The Philosophy of Comedy | Henri Bergson

[@paulb7422]

This could also explain why people find satire such a compelling way to criticize certain things - if laughter is meant to call to attention things people are unaware of, then comedy that reveals certain negative or stagnant parts of society often is able to communicate its message clearly and broadly. Also I only just watched this video and I'm already seeing how Bergson's definition fits practically every comedic thing I come across - even a cursory glance at KZbin recommended videos. Great work as usual!

[@michaeltilley8708]

Conversely, Spinoza says that satire/irony can make us more comfortable with unacceptable circumstances, a sort of decoration of the prison cell. Perhaps there is a distinction between ‘A Modest Proposal’ and ‘The Daily Show’ that someone smarter than I can elucidate.

[@paulb7422]

@@michaeltilley8708 That's a really interesting observation, do you know where Spinoza talks about this?

[@michaeltilley8708]

@ Through the use of the geometrical method Spinoza opposes satire, but he does not directly denounce the satirist, nor does he condemn him, or argue that he should not be free to satirize whatever he likes. Rather, as Deleuze explains, Spinoza understands that “satire is everything that takes pleasure in powerlessness and distress of men, everything that feeds on accusations, on malice, on belittlement, on low interpretations, everything that breaks men’s spirits.”54 The free person thus rises above satire and related forms of protest in an effort to awaken and inspire others to affirm an ethics of love and joy.

[@michaeltilley8708]

@

[@michaeltilley8708]

@ and this from the Deleuze seminar on spinoza (admittedly he does not give clear citations and is a self-confessed philosophical buggerer!) “And of course, we laugh; I mean that the tyrant can laugh, the priest laughs, but, Spinoza said, in a page that I find very beautiful, “his laughter is that of satire, and the laughter of satire is a bad laugh.” Why? Because it is laughter which communicates sadness. One can mock nature; the laughter of satire is when I mock humans. I’m being ironic, a kind of irritating irony. I am making fun of humans. Satire is another way of saying that human nature is miserable. “Ah you see what the misery of human nature is!” This is the proposition of moral judgment: “What misery human nature has!” This could be the object of a sermon or the object of satire. And Spinoza, in some very beautiful texts, said: “What I’ve called an ethics is precisely the opposite of satire.”

[@anuel3780]

im sort of taken aback at how succient and applicable this is. all other comedy definitions/philosophy I've been exposed to have always been groanworthy because it's "oh it's this attribute that's in the type of comedy i do that i pretend is universal" (whether that's a classic element of surprise, or something more annoying like it's always about punching down), and i was honestly already bracing for this to be another bad one with his mention of "all comedy concerns what is human" (a lot of art discussions do this which annoys me because you can just redefine what is human). but reaching "where we should find life, instead we find mere matter", it actually just, worked. honestly could've stopped the video there, although the rest of the examples substantiate it excellently for the nuances in that. thanks for giving me a new definition of comedy, definitely want to read Laughter now :D

[@cloudbloom]

Did you mean to write "succinct" in that first sentence? I only ask because I've never seen "succient" before and I was befuddled by it🤔

[@anuel3780]

@@cloudbloom yes lol, it happens

[@cloudbloom]

@@anuel3780 no worries, just had to double check haha

[@saturninterrobang]

That succinct typo tripped me up but i felt that same way

[@iammraat3059]

Welcome to the Bergson club. You are in for an adventure of a lifetime

[@madukamagica]

Ig the mechanical angle also explains why low quality gifs/videos or bitcrushing images also gets such a rise outta me 🐜

[@davidegaruti2582]

Oh yeah absolutely ! It's also why montage can be fun :D It's a slap dash application of somenthing that would be more slow and lumbering in real life

[@CosetteTape]

LOUD = FUNNY because that's not what human loudness sounds like KZbin poop sentence mixing is funny because you're using a human voice like a Speak-N-Spell or a Casio keyboard.

[@doneyes]

Nice observation

[@JohnTravena]

Comedy is a great equalizer too. Fooling someone when they’re too serious is probably universally funny.

[@Flatscores]

The best KZbin channel on continental philosophy strikes again. This one is a classic too, got to love that Bergson is still remembered (& thanks to Deleuze for that). On that note, it would be interesting to research Deleuze's own relation to the comic, which appears to me different (perhaps more akin to a comic narrative archetype as the best model for his metaphysics). Also, got to love how Eco made the lack of philosophical accounts on comedy into a crime story.

[@BuffyandClyro]

Oddly enough, Zealandia Te Māra a Tāne- a wildlife refuge in Wellington, New Zealand- has a Bergson quote inscribed on the facade of the building visitors have to pass through to enter the refuge. It’s the only place outside of Deleuze’s books on film I’ve ever seen Bergson quoted

[@Liliquan]

I’ve seen Bergson quoted in many places. Bergson is still studied in Academia. Specifically in Process metaphysics.

[@JanJozefo]

Ohhhh. Do you recall what the quote is?

[@BuffyandClyro]

@@JanJozefo Yes, it's "The future can no longer be 'What is going to happen?' It is 'What are we going to do?'"

