something is wrong here.

Laughter is a pleasurable experience and again, according to this theory, the process of laughter
gives us a reward for providing this signal. Bad grammar or a pie in the face can also bring about
this response. This reinforces a feeling of superiority - an "I'm better than you are" response.
While laughter itself is a universal language, the social gaffs that cause laughter differ from one
society to another. So something that causes hilarity in one culture may not necessarily result in

1
the same response in another culture. One problem with this type of response is that it also
punishes the person who breaks the rule. While it may seem OK to signal that the rule is broken,
we may feel sorry for the person who makes a genuine mistake who is then embarrassed.

2. The incongruity theory:

This suggests that humour arises when the seemly and logical disappear and things that do not
normally go well together appear. The child who places a toy cat in the cat basket and heads off to
the vet can bring about intense laughter. This occurs when certain situations do not go well
together. It suggests that something doesn't belong here. Laughter, as a social signal warns others
about this.

Veatch's Theory of Humor:

Thomas Veatch's Theory of Humor states that in order for something to be perceived as
humorous, there are three elements that need to be present:

There is a perception that something is wrong - there is a violation of what should be.
There is a prevailing perception that the situation is, in fact, normal and okay.
Simultaneity Both A and B are present at the same time - "okay" and "not okay" are present in the
perceiver's mind at the same time, resulting in an incongruity. Tom Veatch defines humor by
saying, humor occurs when it seems that things are normal while at the same time something
seems wrong.

3. Relief theory:

The earlier theories do not address why feelings of superiority or incongruity should call forth
such an exuberant physical reaction. An advantage of the relief theory--proposed by Freud--is that
it at least tries to explain the causal link between humour and laughter.

When a joke is told, its initial part is the building of a climax, during which a tension is built in
the minds of the audience. The punch line, which is a sudden anti-climax, provides a sense of
relief to the audience. This sudden release of tension manifests itself in the form of laughter.

According to Freud, there are powerful censors in the mind that form unconscious barriers to
prevent us thinking about "forbidden thoughts". In this view, the laughable (ideally, a naughty

2
joke) liberates the laugher from inhibitions about forbidden thoughts and feelings. The result is a
discharge of nervous energy that distracts the inner censor from what is going on. Freud suggests
that the release of this energy is a pleasurable experience as demonstrated by the good feeling that
laughter provides.

Without a tool such as humor, our conscious mind would not allow us to talk or think about the
"forbidden" subject dealt within the joke. Freud regarded humour as a means of outwitting our
internal censor. We are allowed to indulge in forbidden thoughts if it is first disarmed in some
way. An insult may seem funny if it is first of all posed as a compliment. In addition, laughter has
the function of releasing nervous tension that results from thinking/talking about these
"forbidden" subjects.

Freud also suggested that jokes as such are usually short things with double meanings. This is to
fool the simple censors, who see only surface meanings and fail to penetrate the disguise of the
forbidden wishes. Freud's theories seem to work best for humorous aggression and sex related
jokes. The censorship theory explains why a joke is not so funny if you've heard it before. This is
because a new censor has been constructed, or an old one extended. Novelty is therefore a key
component in the telling of a joke that others consider "funny."

4. Laughter as social behaviour

A more recent theory comes from Robert Provine. Given the tendency for laughter to disappear in
the laboratory, he enlisted the aid of a number of undergraduates to wander public places and take
note of the behaviour of individuals involved in laughter. He found that most laughter was not in
response to jokes or stories. Only some 10 to 20 per cent followed anything remotely
recognisable as a punch line. A lot of laughter came in response to things such as "Gotta go now!"
a comment which by itself does not seem to immediately bring forth a stream of laughter. Only
10% of lines that caused laughter could be seen as anything close to funny.
Laughter in this respect has a social function and may act as a bond between individuals in a
group. This has been reinforced by studies of chimpanzees who exhibit a panting sound in
situations to those similar to where laughter in humans is created. Apes laugh during tickle type
games, as well as rough and tumble play.

While laughter can create bonding within a group, it can also be used in a way that laughs
at a person rather than with the person. In this case, the function of laughter is to force
some type of conformity to a social norm, or even to force an individual out of a group.