Search results for 'Humor' (try it on Scholar)

528 found
Sort by:
  1. Aaron Smuts (2010). The Ethics of Humor: Can Your Sense of Humor Be Wrong? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (3):333-47.score: 24.0
    I distill three somewhat interrelated approaches to the ethical criticism of humor: (1) attitude-based theories, (2) merited-response theories, and (3) emotional responsibility theories. I direct the brunt of my effort at showing the limitations of the attitudinal endorsement theory by presenting new criticisms of Ronald de Sousa’s position. Then, I turn to assess the strengths of the other two approaches, showing that that their major formulations implicitly require the problematic attitudinal endorsement theory. I argue for an effects-mediated responsibility theory (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. E. M. Dadlez (2011). Truly Funny: Humor, Irony, and Satire as Moral Criticism. Journal of Aesthetic Education 45 (1):1-17.score: 24.0
    Comparatively speaking, philosophy has not been especially long-winded in attempting to answer questions about what is funny and why we should think so. There is the standard debate of many centuries’ standing between superiority and incongruity accounts of humor, which for the most part attempt to identify the intentional objects of our amusement.1 There is the more recent debate about humor and morality, about whether jokes themselves may be regarded as immoral or about whether it can in certain (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Aaron Smuts, Humor. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.score: 24.0
    According to the standard analysis, humor theories can be classified into three neatly identifiable groups:incongruity, superiority, and relief theories. Incongruity theory is the leading approach and includes historical figures such as Immanuel Kant, Søren Kierkegaard, and perhaps has its origins in comments made by Aristotle in the Rhetoric. Primarily focusing on the object of humor, this school sees humor as a response to an incongruity, a term broadly used to include ambiguity, logical impossibility, irrelevance, and inappropriateness. The (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Aaron Smuts (2007). The Joke is the Thing: 'In the Company of Men' and the Ethics of Humor. Film and Philosophy 11 (1):49-66.score: 24.0
    Any analysis of "In the Company of Men" is forced to answer three questions of central importance to the ethics of humor: (1) What does it mean to find sexist humor funny? (2) What are the various sources of humor? And, (3) can moral flaws with attempts at humor increase their humorousness? I argued that although merely finding a joke funny in a neutral context cannot tell you anything reliable about a person's beliefs, in context, a (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. John Morreall (2009). Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 24.0
    Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor develops an inclusive theory that integrates psychological, aesthetic, and ethical issues relating to humor Offers an enlightening and accessible foray into the serious business of humor Reveals how standard theories of humor fail to explain its true nature and actually support traditional prejudices against humor as being antisocial, irrational, and foolish Argues that humor’s benefits overlap significantly with those of philosophy Includes a foreword by Robert Mankoff, Cartoon (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Andrew Jordan & Stephanie Patridge (2012). Against the Moralistic Fallacy: A Modest Defense of a Modest Sentimentalism About Humor. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (1):83-94.score: 24.0
    In a series of important papers, Justin D’Arms and Daniel Jacobson argue that all extant neo-sentimentalists are guilty of a conflation error that they call the moralistic fallacy. One commits the moralistic fallacy when one infers from the fact that it would be morally wrong to experience an affective attitude—e.g., it would be wrong to be amused—that the attitude does not fit its object—e.g., that it is not funny. Such inferences, they argue, conflate the appropriateness conditions of attitudinal responses with (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Shayne Clarke (2009). Locating Humour in Indian Buddhist Monastic Law Codes: A Comparative Approach. [REVIEW] Journal of Indian Philosophy 37 (4):311-330.score: 24.0
    It has been claimed that Indian Buddhism, as opposed to East Asian Chan/Zen traditions, was somehow against humour. In this paper I contend that humour is discernible in canonical Indian Buddhist texts, particularly in Indian Buddhist monastic law codes (Vinaya). I will attempt to establish that what we find in these texts sometimes is not only humourous but that it is intentionally so. I approach this topic by comparing different versions of the same narratives preserved in Indian Buddhist monastic law (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Martin Shuster (2013). Humor as an Optics: Bergson and the Ethics of Humor. Hypatia 28 (3):618-632.score: 24.0