[@JanJozefo]

@BuffyandClyro thank you! Love it

[@anonUK]

Monty Python's Flying Circus (not the movies) often brought up Bergson.

[@michaell3105]

If I remember correctly, Aristotle's theory of comedy was also social, in that we laugh at that which is "lower" than us. But I think Bergson's perspective works even in that way, especially if you sprinkle in a little Nietzsche. Think of a villain's laughter. Often, it is because they feel they feel "higher" than their opponents, or that they know better, or they consider the status quo morals laughable in themselves. Often it is a higher ability to "exercise will" which they perceive. Stronger will = more agency, less mechanical. To know better than another, or to take glee in one's own doings, is celebrating one's own agency as greater. Anyway, great video! I highly recommend Whitley Kaufman's Seinfeld and the Comedic Vision.

[@erikfurudisatoko]

thank you Cuck, always instructive

[@guysome3263]

😂

[@ShadaOfAllThings]

the fact people are going to think you're insulting him at some point doing this is hilarious to me

[@eudaemonical]

A fine demonstration!

[@jaydenwilson9522]

Reminds me of the new CUK coin my friend is pushing now.....

[@florida_sucks]

the late capitalism of kpop is what radicalized me

[@BlueMorningStar]

Super interesting, thank you for this. It's an extremely seductive theory, and it's hard not to start seeing it everywhere in comedy. The place where I feel it starts to unravel is the hard binary opposition Bergson insists on between matter and life. Bergson's work is a reaction against the industrial revolution, which not only filled the world with factories and machines, but also "mechanized" human life in order to meet the demands of production. For example, Bergson is most famous for his writing about time, and his organic and flowing concept of time is designed as an antidote to the clock-based, infinitely divisible sort of time you'd get in the factory workplace (he famously got in a fight with Einstein about this, seeing general relativity as the zenith of that sort of rigid, clock-based time). Modern science teaches us that so much of what a human being is can be explained by matter and its deterministic interactions, and Bergson's great question is what space is left for the soul there. He enlists comedy to help him answer that question, and he turns laughter into a finely honed instrument that tells us where matter ends and true life begins. Where he really falls into error, however, is in his insistence that life and matter are fundamentally separate, and that life is always to be valorized over matter. If comedy's only purpose was to correct stupid errors where we fall into mechanical repetition, then why are those funny errors so damn memetic? Why do we insist on mimicking it again and again when someone says or does something silly? Why do we retell jokes to our friends? Why do we rewatch our favorite comedies again and again? We're clearly not just correcting an error of the human mechanism, but deriving pleasure from it, repeating it and reveling in it. The horror Bergson ultimately couldn't face is that when we engage in comedy, we WANT to be mechanistic; we crave the silliness and slapstick of steel, we aspire to the hilarity of the blessed machine.

[@bluepeteblue]

Great comment. I had a similar thought (i.e. the effects on industrialization on society and how that spawned a kind of humor that's discussed here). Sounds like you're familiar with Bergson? Is that true, his question about space for the soul?

[@cybershadow136]

I love YT because a comment discussing the intricacies of humor in continental philosophy can seamlessly end with a warhammer 40k reference

[@PhenomUprising]

I don't think he said it was the sole purpose, but the origin. (Even this video mentions that in the part about it being used sometimes for bad things like bullying).

[@Mauro-so9kv]

​@@PhenomUprising maybe (if he understood evolutionary biology like it is understood today) not even the origin but the reason why the spontaneous feature got selected

[@DanHarkins-jk9mi]

While I am nothing more than an amateur "enjoyer" of some philosophy, the whole "forcing the square peg of comedy into the round hole of the industrial revolution due to the period in time" is one of the most fascinating concepts I've ever had the pleasure of experiencing. I'm not even sure why. Anyway....bye!

[@cerumen]

My initial response was to try and challenge the premise, and I thought of examples of scenes where a character, usually known for their ignorance or incompetence - suddenly displays an uncharacteristic/improbable level of insight or physical prowess. But I can see how those examples could be interpreted to fit within Bergson’s framework. the audience themselves are made to seem comically mechanistic, by failing to account for the possibility that people (and certainly fictional “people” inhibiting a comedic work) can sometimes possess surprising depths to their character. Equally, sudden uncanny feats of intellectual or physical ability seem mechanistic, like flukes of nature or glitches in a machine - “A stopped clock is right twice a day”. It’s funny to find your thoughts pre-empted by someone who died like a hundred years ago.

[@jonasceikaCCK]

That's true! Bergson also makes a distinction between comic and witty utterances. A comic utterance makes us laugh at the person saying it, whereas a witty utterance makes us laugh at a third party or even ourselves. The turning of the joke on the audience could thus be described as falling in the domain of wit.

[@davidegaruti2582]

Oh yeah ! Humor can become meta if it's intellectual !

[@OrdonWolf]

I guess this also explains why we find animals acting like people so funny - the joke is on us for forgetting that animals can be lifelike!

[@maybepriyansh9193]

@@jonasceikaCCK This is so fascinating. another video on wit and its difference from comic please??????????

