Framing the Ethical Boundaries of Humor
-
David Poplar
Abstract
Humor is unlike other forms of communication because its content is not meant literally. Like acts of play, humor is not intended to be taken at face value. As a consequence, the assumptions and rules that govern normal conversation do not apply. Humor therefore depends upon both the speaker and the audience fully understanding that what was communicated should be treated in this unique way. The play frame refers to this shared understanding about the nature of the communication. Analyzing whether a communication falls within the play frame may help us better understand not only whether the communication can be deemed non-serious or serious, but also whether it can be treated uniquely as merely the speaker’s attempt at play or as a typical instance of literal speech for which the speaker can be deemed ethically responsible.
© 2022 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Titelei
- Table of Contents
- The Excess of Moderation: Clement of Alexandria against Laughter
- Toward Moral Sublimity: Elements of a Theory of Humor
- Truth and Autobiography in Stand-up Comedy and the Genius of Doug Stanhope
- The Visual Rhetoric of Monty Python’s Flying Circus: Fulfilling Noël Carroll’s Hopes for a Classification of Sight Gags
- Framing the Ethical Boundaries of Humor
- Is Laughing at Morally Oppressive Jokes Like Being Disgusted by Phony Dog Feces? An Analysis of Belief and Alief in the Context of Questionable Humor
- What Is Wrong with Laughing? Faulty Laughter as a Case of Negligent Omission
- Discussion: Short Article for Further Debate
- Mind the Gap! On Dmitri Nikulin’s Case for the Affectionate Laughter of Agnes Heller
- Laughter’s Affect and Effects
- Aunt Eggs Chicken (E.C.) Dents
- The Robot Sol Explains Laughter to His Android Brethren
- Philosophical Satire and Criticism
- Of Coconuts and Beings: Peculiarities of a Diophantine Problem
- Humor in Philosophy Education
- Has Higher Education Fallen Down the Rabbit Hole?
- Symposium
- Critics
- An Infallible Assassin: On Lydia Amir’s The Legacy of Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Laughter
- Philosophical Laughter: Divine or Annihilating?
- Reflections on Lydia Amir’s The Legacy of Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Laughter
- Author’s Response
- “The Good Life” Is Not Necessarily “Good,” Nor Is Humor Always Funny
- Book Reviews
- Call for Papers, Book Reviews, Guidelines
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Titelei
- Table of Contents
- The Excess of Moderation: Clement of Alexandria against Laughter
- Toward Moral Sublimity: Elements of a Theory of Humor
- Truth and Autobiography in Stand-up Comedy and the Genius of Doug Stanhope
- The Visual Rhetoric of Monty Python’s Flying Circus: Fulfilling Noël Carroll’s Hopes for a Classification of Sight Gags
- Framing the Ethical Boundaries of Humor
- Is Laughing at Morally Oppressive Jokes Like Being Disgusted by Phony Dog Feces? An Analysis of Belief and Alief in the Context of Questionable Humor
- What Is Wrong with Laughing? Faulty Laughter as a Case of Negligent Omission
- Discussion: Short Article for Further Debate
- Mind the Gap! On Dmitri Nikulin’s Case for the Affectionate Laughter of Agnes Heller
- Laughter’s Affect and Effects
- Aunt Eggs Chicken (E.C.) Dents
- The Robot Sol Explains Laughter to His Android Brethren
- Philosophical Satire and Criticism
- Of Coconuts and Beings: Peculiarities of a Diophantine Problem
- Humor in Philosophy Education
- Has Higher Education Fallen Down the Rabbit Hole?
- Symposium
- Critics
- An Infallible Assassin: On Lydia Amir’s The Legacy of Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Laughter
- Philosophical Laughter: Divine or Annihilating?
- Reflections on Lydia Amir’s The Legacy of Nietzsche’s Philosophy of Laughter
- Author’s Response
- “The Good Life” Is Not Necessarily “Good,” Nor Is Humor Always Funny
- Book Reviews
- Call for Papers, Book Reviews, Guidelines