    Although the ethics of humor is a relatively new field, it already seems to have achieved a consensus about ethics in general. In this paper, I implicitly (1) question the view of ethics that stands behind many discussions in the ethics of humor; I do this by explicitly (2) focusing on what has been a chief preoccupation in the ethics of humor: the evaluation of humor. Does the immoral content of a joke make it more or (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. John Marmysz (2010). Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor. [REVIEW] Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 68 (3):305-308.score: 24.0
    A review of John Morrreall's book Comic Relief: A Comprehensive Philosophy of Humor.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. John Marmysz (2003). Laughing at Nothing: Humor as a Response to Nihilism. SUNY Press.score: 24.0
    Disputing the common misconception that nihilism is wholly negative and necessarily damaging to the human spirit, John Marmysz offers a clear and complete definition to argue that it is compatible, and indeed preferably responded to, with an attitude of good humor. He carefully scrutinizes the phenomenon of nihilism as it appears in the works, lives, and actions of key figures in the history of philosophy, literature, politics, and theology, including Nietzsche, Heidegger, Camus, and Mishima. While suggesting that there ultimately (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Brian Ribeiro (2008). A Distance Theory of Humour. Think 6 (17/18):139-148.score: 24.0
    This paper develops a programmatic 'theory sketch' of a new theory of humour, pitched at roughly the same level of detail, and intended to have roughly the same level of inclusiveness, as the other available philosophical "theories" of humour. I will call the theory I propose the distance theory. After an appeal to some intuitive illustrations of the distance theory's attractions, I move on to offer an analysis of observational comedy using the distance theory. I conclude the paper with some (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Aaron Smuts (2003). Review of Simon Critchley, On Humour. [REVIEW] Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 61 (4):414-416.score: 24.0
    The highlight of Simon Critchley's small book On Humor (2002) is the inclusion of seven beautiful prints by Charles Le Brun at the start of each chapter. Le Brun's captivating drawings are zoomorphic studies of the human face, each in relation to a different animal.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Brenda Goldberg (1999). A Genealogy of the Ridiculous: From 'Humours' to Humour. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies 1 (1):59-71.score: 24.0
    We tend to take the phenomenon of humour for granted, seeing it for the most part as something innately and fundamentally human. However we might go even further than this, and say that the phenomenon of humour is perceived as an essential part of what makes us human. In this respect, philosophers and theorists as wide apart as Aristotle and the French, feminist Julia Kristeva (1980; also see Goldberg, 1999a) have regarded a baby's ability to laugh as one of the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Georges B. Dreyfus (2008). What is Debate For? The Rationality of Tibetan Debates and the Role of Humor. Argumentation 22 (1):43-58.score: 24.0
    In this essay, I examine the mode of operation and aim of debates in the Tibetan Buddhist traditions. I contrast the probative form of argument that was privileged by the Indian tradition to the more agonic practice favored by Tibetan scholastics. I also examine the rules that preside over this dialectical practice, which is seen by the Tibetan tradition as essential to a proper scholastic education. I argue, however, that the practice of debates cannot be reduced to this dialectical model, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. David Benatar (2014). Taking Humour (Ethics) Seriously, But Not Too Seriously. Journal of Practical Ethics 2 (1):24-43.score: 24.0
    Humour is worthy of serious ethical consideration. However, it is often taken far too seriously. In this paper, it is argued that while humour is sometimes unethical, it is wrong much less often than many people think. Non-contextual criticisms, which claim that certain kinds of humour are always wrong, are rejected. Contextual criticisms, which take issue with particular instances of humour rather than types of humour, are more promising. However, it is common to overstate the number of contexts in which (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Sharon Lockyer & Michael Pickering (eds.) (2005). Beyond a Joke: The Limits of Humour. Palgrave Macmillan.score: 24.0
    Humor is pervasive in contemporary culture, and is generally celebrated as a public good. Yet there are times when it is felt to produce intolerance, misunderstanding or even hatred. This book brings together, for the first time, contributions that consider the ethics as well as the aesthetics of humor. The book focuses on the abuses and limits of humor, some of which excite considerable social tension and controversy. Beyond a Joke is an exciting intervention, full of challenging (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Alejandro Angulo-Novoa sj (2008). La metafísica del humor de A. Garzón. Logos 14:107-114.score: 24.0