[@ismailtaskran9740]

It seems to me that in all these examples one rule of the world triumphs over the other unexpectedly. Like when Charlie Chaplin uses his tools on a person’s nose the “you should always perform this hasty job” rule in the context of his job triumphs over the rule of how you treat humans as opposed to machines in the bigger context. Bergson claims one rule is more lively/organic than the other. So if we find an example with two rules in equal level of liveliness that still creates a scenario we can find the shortcoming of his theory.

[@badlula17]

So glad you made a video on this, it's one of the philosophical questions I've spent most time thinking about and for some reason I never did any reasearch on it. Looking forward to getting my personal thories challenged!

[@georgesarreas5509]

I have never watched a definition of comedy. Never attempted to. All of the definitions of art i had seen were lacking, so when i saw you with this title... I felt like i had to. And I'm glad i did. This is the first time i decided tohear someone on talking about what comedy is (and im 30). And i walked away happy i did. Amazing video

[@JMcG92]

I really enjoyed this! One thing that came to mind is the fact that comediens will often refer to their performance as a "routine". A fittingly mechanical descriptor.

[@crab6084]

This deserves way more views. I havent been so excited to read a book in ages (:

[@jonasceikaCCK]

Thank you!

[@NguyenHa-cp3du]

Henry Ford and Taylor: "So... acting like automaton is funny eh? We gonna make these workers look real funny"

[@jumpingman6612]

Haha grim

[@SuperEdfish]

We laugh at things that frighten us. Laughing is a way of overcoming the frightening concept, of nullifying it. Bergson's theory can actually be explained based on that assumption. Because what can scare us more than death - the ultimate turning of life into matter? Laughing about it is laughing it off.

[@mynciee]

Thanks for influencing me to learn philosophy. I'm now studying for the LSAT and learned that many philosophy students do well with it. When I saw your upload I realized you helped me get there. Thanks again and I hope life is treating you well!

[@Brian-sh5ne]

I like this theory and I think it can have interesting examples that become more layered. For example, there have been memes lately about how every superhero movie these days includes a witticism like, "Well that just happened," after some ridiculous scene of action. Originally, such a line of dialogue would be poking fun at the rigid tropes and expectations of a superhero story, intending to evoke laughter at the genre and the audience who watches the genre. However, dialogue like that has become so overused in the genre that it reflects a comedic rigidity in itself, except now the object of laughter is the makers of the film who rigidly repeat the same formula expecting to get the same laugh from audiences. This is not even to mention that there must have been a liminal period in which audiences had stopped laughing at the same tired dialogue, but hadn't yet identified the repitition to make memes and laugh about the filmmakers' rigidity. Anyways, I loved this video and found it very interesting. This is consistently one of the best channels on KZbin.

[@websiteuser7926]

i was interested in theories of humor but couldnt ever find anything satisfying, this one feels surprisingly holistic, will definitely have to read some of the book

[@kaijuno]

A clear and useful framework for comedy from a man whose entire vibe seems deeply serious. Thank you! ❤️

[@nnnn3563]

I cried when you talk about absentmindedness while showing dennis screaming "I AM GOLDEN GOD" thank you so much, what a great video

[@dialectic76]

Fantastic video. Excellent work. Thank you. (I'm also enjoying your book, "How to Philosophize with a Hammer and Sickle."

[@athko]

^~^ ive been writing abt this book for my current project, im so glad u made a video on it!

[@zerologic7912]

I was just looking into Bergson's Laughter a couple days ago and now you drop this! Based

[@addammadd]

Based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based based

[@comradethatmetalguy]

I'm interested in reading Bergson now. Thank you for this video.

[@ubik1677]

I didn't thought that the other choices of the poll would have been done. I'm excited, because this was the one i chose :)

[@jonasceikaCCK]

After making the video on fascism I ran a new poll on my Patreon, and this topic won out! I almost never discard a video idea, just keep it in the polls until it wins out

[@KenLieck]

@@jonasceikaCCK There's definitely a joke in there somewhere...

[@davidegaruti2582]

Honestly the timing of this video couldn't be more perfect : i was looking into laughing yoga for a change in medutation practice , And having this video come in and explain how humor the tought process of laughing works helped me massively ! I shall now use this to cognitively reframe the way i see all things !

[@Hi_Im_Akward]

As a survivor of a lot of trauma and a lover of dark humor, I will say this explanation is good but only seems to explain some forms of comedy. The theory i put forth is that one function of humor is a coping mechanism to deal with things that are otherwise beyond the scope of the brain's ability to process. I argue this despite any therapist I've ever had that likes to tell people like me it's a way to avoid dealing with the trauma and I mean this sincerely because I have in fact dealt with a lot of it and I still very much find dark humor cathartic. I would be interested to see deeper philosophic ideas on this. Comedy as described here seems to me to be the cheap and easy kind. Where the more nuanced humor is much harder to achieve. Ask any stand up comedian and they will tell you how difficult their job can be. I'd also like to dissect this theory a bit with specific examples. Like dad jokes, something that I think has a somewhat unique comedy aspect to it in that the goal is almost more cringe than laughter yet I think possibly could be pretty well described within this theory.

