The basic humor process : a cognitive-shift theory and the case against incongruity

268 Pages·1998·5.71 MB·English

by  Latta

The Basic Humor Process
1749 If
I 1999
Humor Research 5
Editors
Victor Raskin
Mahadev Apte
Mouton de Gruyter
Berlin · New York
The Basic Humor Process
A Cognitive-Shift Theory
and the Case against Incongruity
by
Robert L. Latta
W
Mouton de Gruyter
DE
G
Berlin · New York 1999
Mouton de Gruyter (formerly Mouton, The Hague)
is a Division of Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin.
® Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the
ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.
Library of Congress - Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Latta, Robert L., 1945-
The basic humor process : a cognitive-shift theory and the
case against incongruity / by Robert L. Latta.
p. cm. — (Humor research ; 5)
Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index.
ISBN 3-11-016103-6 (hardcover : alk. paper)
I. Wit and humor - Psychological aspects. I. Title.
II. Series.
BF575.L3L35 1998
152.4'3-dc21 98-30868
CIP
Die Deutsche Bibliothek - Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Latta, Robert L.:
The basic humor process : a cognitive shift theory and the case
against incongruity / by Robert L. Latta. - Berlin ; New York :
Mouton de Gruyter, 1998
(Humor research ; 5)
ISBN 3-11-016103-6
© Copyright 1998 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co., D-10785 Berlin
All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this
book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechan-
ical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publisher.
Cover Design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin.
Printing: Druckerei Hildebrand, Berlin. - Binding: Lüderitz & Bauer, Berlin.
Printed in Germany.
To Professor Masuo Funaki of Bukkyö University
who has looked after me well
with many thanks to my friend and colleague
Professor Toshihiko Ogata
and, as always through the decades, my friend
Professor Stanley L. Paulson.
For comments on the manuscript, thanks are due to
Professor Victor Raskin and Professor Mahadev L. Apte.

Preface
This treatise presents and defends a new theory of humor, to be called "the-
ory L" in the following, after its author, for lack of a satisfactory descriptive
label. The reader is invited to call it what he or she likes. It is designed to
cover all examples of humor, of all types, and to provide the foundations for
a full account of the global (entire) phenomenon of humor. It is quite distinct
from any theory proposed previously, though it might be said that it has its
origins in Arthur Koestler's theory of humor.
Theory L and incongruity theory are contrary in the strict logical sense of
the term: if theory L is true, then all incongruity theories - all theories
which ought to be classified as such - are false, and if one or another incon-
gruity theory is true, then theory L is false, but it might be that both theory
L and all incongruity theories are false. Hence an effort is made to demon-
strate that incongruity theory in general, in all its forms, fails, that it comes
to nothing, that it represents a historic error comparable to the notion that
the earth is a flat, square disk, or - though this is more controversial - to the
notion that the mind and the body of a human being constitute two numeri-
cally distinct particulars.
The treatise is divided into four parts. Part 1 presents various preliminar-
ies, part 2 presents and defends theory L, part 3 defines incongruity theory
and argues against it, and part 4 further develops the themes of the first
three parts. Parts 1 and 2 proceed topic by topic, not theorist by theorist, as
a matter of course, and part 3 likewise, for the primary intention there is not
to make a case against the theories of certain particular theorists, but rather
to make one against a certain type of theory, which is to say against an en-
tire class of theories. Only chapter 12, on Kant and Koestler, which opens
part 4, proceeds theorist by theorist.
The style is impersonal throughout. It is hoped that this will not create the
impression that the author is full of haughty self-assurance. Any reader who
wishes to visit him will find him to be undogmatic, open-minded, and very
handsome.
Every thesis asserted is defended at one point or another or else asserted
as obvious, with the exception of a few minimalist suggestions in chapter 1,
section 9, introduced as such, concerning the problem of consciousness,
which go largely undefended for lack of space.
At most points, the pronouns "he," "him," and "his" are used in the tra-
ditional way to cover both the male and the female, simply for lack of a
viii Preface
graceful alternative. There is much to be said for the addition of three new
singular personal pronouns, nonspecific as to gender, to the English lan-
guage. They should be easy to pronounce, easy to recognize in speech and
writing, and unambiguous. "De," "der," and "ders," to rhyme with "she,"
"her," and "hers," would perhaps fill the bill nicely.
The spelling "premiss" is followed in preference to "premise" and the
construction "consists in" in preference to "consists of," at the urging
and suggestion respectively of the American philosopher Charles Sanders
Peirce.
Throughout, titles of works cited and headings from them appear in "up"
(capitalized) or "down" style according to the original.
An effort has been made to spell names and attribute fields of expertise
correctly. Perhaps it has failed here and there. If so, heartfelt apologies
wherever appropriate.
Finally, a word of guidance that applies especially to those passages
which constitute exercises in philosophy, and most especially to those
which constitute exercises in metaphysics (as a branch of philosophy): The
text means just precisely what it says, down to the last comma. It is not nec-
essary to make heroic leaps of imagination to hit on the correct interpreta-
tion, the intended meaning. The intended meaning is the straightforward
one.
Robert L. Latta
Bukkyo University
Murasakino, Kita-ku
Kyoto
Japan 603-8301
[email protected]
Contents
Preface vii
PARTI
Preliminaries 1
Chapter 1
The mystery of humor and sundry further matters 3
1. The mystery of humor 3
2. The anti-essentialist approach 4
3. Humor processes and the basic humor process 6
4. The expressions "a particular experience of humor," "an episode
of humor," "the experience of humor," and "humor" 7
5. Stimulus side and response side 8
6. Stimulus-side bias 9
7. The terms "laughter" and "amusement" 12
8. The subjective character of humor 14
9. The problem of consciousness 17
Chapter 2
The fundamental question of humor theory 28
1. A question which must wait: that of the descriptive definition of
humor 28
2. Peripheral cases 30
3. Further questions which must wait 33
4. Questions which will remain after the basic humor process has
been identified 34
PART 2
Theory L and reason to conclude it is true 35
Chapter 3
Theory L 37
1. The initial stage of the basic humor process 37
2. The mid-process transition 38
3. The final stage 41
4. Theory L in sum 44
χ Contents
5. Classification of the theory 44
6. Major implications 45
7. The major positive thesis of this treatise 49
Chapter 4
The laughter of humor, relaxation, and pleasure 50
1. Laughter and relaxation 50
2. Laughter and the expression of "relief' 55
3. Unrelaxation of the levels which must be posited: where it might
be supposed to originate 56
4. Laughter and the expression of pleasure 57
Chapter 5
The inapplicability of standard criticisms of "relief' theories 60
1. The straight-man level, the insider level, and the quasi straight-man
level 60
2. Morreall on "relief" theories 61
Chapter 6
The explanatory power of theory L 68
1. Analyses of examples 68
2. Theory L and the global phenomenon of humor 86
3. The unity and variety of the phenomenon of humor 95
4. Theory L and evolution 96
PART 3
Incongruity theory and reason to conclude it is unsound 99
Chapter 7
Incongruity theory and the concept of incongruity 101
1. The basic incongruity thesis, the ultimate incongruity thesis, and
the major negative thesis of this treatise 101
2. Theory L and incongruity theory 102
3. The dictionary definition of incongruity 103
4. McGhee's definition in terms of ridiculousness 105
5. Extended definitions 106
6. Restricted definitions 115
7. Total redefinitions 119
8. McGhee's formal definition 122
9. The definition to be used here 124