    La caricatura de Garzón, que aparece en el periódico El Espectador con el título de Cartones, es una caricatura filosófica, un dibujo del alma humana, en contraste con la de su contemporáneo Osuna que es la clásica caricatura política. Garzón prescinde, en general, de las palabras y critica con humor seco la insensatez. Adopta en sus dibujos del alma una posición ética que repudia el espíritu mercantil de nuestra época. El hombrecillo protagonista de sus dibujos recuerda los hombres grises, (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Robert Storey (2003). Humor and Sexual Selection. Human Nature 14 (4):319-336.score: 24.0
    Recently Geoffrey Miller has suggested that humor evolved through sexual selection as a signal of "creativity," which in turn implies youthfulness, intelligence, and adaptive unpredictability. Drawing upon available empirical studies, I argue that the evidence for a link between humor and creativity is weak and ambiguous. I also find only tenuous support for Miller’s assumption that the attractiveness of the "sense of humor" is to be found in the wittiness of its possessor, since those who use the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Berys Nigel Gaut (1998). Just Joking: The Ethics and Aesthetics of Humor. Philosophy and Literature 22 (1):51-68.score: 21.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Joseph Newirth (2006). Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious: Humor as a Fundamental Emotional Experience. Psychoanalytic Dialogues 16 (5):557-571.score: 21.0
  21. John Marmysz (2001). Humor, Sublimity and Incongruity. Consciousness, Literature and the Arts 2 (3).score: 21.0
    Humorous laughter is related to the sublime experience in that it involves the transformation of a potentially unpleasant perception into a pleasurable experience. However, whereas sublimity is associated with feelings of awe and respect, humorous laughter is associated with feelings of superiority and contempt. This difference is a result of the fact that sublimity is an affective response involving an individual’s perception of vulnerability while humorous laughter is a response involving perceived invulnerability.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. J. Morreal (1983). Humor and Emotion. American Philosophical Quarterly 20 (July):297-304.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Glenn A. Hartz & Ralph Hunt (1991). Humor: The Beauty and the Beast. American Philosophical Quarterly 28 (4):299 - 309.score: 21.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Cris Mayo (2010). Incongruity and Provisional Safety: Thinking Through Humor. Studies in Philosophy and Education 29 (6):509-521.score: 21.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Jorge Figueroa-Dorrego & Cristina Larkin-Galinanes (eds.) (2009). A Source Book of Literary and Philosophical Writings About Humour and Laughter: The Seventy-Five Essential Texts From Antiquity to Modern Times. The Edwin Mellen Press.score: 21.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Elena Hoicka, Sarah Jutsum & Merideth Gattis (2008). Humor, Abstraction, and Disbelief. Cognitive Science 32 (6):985-1002.score: 21.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Susanna Trnka (2011). Specters of Uncertainty: Violence, Humor, and the Uncanny in Indo‐Fijian Communities Following the May 2000 Fiji Coup. Ethos 39 (3):331-348.score: 21.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Manuel Ballester Hernández & Enrique Ujaldón (eds.) (2010). La Sonrisa Del Sabio: Ensayos Sobre Humor y Filosofía. Biblioteca Nueva.score: 21.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Geert Brône (2010). Bedeutungskonstitution in Verbalem Humor: Ein Kognitiv-Linguistischer Und Diskurssemantischer Ansatz. Peter Lang.score: 21.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Adir Cohen (2008). Soḳraṭes U-Ḳsanṭipah Be-Yeraḥ Devash: Mifgash ʻim Filosofyah Be-Darkhe Ha-Humor Ṿeha-Tseḥoḳ. Amatsyah.score: 21.0
    No categories
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. F. R. Fleet (1890/1970). A Theory of Wit and Humour. Port Washington, N.Y.,Kennikat Press.score: 21.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Julius Gordon (1950). Your Sense of Humor. New York, Didier.score: 21.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Anthony Ashley Cooper Shaftesbury (1988). An Old-Spelling, Critical Edition of Shaftesbury's Letter Concerning Enthusiasm, and, Sensus Communis: An Essay on the Freedom of Wit and Humor. Garland.score: 21.0
  34. Joshua Shaw (2010). Philosophy of Humor. Philosophy Compass 5 (2):112-126.score: 18.0
    Humor is a surprisingly understudied topic in philosophy. However, there has been a flurry of interest in the subject over the past few decades. This article outlines the major theories of humor. It argues for the need for more publications on humor by philosophers. More specifically, it suggests that humor may not be a well-understood phenomenon by questioning a widespread consensus in recent publications – namely, that humor can be detached from laughter. It is argued (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Brian Boyd (2004). Laughter and Literature: A Play Theory of Humor. Philosophy and Literature 28 (1):1-22.score: 18.0