[@samanteater]

I think this model can explain dark humor, but only if you disagree with Bergson's idea that comedy and tragedy are diametrically opposed. I find the truth to be quite the opposite- the comic filters that cause characters to repeat the same types of actions over and over again are highly analogous to the fatal flaws that motivate tragic figures. I think dark humor is essentially an acknowledgement that the automata of life that cause suffering are funny. Take the rise of "tragicomedy" shows like Bojack Horseman or Rick & Morty, for example- their protagonists are highly flawed characters who seem doomed to repeat the same destructive actions over and over again, which is both sympathetic due to the pain it causes but also funny because of their seeming inability to change.

[@Kastelt]

I love that someone dedicated the time to make a book about laughter. Philosophy tends to be serious, but it's lovely to see analysis of the less serious parts of us. I think Schopenhauer also said something about laughter but don't know about the rest of them.

[@TheZslewis]

I’d like to see theory as to how, and thus why you’re so fucking good at this. seriously. i’ve been with you since the start, and you’re a tier above the rest. It’s you and plastic pills and a bunch of dramatists seeing that roderick isn’t producing new material. thank you for doing this with your time.

[@potatocoder5754]

I am in my mid 30s and I have been intensely studying my field since roughly 14-15, CCK probably has a similar story. When you have been passionate about a field for 20 years, and you are still just as passionate, it shows in your work.

[@EnCounterCultureMedia]

Lmao the cat meme with the orange cat makes laugh so much man. It's just hilarious for some reason.

[@ron3252]

Simply great! This video will get BILLION and BILLIONS of views!

[@kylerodd2342]

Bergson is one of my favorite philosophers to read. Glad he’s getting a bit more recognition. He’s helped shape a lot of my views (along with other thinkers).

[@benjaminhulett7212]

I had just pulled this book from my library to start reading, and this makes me even more eager to dive in. Great content as usual!

[@robertlevine2827]

You are da bomb for using Slavoj Zizek to illustrate comic repetition of mannerisms.

[@sanswelt8746]

OMG!!! i recently submitted a paper discussing Bergson's theory of laugther and cited one of you videos!! what a beautiful coincidence

[@footstool661]

I like how well this fits into what I've heard of laughter potentially being a sign of aggression originally, in that we tend to bare our teeth when we laugh. So in laughing at something we're warding off some perceived threat. Aren't there some instances where his theory works in reverse, however? It's often funny when something which should appear mechanistic or aimless seems to act otherwise, such as an animal or a computer behaving in some way like a human. Bender springs to mind... Maybe you could say more generally that it's funny when something disrupts our idea of the order of things whether in society or in nature, or acts in the opposite way to its imagined character or assigned function.

[@kozobrody1240]

I think the memes you put in the video were particularly funny to me because their comedic nature was juxtaposed to the analytical and reflective nature of the whole video and of your channel in general; that is to say, where I expected the 'life' of your narrative to be responsive and flexible I got faced with the mechanicalness of you presenting the idea that drake is the type of guy to tickle monster his friends

[@sense_maker1816]

I like how there’s a continuity of the media you use in these videos, with the Berzerk and the Simpsons in the background. Just need some Shrek and Emoji Movie for the next one haha

[@MrTopHatZombie]

I wonder what Bergson's response would be to the more recent discoveries of animal laughter in apes, rats, and dolphins? I know that in his time animal cognition/behavioral studies were minimal, so can't really make a comparison, but I wonder if his framework could include animal laughter somehow.

[@pooplenepe59]

I saw the news about the rats laughing when tickled, and how its related to play behavior in rats. I think animal play has an element of "pretend" or "false"ness with for example cats and dogs attacking fake prey or doing gentle play bites

[@kubakrzywicki2502]

Your video appears just in time! I am writing my bachelor on humor and its translation in that french comedy "Asterix & Obelix: Mission Cleopatra". Bergson's views will make a great framework for the theoretical part, so thank you for reminding me of him

[@jnagarya519]

There are other essays on comedy, one of which points to disjuncture between expectation and the unexpected.

[@jumpingman6612]

This is one pillar of comedy, for sure.

[@OrdonWolf]

Ok this theory makes WAY more sense than I was expecting. The reason we share memes is because engaging with the meme socially will make it funnier! And “it’s so bad it’s NOT FUNNY” is a great example of how emotional attachment is called out as making something stop being funny (in a joke, no less!) This explains so many things!

[@isaacp64]

It's really interesting to explore the intersection between comedy and philosophy, because one of the first philosophy-related texts i ever read was "Plato and a Platypus walk into a bar", a pop-philosophy book whose main idea is that comedy and philosophy have a lot in common, because insight and a punchline work sort of the same way. Fun to see other people had come up with their own theory of comedy before!

