If humor has so many benefits (i.e. positive feelings, conflict de-escalation, improving relationships, enhancing creativity, improving marketability, etc.) then why is it not studied as much? Clearly, humor has immense utility.
Perhaps it's because humor is a risky business? Failed attempts at humor can lead to unfavorable impressions. But isn't the consequences of failure imply the need to understand humor better?
To set some ground rules, what we find funny springs from our intuition. What springs from our intuition is what we accumulate through our own experiences. What is funny is a subjective and personal experience.
What I find funny may not be funny to other people. Yesterday, I laughed a lot. I had GPT3 cranking out quotes that I found funny. Here's one:
I did watch *The* Suicide Squad and I was entertained by the humor. Taika Waititi, a director that always makes me laugh, was in the movie! Although to my surprise, he wasn't the director. What is it about Waititi that he can generate so many laughs?
The movie was directed by James Gunn. He also directed Guardians of the Galaxy. Another entertaining movie in my book. Why are these two directors are funny and others aren't as much? What's their formula? imdb.com/name/nm0348181/
Surprise or incongruity is what makes words funny. A funny quote is when a comedian sets up the context that can be imagined and then conjures up a surprise that breaks the original expectation. It's not unlike a magic trick. Perhaps that's why magic is also entertaining.
It appeals to one's intuition of the familiar and then breaks that symmetry. To set up a surprise (and also horror) one has to prime the audience and then break that priming in a manner that makes obvious in a causal sense but is also unexpected.
Something funny begins by making sense and then ends by also making sense. It must be logically stitched together. This explains why good comedians are usually very intelligent people.
Humor is rich in semantics. It entangles the similar with the dissimilar. It leads from the familiar to the unexpected. It blends concepts that are conceptually incompatible. It exhibits the features of what makes humans generally intelligent.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Almost all models of cognition are metaphors. They are useful for humans to explain what goes on in the brain. But these models are insufficient for understanding how the brain works.
There are two kinds of scientific models. Descriptive models and generative models. A good example of this is the relationship between thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. The former is a descriptive model and the latter is a generative model.
A descriptive model informs its equations through experimental data. Effectively, they are a gross way to curve fit what is observed. A generative model however generates what is observed from the interaction of the parts of the system.
Repeat synonyms enough time, people will believe it is true! Some new suggested filler verbs to describe cognition.
But if you prefer the brain as a homeostatic system, then these filler verbs should be part of your vocabulary.
A problem though with the homeostatic system is that it is framed in terms of final behavior. It does not describe the generative mechanism. IMHO, the distributed consensus or the game theoretic formulation has greater appeal. deepmind.com/blog/article/E…
Some more GPT-3 generated quotes of wisdom. What is life? 1- Life is a series of untimely interruptions. 2- Life is a disease that can be transmitted by spitting. 3- Life is what happens to you while you are making other plans
4- Life is a series of one-way journeys with only two destinations: Where you started, and where you are now. 5- Life is a game. I don’t know how to play it. Nobody told me there were rules. 6- Life is a journey, a journey is a series of choices, choices determine destiny.
GPT-3 answers to 'what is time?'. 1- Time is what a clock measures; what a clock measures is not necessarily what your heart feels. 2 - You mean 'Time is'. 3- Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. 4- Never waste time; it's the stuff life is made of.
Is it not strange that for some, the significant events of history occurred in a virtual world? I actually wasn't aware of this posting, rather, I was aware when Linux was announced by Torvalds (which came 15 days later).
Social networking was primarily on Gopher at that time. Perhaps the only reason I was interested in Linus announcement was that I was taking an OS course at that time and we were playing around with Minix. I never was an OS aficionado though.
I left university shortly after and the corporate world. There I was actually cut off from the goings-on in the internet for about a year. It was only when I joined IBM did I got exposed to the WWW.
Some interesting GPT-3 quotes. 1- Economists have predicted nine out of the last five recessions. 2-The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. 3- When in doubt, try using a bigger hammer.
4-Insanity is a perfectly rational adjustment to an insane world. 5-Awe is the sense of wonder you feel when you see something that looks like it’s too big to be true. 6- To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target.
7- If at first you don’t succeed, destroy all evidence that you tried. 8-The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread. 9-The severity of the itch is inversely proportional to the ability to reach it.
More GPT-3 jokes. (1) Why did the Anarchist cross the road? To get to the chicken side of the free-range anarchist commune. (2) Why did the Atheist cross the road? There was no chicken, so he didn't. (3) Why did the Catholic cross the road? To get to the other confession.
(4) Why did the Evangelist cross the road? To witness to the chicken. (5) Why did the Hindu cross the road?
To get around the chicken. (6) Why did the Agnostic cross the road? To see whether the chicken was on the other side.
(7) Why did the Jihadist cross the road? To increase the body count on the other side. (8) Why did the physicist cross the road? To see what would happen. (9) Why did the theoretical physicist cross the road?
Because it was his field.