    : Humor seems uniquely human, but it has deep biological roots. Laughter, the best evidence suggests, derives from the ritualized breathing and open-mouth display common in animal play. Play evolved as training for the unexpected, in creatures putting themselves at risk of losing balance or dominance so that they learn to recover. Humor in turn involves play with the expectations we share-whether innate or acquired-in order to catch one another off guard in ways that simulate risk and stimulate (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Merrie Bergmann (1986). How Many Feminists Does It Take to Make A Joke? Sexist Humor and What's Wrong with It. Hypatia 1 (1):63 - 82.score: 18.0
    In this paper I am concerned with two questions: What is sexist humor? and what is wrong with it? To answer the first question, I briefly develop a theory of humor and then characterize sexist humor as humor in which sexist beliefs (attitudes/norms) are presupposed and are necessary to the fun. Concerning the second question, I criticize a common sort of argument that is supposed to explain why sexist humor is offensive: although the argument explains (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. John Lippitt (2000). Humour and Irony in Kierkegaard's Thought. St. Martin's Press.score: 18.0
    Irony, humor and the comic play vital yet under-appreciated roles in Kierkegaard's thought. Focusing upon the Concluding Unscientific Postscript , this book investigates these roles, relating irony and humor as forms of the comic to central Kierkegaardian themes. How does the comic function as a form of "indirect communication"? What roles can irony and humor play in the infamous Kierkegaardian "leap"? Do certain forms of wisdom depend upon possessing a sense of humor? And is such a (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Robert C. Roberts (1988). Humor and the Virtues. Inquiry 31 (2):127 – 149.score: 18.0
    Five dimensions of amusement are ethically searched: incongruity, perspectivity, dissociation, enjoyment, and freshness. Amusement perceives incongruities and virtues are formally congruities between one's character and one's nature. An ethical sense of humor is a sense for incongruities between people's behavior and character, and their telos. To appreciate any humor one must adopt a perspective, and in the case of ethical amusement this is the standpoint of one who possesses the virtues. In being amused at the incongruity of some (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. John Morreall (1989). The Rejection of Humor in Western Thought. Philosophy East and West 39 (3):243-265.score: 18.0
    I examine three main objections to humor in western thought--That humor is hostile, That it is irrational, And that it is irresponsible. None of these, I show, Is a valid general objection to humor. I then explore some of the values of humor overlooked in western thought, Especially the way it gets us to see things in new ways and liberates us from practical concern. I contrast the western rejection of humor with the embracing of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Mordechai Gordon (2012). Exploring the Relationship Between Humor and Aesthetic Experience. Journal of Aesthetic Education 46 (1):111-121.score: 18.0
    The connection between humor and aesthetic experience has already been recognized by several thinkers and aesthetic educators. For instance, humor theorist John Morreall writes that "humor is best understood as itself a kind of aesthetic experience, equal in value at least to any other kind of aesthetic experience."1 For Morreall, both humor and aesthetic experience involve the use of the imagination, are accompanied by a sense of freedom, and often lead to surprises that we did not (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Ignacio L. Götz (2002). Faith, Humor, and Paradox. Praeger.score: 18.0
    Machine generated contents note: Introduction 1 --1. The Nature of Paradox 11 --2. Faith and Paradox 23 --3. Faith and Paradox: Cases 33 --4. Faith, Hope, and Unbelief 49 --5. Faith, Dogma, and Fanaticism 61 --6. The Structure of Humor 81 --7. On Frivolity 93 --8. Humor and Faith 103 --Conclusion 115.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. C. Stephen Evans (1987). Kierkegaard's View of Humor. Faith and Philosophy 4 (2):176-186.score: 18.0
    Many people view humor and a serious religious life as antithetical. This paper attempts to elucidate Kierkegaard’s view of humor, and thereby to explain his claims that humor is essentially linked to a religious life, and that the capacity for humor resides in a deep structure of human existence. A distinction is drawn between humor as a general element in life, and a special sense of humor as a “boundary zone” of the religious life. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Hugh LaFollette & Niall Shanks (1993). Belief and the Basis of Humor. American Philosophical Quarterly 30 (4):329 - 339.score: 18.0
    Humor is a pervasive feature of human life which crosses racial, cultural, sexual, and class divisions. Yet its nature is elusive. This elusiveness should have piqued the philosophical imagination; its pervasiveness should have demonstrated its philosophical importance. However, it has generated relatively little..