[@MsJeffreyF]

It's like we laugh to bring something back to humanity. Or at least back to what we perceive or desire to be human. Shared humour as a way to keep us all in line with a shared perception of what it means to be properly human

[@kylerodd2342]

Maybe not humanity but more like life. In his thesis on Time and Free Will, in the first chapter, he has a section where he says something like “what else would we be but automata if not for joy and sorrow.” He’s trying to say that it’s through these inclinations that gives life its will, compared to lifeless matter. And when we laugh at something that falls into the mechanical we are either trying to instill some joy or some sorrow onto the person (laughing with or laughing at the person).

[@pablodejesusfieiro1337]

Seeing laughter as an attention bringer is an interesting concept, it does for sure explain its loudness, and also its preferably social aspect. It also explains why funniness is undeterminable to a certain extent, that which is funny is that to which I am tempted to pay attention, since I'd like the information it provides, but that which I am tempted to pay attention to simply is what is funny. An example of what's funny is as close as you can get to understanding why it is funny. Interesting book and video, it has definitely given me food for thought. Laughter being what reminds us of our ties to the consecuential and predetermined is definitely quite the idea.

[@S.G.Wallner]

Many big thinkers nod to Bergson. McGilchrist, Kastrup, Koch, Gomez-Marin, Sheldrake, and others. Thanks for putting this together.

[@maldeojocomunicaciones8427]

This is very interesting and I believe it can have a Bataillesque spin about the realization of the continuity/discontinuity of the self and the material world.

[@EmperorCaligula_EC]

He was a great thinker, and it is a pity he is so less known today.

[@letMeSayThatInIrish]

What a blast from the past. I read this as a kid and recall looking around for funny situations and whether they conformed to Bergson's pattern. I also recall thinking I found some, but now I'm not sure I used enough imagination in Bergson's defense.

[@VolatileChemical]

Umberto Eco's novel The Name of the Rose has a fascinating discussion of Aristotle's theories of comedy and laughter, because it revolves around a hunt for Aristotle's lost book on comedy, the second volume of his Poetics, in which it was the counterpart to the discussion of tragedy. A fanatical medieval monk, who represents the exact kind of rigidity and inflexibility Bergson talks about, manages to hide and then destroy the last existing copy of the book because he's terrified it would become influential and dangerous in that era of late medieval scholasticism when Catholic scholars were rediscovering and lauding Aristotle's works. He thinks if comedy becomes seen as legitimate and civilized, then people may feel justified in laughing at God and the Church, which would be much more fatal for those things than simple fear or hatred. His struggle seems absurd (and thus funny) to modern readers, but it does lead us to wonder how western philosophy may have been impacted if the actual book survived and we had centuries of discussion about comedy in the same way the surviving volume of Poetics inspired centuries of discussion about tragedy. Even still we can reconstruct what Aristotle says about comedy from other writers' quotes and summaries, and Eco's novel does a good job of imagining what Aristotle may have said in it.

[@satyasyasatyasya5746]

I've always said that comedy makes you laugh but not everything that makes you laugh is comedy. Because theres an art there, and that art is what we have to find through philosophising about it. Not to mention, the skill and effort and instincts too. But then you've got the social and nuerological aspects and it becomes this whole massive field of study xD

[@MrKumbancha]

this seems like a limited version of the "discovery" theory of laughter, that we laugh when we break usual patterns of thinking and learn new ways of seeing. But the "human into machinery" angle seems a little shoehorned, like he found that example and tried to extend it to every facet of comedy

[@clarabatty8696]

this sounds really interesting, I've just looked it up and couldn't find anything on the discovery theory of laughter, where did you find it originally? Thanks

[@MrKumbancha]

@@clarabatty8696 i think it was a subset of the "incongruity" theory, which is even more general, it says that we laugh when we experience a pattern being broken in a manner revealing another pattern(very rough simplification). the discovery/learning theory just specifies that that laughter is a mechanism to reinforce learning new patterns/discard old ones. my point was that Bergson's theory seems like a very specific version of this, that we laugh only seeing the "life" pattern being turned into the "machinery" pattern

[@schnetzator]

As a german, I cannot thank you enough for this video. Surley after the rigorous study of the works of Bergson, I too can become funny.

[@rogersalllike9133]

Comedy is something that happens it is actually not supposed to happen Something that is ridiculous but happens is what makes a situation funny

[@masterlikesmargarita]

Such a nice video. Somehow also so funny... had to laugh so much. A note I think to laugh about - isn't it laughable how we are just forced to laugh? I cannot hold it back and if i try and recognize - i recognize the mechanical me having a comedic puff. And so it makes me happy that i laugh and therefore i... well i laugh!

[@lewisbaitup6352]

Thank you lad, will defo be watching this tommorow.

