Home > Miscellaneous Articles > Humour

Humour What people find funny varies from individual to individual and whilst some people find slapstick and people slipping on a banana skin funny, it leaves other people cold. Doctors have found that some people who have had strokes lose their sense of humour. This is from Neurology World: "A small part of the frontal lobes appears critical to our ability to recognize a joke,'' said Dean Shibata of the University of Rochester School of Medicine. Although the purpose of humor and laughter is still largely unknown despite 2000 years of speculation, having a sense of humor is a key part of our personalities and it can play a powerful role in balancing negative emotions, such as fear,'' he said. Humour usually involves some kind of context switch. For example a pun is taking a phrase and switching its context by using a word in a different way: Baking Blondes One day 2 blondes walked into a tanning salon. One blonde said, " A tan for 2 please!" The cashier said, " Ok," filled out a form for them and asked, "are you two sisters?" They chuckled and replied, "No, we aren't even Catholic." Similarly, this is a context switch where the result isn't what was expected: The Exam A student comes to a young professor's office hours. She glances down the hall, closes his door, kneels pleadingly. "I would do anything to pass this exam." She leans closer to him, flips back her hair, gazes meaningfully into his eyes. "I mean..." she whispers, "...I would do... anything!!!" He returns her gaze. "Anything???" "Yes,... Anything!!!" His voice turns to a whisper. "Would you... .. .. .. .. study???" I've often noticed that sceptics have a different sense of humour to me. A look at any sceptic web site will show that, if there is humour, it doesn't really do a context switch. It’s more akin to the slipping on a banana skin humour or, more usually, simply ridicule of those who think differently to them. This relates to the item above, that a stroke can change a person’s sense of humour. Sceptics have a different way of using their brain than other people. It’s as if they have part of their brain missing. Appreciating a context shift is seen as funny because although the information hasn't changed, it’s viewed in another way. I've mentioned before ('The Information Age') that the key to real understanding is not simply getting more information, but seeing the information you have in a different way. This is something that lateral thinkers do a lot, but sceptics are incapable of. This sounds absurd but there is actually evidence that backs this up, which I’ll examine later. On a related tack, this test was reportedly given by Microsoft to screen 200 applicants (presumably men) for one job: It’s a wild night. As you drive you see three people waiting at a bus stop: An elderly woman who looks as if she is about to die An old friend who once saved you life The woman of your dreams You only have room for one passenger. What do you do? I've seen this is slightly different formats but the basic idea is the same. It is supposed to test for lateral thinking, the ability to ‘think outside of the box’ to use current jargon. To my mind it reaffirms the fact that you can’t test for something you have no understanding of. The ‘correct' answer is: Give the keys to the old friend to take the lady to the hospital and himself onward, whilst you stay and get to know the woman of your dreams. Let’s look at the assumptions: The woman who looks like she is about to die may have been like that for some time. She may resent the idea that she should go to a hospital. (I've also heard the version that she only has one day to live. How are you supposed to know that fact?) Does the old friend have a driving licence? Can he drive? Do you have so much time that you can stop what You're doing and wait at a bus stop? Many people would be dumbstruck with the woman of their dreams. Why should she talk to you? She may resent being chatted up at a bus stop The idea here is the win-win situation but you can’t contrive this type of test to test for lateral thinking as, by definition, lateral thinking requires thinking outside of the given context. Otherwise it’s not lateral.