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Al Gini (2011). The Importance of Humor in Teaching Philosophy. Teaching Philosophy 34 (2):143-149.score: 18.0
    Philosophy and joke telling do not share the same pedigree, but both can have an allied function and purpose. Philosophy and joke telling can help us to organize, interpret, possibly understand, or, at least, hopefully face and confront the fundamental issues of existence.Let me be more precise about what I mean by using humor and jokes in teaching philosophy. Humor, joke telling, can serve as a narrative playlet to metaphorically illuminate a complex philosophical concept. However, every class should (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. David Owen (2011). Must the Tolerant Person Have a Sense of Humour? On the Structure of Tolerance as a Virtue. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (3):385-403.score: 18.0
    This article addresses the relationship of toleration and humour as virtues. It argues that our understanding of toleration as a virtue has been captured and shaped by the conception of tolerance as a duty and, through a critique of John Horton?s classic article on toleration as a virtue, seeks to show what a view freed from such captivity would look like. It then turns to argue that humour plays a fundamental role in relation to living a virtuous life. Finally, it (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Jason T. Peifer (2012). Can We Be Funny? The Social Responsibility of Political Humor. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 27 (4):263-276.score: 18.0
    Probing the vague boundaries and constraints commonly placed on humor, this exploratory essay considers the responsibilities and duties that can guide political humor. Working within a deontological paradigm, the essay establishes the relevance of ethics within society's political humor and considers the importance of ethical political humor. Moreover, this study points to Christians and Nordenstreng's model of global social responsibility theory as providing a parsimonious and flexible framework for orienting ethical political humor.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Lawrence Lengbeyer (2005). Humor, Context, and Divided Cognition. Social Theory and Practice 31 (3):309-36.score: 18.0
    Those who suggest that only a sexist (or racist, or anti-semite) can experience amusement at a sexist (or racist, or anti-semitic) joke have failed to grasp two underappreciated features of the psychology of humor: (1) that amusement is sensitive to what is conveyed to the audience by the contexts within which a joke is taken to be situated, and hence to pragmatic, and not merely semantic, factors; and (2) that, given the non-integrated nature of the ordinary human cognitive system, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Niall Shanks & Hugh LaFollette (1993). Belief and the Basis of Humor. American Philosophical Quarterly 30 (4):329-39.score: 18.0
    When theorists have studied humor, they often assumed that laughter was either a necessary or a sufficient condition of humor. It is neither. Although humorous events usually evoke laughter, they do not do so invariably. Humor may evoke smiles or smirks which fall short of laughter. Thus it is not a necessary condition. Nor is it a sufficient condition. People may laugh because they are uncomfortable (nervous laughter), they may laugh at someone (derisive laughter), they may laugh (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Edward C. Halper (2011). Humor, Dialectic, and Human Nature in Plato. Epoché: A Journal for the History of Philosophy 15 (2):319-330.score: 18.0
    Drawing principally on the Symposium, this paper argues that humor in Plato’s dialogues serves two serious purposes. First, Plato uses puns and other devices to disarm the reader’s defenses and thereby allow her to consider philosophical ideas that she would otherwise dismiss. Second, insofar as human beings can only be understood through unchanging forms that we fail to attain, our lives are discontinuous and only partly intelligible. Since, though, the discontinuity between expectation and actual occurrence is the basis for (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Jeremiah Conway (2007). The Humor of Philosophy. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (2):3-10.score: 18.0
    Philosophy has been the butt of jokes throughout history. This paper examines two comedians-Aristophanes and Woody Allen-for what they fmd funny about philosophy. Consideration of this humor is important because it insightfully captures the tensions between philosophy and everyday life. Risking the proverbial waming about ruining good jokes with analysis, the paper takes up the question why an activity that these comedians love to roast, philosophers take seriously.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 528