[@asafoetidajones8181]

My personal definition of comedy, which I've been slowly developing for the past few years is this: "Joy resulting from the discovery of a hidden truth being revealed by the unexpected transition from one perception to another." It covers puns: the transition from the perception of a word meaning one thing to recognizing it meaning another. He covers knock knock jokes by the same token. It covers non-sequiturs - the transition is from a state where reason is expected to a state where reason is not present. The Revelation is that there is no sense. It covers physical comedy much in the same way, moving from a state of order and dignity to one of embarrassment and disarray. Folly or weakness is revealed, that's what's discovered in physical comedy. Fancy man was standing up straight, he thought everything was all well and good, but then he slipped and fell in the mud and got dirty hehe. It even applies to toilet humor, our initial state is genteel, sanitary, but the earthy, stanky truth of our biological reality is revealed by a fart or what have you. Gallows humor is the shift from a polite, avoidant Pollyanna state, to one that acknowledges sadness, darkness and Evil, a Memento Mori. Every case we start with one assumed state, and then unexpectedly a second state is revealed that shows some truth. The fact that a ship is going to occur may be expected, but the specific shift what state is going to come in, is not. That's novel and joyful. This definition also helps me understand why different people think different things are funny, especially political company. You'll see conservatives say the left can't meme, progressive say conservatives aren't funny. The reason this is because they have different perceptions of Truth, so they can't recognize each other's truths. A racist person hearing a racist joke is please to hear the revelation of what they consider a truth. A non-racist person doesn't find the joke funny because it's based on what they see as a a false premise, more so than it is harmful or offensive, so it's poorly constructed in their view. Imagine hearing a blonde joke if you have never heard the stereotype that blondes are stupid. Even a joke based on a hypothetically positive stereotype is going to fall flat if you don't immediately recognize the stereotype as some kind of Truth, at least recognize it as a perceived truth even if you don't agree. You know what they say about people from Wisconsin and math.... They're bad at it. oh you didn't know that? Or you think it's too clearly false to be funny? Anyway if I were to criticize my theory of comedy, I guess I'd say it's potentially too broad. You could apply to things that we don't consider comedy. Like recognizing the meaning in a poem, or assembling a puzzle to reveal an image, those could be joyful experiences of the revelation of moving from one state of perception to another better not comedic. But I still think I'm on to something

[@benjamino.7475]

Literally never thought about this philosophy topic, but it's amazingly interesting

[@silver1788]

i wrote a small paper for my school on memes and their relationship to Gen Z, Social media and humor about a year ago ever since i constantly think about the complexities that form the background to the things we intuitively laugh at, both in memes and everyday conversations and interactions. Thinking back now with bergsons theory my examples definitely fit into Bergsons categories you brought up here, though they obviously are only the very basic foundation upon which the cultural complexities of comedy build. I can't thank you enough for introducing to us in these videos all these interesting theories and personalities that philosophy brought forth in recent centuries.

[@tierfreund780]

The idea of "types of people" is something I've been thinking about a lot, and I like bergsoms ideas about it. but types of people show up in drama and tragedy too. often with the same purpose: "don't be like this" "don't be so easily fooled" "don't let your instincts lead to your undoing"

[@zoehardee8636]

This video cured my autism

[@samuctrebla3221]

It's too soon to know

[@bobdillaber1195]

I see what you did there. 😂

[@MikeStoneJapan]

Yooooooooo. This is fyeeeeeeee. One of my fav channels on one of my fav topics. The opposites are really the crux. Ok so I used to be very into comedy, before I became an engineer I was pursuing a comedy writing and improv career in London. Just trust me when I say I was really into comedy. One my shakespeare professors while I was doing my lit undergrad put me onto Henri Bergeson via Laughter and he always stuck with me. To this day, it is one of my pet theories that Bergson was right about a lot of things especially the 'SUDDEN & UNEXPECTED REVERSAL' (e.g the opposition between the expectation of continuing to walk and the slipping on the banana peel) being at the heart of irony which itself is at the heart of not just comedy but dramatic tension in general and also notably wit in general. When the person farts while making the serious speech, it is the unexpectedness and the contrast. Hence the more serious the speech and the more serious (and unlikely to fart freely) the person is and the wetter, louder and longer the fart the funnier the situation gets (for the most part). This is why when we often can resort to laughter when something that were desire for a long time and pay a high price for breaks suddenly or turns out to be worth far less than the expectation. Regarding repetition, it is interesting to note that improv comedy, which is very much the foundation of contemporary comedy (in my very personal view), there is a concept called heightening is heavily underpinned by the principle of repetition. Memes and meme-ing today relies heavily on the concept of heightening the game or repeating the central funny with thing with unexpected variation. Some of the funniest memes are the one that bring contrasting and unexpected concepts together. Fascinating stuff. Also good job on the pronunciation

[@jaredwblack]

While watching this, there's one work of comedy that kept coming to my mind which checks the boxes of both repetition and a character's absent minded unawareness of their own absurdity. That is the 60's TV show Get Smart. There are a handful of gags that keep getting repeated over and over, but they are pulled off so well the nearly mechanical repitition builds up anticipation each time as you can see the lead-up. The audience always knows when a "Sorry about that , Chief" or a "Missed it by that much," or a "I'll handle this, 99" is coming, and they payoff always comes. Also, the lead character, as well as a few supporting characters are blissfully unaware of their own ineptitude and absurdity. Each episode follows a familiar formula where the mission is usually successful in spite of the ineptitude, which is a subversion of the expectation that ineptitude leads to failure. The formulaic plot is alao comically repetitive, and helps to satirize the spy thrillers like James Bond that were popular at the time

[@BlindCentipede]

I plan to read the new biography by Emily Herring after tackling a few of Bergson's work in the original

[@user-mj2ol6kv8y]

The opposition of life and matter being central to Bergson's theory makes intuitive sense immediately, it reminds me of a piece of writing advice or perhaps analysis of commedia dell'arte or something I read years ago, that said what makes characters comic is their being totally static and unchanging (like that ep of the it crowd where the comedy derives from Moss remaining awkward and businesslike even when the room he's in is on fire)

[@davephillips9360]

Brilliant work thank you.❤

[@azaraniichan]

the goat talking about the goat

[@rhondajo7822]

❤❤❤❤ how delighted I am, in the year of 2024 (at the age of 69), to have discovered Henri Bergson.❤

[@bobdillaber1195]

Oh, me too, and I'm an old man. I'm glad my radar is still working.

[@jannetteberends8730]

71 woman, just downloaded his book at Gutenberg.

[@jannetteberends8730]

There are more publications of him on Gutenberg for free to. download.

[@rmeddy]

Great topic, I haven't been exposed to Bergson since reading a book on humor about a decade ago

[@zenonvtuber]

Babe wake up, new CCK philosophy just dropped. One more reason to live!

[@letsplaywithlife3063]

Yess

[@mattsmith2222]

Precisely

[@tuckerbugeater]

aren't you living for the revolution comdrade?

[@kin3702]

I was running low but this has added at least 6 hours to my life

[@aturchomicz821]

Least depressed Leftist:

[@bensimon5341]

The upshot I was expecting from the idea of the comic being fundamentally about the opposition of life vs. mere matter was that all laughter is ultimately motivated by our anxiety about death: about the living becoming mere matter, and, flowing from that, that the social function of laughter would be the dispelling or mitigation of that anxiety. Of course, with something as universal and fundamentally human as laughter, it would make sense if it performed multiple social functions.

[@grechka-chan]

This resonates with me because it explains one particular instance of humor I experienced that I didn't really have a coherent explanation for before. Meshuggah is a metal band that's known for their nearly mechanical precision, almost complete lack of melody, and focus on the arithmetic interaction between separate rythmic structures in their songs. The tones they use for their guitars remind of factory equipment, the screaming vocals are deliberately monotonous, and rhe rythm of the lyrcis does not respect the rythm of organic English speech, instead being just another mechanical element to contribute to the total equation of the song. All these choices are a deliberate attempt to write music that does not seem to be written by human, and instead is a product of an alien mind, a machine, a lovecraftian horror creature, or the deteriorating sense of self of a human being in a (mental) helath crisis/ under heavy influence of psychotics. So, their music can be described, in short, as being almost entirely mechanical. The elements of the living are there, but they're sparsely used and serve only to highlight the pure matter around them. When I first heard one of their songs, it made me laugh. Not just chuckle a little, I was straight belly-laughing. I thought this must be a joke. This reaction was always somewhat confusing to me in retrospect, I attributed it to just hearing something completely new, opposite to what I at the time believed could even be dedcribed as music. But it never felt like this explanation was exhaustive. I've listened to a lot of music that was strange and different without necessarily being funny. It's also the only band that doesn't actively try to be funny that made laugh. Now that I can view that as the experience of seeing pure matter, mechanics, automata of rythm and sound, in place of the living melodic soul I expected to find in a music piece, I finally have a coherent theory of this experience! Thank you! Go listen to Meshuggah, it's fucking sick.

[@CarlosVargas-oo6gn]

Another banger of a video! 🎉

[@POSTELVIS]

the inclusion of Rocco Botte at youtube Live 2015 is highly appreciated

[@SuenteusPi]

This explains why "The Stepford Wives" is a laugh riot, as is "The Best of Both Worlds, Part One". And the society in "1984"

[@cerumen]

I can’t tell if this comment is a joke or being serious, Which I now find more interesting than I previously would’ve

[@aturchomicz821]

@@cerumen Would it really be a CCK comment section without any Schizo comments?🗣🗣

[@jim23mac]

You had me at 'involuntary' .. LOL

[@arthurattili]

I have always perceived comedy as the result of a break in expectation. What changes are the context and the characters. The break in expectation is the encounter with the contradictory, that which is not expected to happen in the flow of the narrative. Watching this video, however, I realized that this was not the only factor. Additional elements are necessary to evoke comicality, such as the abrupt transition (break in expectation) from a living nature to something mechanical on some level.

[@1992420256152118]

Amazing. Makes so much sense!!!!!

[@no_laughing_matter]

Got to thinking about satire and parody, and the obvious ways in which these categories accord with Bergson's humourous notion of repetition, as with the caricature example in your video. This leads one to contemplate the satire (as with political satire of grim developments) of humour's polar opposite- tragedy, the humourous register of the human, all too human. Love that shit.

[@tobiashagstrom4168]

I've noticed that learning seems to be perhaps the main function of humor. It is often about noticing things, be it things that are happening around you, or about noticing relations between things, ways in which they are strangely similar or different. Jokes are often about exercising your ability to expect the unexpected, when something that shouldn't make sense makes sense. Even anti-humor is about expecting the unexpected, in a situation where what is otherwise unexpected is expected. I think this helps train our minds to be more attentive of our natural and social surroundings, and to become more creative problem-solvers. I will admit that I do judge people a fair bit based on if their sense of humor makes sense or not. In particular, if they laugh at things that "seems" like a joke, but lacks the actual logical mechanism of the kind of joke it is sounds like it's trying to be. It's not that it's morally wrong to do humor incorrectly, but I do tend to expect that intelligent people will think more about what is funny to them. And thus when a less intelligent person may laugh at something because it vaguely "seems" like it should be funny, I expect a more intelligent person to be someone who stops and wonders if they've understood the joke or not, someone who looks for a clever punchline, and gets disappointed if they don't find one. If someone seems willing to laugh and move on without actually having analyzed what just happened, it suggests to me someone who is disappointingly incurious.

[@maxray1796]

Zizek once ventured into a vast desert to deliver a speech. Today, that desert is now a thriving forest.

[@shashvatshukla]

Man this was so good.

[@TheRealJillSandwich]

12:00 who that by? looks like a Papa Meat artwork.

[@jonasceikaCCK]

It is!

[@JanJozefo]

Charlie Kirk! A pretty disgusting conservative pundit. The art is definitely MeatCanyon's

[@Vgallo]

This is so accurate and insightful

[@irisofrosebloom8741]

laughter is a signal that you want to enter into a stronger ingroup coalition with whoever you're laughinig with. also, a stronger outgroup relationship with anyone you're laughing at.

[@bmxt939]

Please make horror and comedy crossover. Explaining the former and the latter, also how one morphs into other (like in "Shivering truth", "Don't hug me I'm scared", "Xavier: renegade angel").

[@munjatkumo1929]

Fascinating theory! I'm not sure I'd subscribe to it completely, but the reasoning sounds strong to me.

[@edenaut]

Amazing Insights!

[@gardnjw]

The picture of the traffic jam was at Broadway and 7th in Los Angeles

[@xanjelx]

lmao that footage of Rocco @ E3 is legendary

[@mattgilbert7347]

Great work, love your videos. I wonder what Bergson might say about the comedic phenomenon of adults behaving like children and children behaving like adults?

[@khaledfahd2346]

Thank you for sharing

[@thecuriousquest]

Very useful. Thank you. 🙏

[@khier-eddinehennaoui9783]

I missed watching your content i would love to see more of it but i am sure you have things to do ❤

[@danielvictor3262]

the repetition alluding to the mechanical and the bodily functions kinda explains why SEX and peoples' attitude towards SEX is hilarious. The act of thrusting your hips repeatedly progressively getting faster until something shoots out is hilarious.

[@delusi0n]

I have a few of Bergson's book! I found him through reading Deleuze, and one of my old professors actually specialized in Bergson's work. Though I was interested in elan vital and not his theory of comedy though I was vaguely aware of this work.

[@calebgrasse]

I was literally just thinking about Bergson on this topic before I saw the video.

[@mikaelsanchez6426]

My professor, when arguing that racism is mostly a subconscious thing, once said "if you've ever thought a racist joke was funny, then you have subconscious racism". That seemed right at the time, but this video helps to explain why that made sense - racist jokes can draw laughter out of people because they already have patterns in their mind that they expect others to follow. Racist humor, then, seems particularly socially pernicious - what it does is take a person of color, who seems to be a person, and shows "no, they don't act like a person, they act like a Mexican", for example. Its not only dehumanizing, but also inviting other people to participate in that dehumanization. Same goes for humor based on gender, sexuality, etc.

[@Senumunu]

i laughed. am i racist ? i dont care enough to ask that question.

[@davidegaruti2582]

It also draws on how both racism and humor are fundamentally intellectual : if racism where instinctual and emotional you wouldn't need jokes to reinforce it ... Instead you need to make caricatures to make it stick , because it is an intellectual process , and a wrong and incorrect one at that

[@McDonaldsCalifornia]

Love that thought ​@@davidegaruti2582

[@drayzorn]

This whole argument and the professor just assumes things in order to agree with itself. If we could all agree on what's racist and what's not and if we knew the content and delivery of a joke before we decide to chuckle or not... And were privy to everyone else's minds and their thoughts, then maybe we could begin to talk talk about bringing out subconscious racism. This just seems so predictably academic, a long-winded effort to complicate an oversimplification.

[@dsur5547]

but the humour in a racist joke is derived from the fact that you know it to be wrong. The statement "apples are fruit" is not funny because it is simply a true statement . Meanwhile saying someone falls into a racist stereotypes is funny because we know it is not true. Were we to subconsciously believe they WERE true we would find them no funnier than the "apples are fruit" statement. You can use the video to say this as well, assuming a person falls into a blueprint of repetitive action is being absent minded as you are forgetting that they are a being of life and not matter. I think this does however bring up an issue with humour as an agent of change as it is also used to cement certain close-minded views when it is supposed to combat them.

[@robertburatt5981]

It follows from Bergson's view on life that "laughter" arising from cruelty and suffering comes from a sick or diseased life.