Evolution And Laughter

Atheists: why do people laugh? Why do people make that noise when they hear something ignorant, silly, or out of the ordinary? Why did they evolve to laugh?

 

Have you ever heard the phrase "Laughter is the best medicine"?

As it turns out, There is a element of truth to that saying in that laughter reduces stress, has pain killing properties and increases bonding.

So I'd guess in many of those circumstances you mention, laughter relieves the situational discomfort.

Laughter-like vocalizations have been noted in other animals, so alot of the properties of laughter may have developed prior to humans.

 

Why is this question specificly targeted to atheists? You're aware there are millions of theists acknowledging the evolution theory right.

 

Because humans are social animals, and it's to the advantage of the group to be aware of one another's emotions. Same thing goes for screaming out of fear/pain. Heck even noises during sex. It makes the other(s) aware of the situation and knowledge is power.

 

I'm merely agnostic, so feel free to ignore this. It is now possible to earn a doctorate in comedy and, soon enough, academia will never be the same again. The first quantifiable theory of humor has already established its about perceiving anything low in entropy. That's technobabble for humor revolves around what's missing from this picture. Your brain itself organizes around what's missing from this picture with, for example, the visual centers of your brain recently being established as organizing around what's missing. That might sound counterproductive, but its analog logic. For example, shadows provide the fastest, easiest, and most reliable way to determine if an animal is moving. By our neurons merely searching for what's missing they can individually and collectively shift their focus from one thing to the next without a clue as to what they are doing and organize and reorganize themselves on the fly to convey any mass, energy, and information with the highest efficiency possible. Despite what's missing having no content, it connotes what is actually present with a shadow implying something is casting the shadow and by simply comparing patterns for what's missing our neurons can learn more about what's present.

Toddlers don't start laughing or acquire any sense of humor until about four months old. The implication is that humor is not merely about what's missing from this picture, but fundamental patterns we perceive within what's missing. A shadow, for example, is not necessarily funny even if it is low in entropy. After about four months old the infants apparently acquire a significant "database" for matching patterns so that the patterns of humor leap out at them as if they had finally finished a jig saw puzzle and saw what the picture contained.

Humans are outrageously noisy and stinky as ground dwelling animals go and would make easy targets for predators if they were not more intimidated by us. Very likely laughter serves cognitive and social functions that leverage the fact predators tend to be weary of us. For example, a toddler laughing could be signaling to adults nearby that they found something unusual. That's similar to wolf behavior where the cubs will circle the perimeter and signal adults if anything unusual approaches.

 

Or signifies the fact that we've already "lost it"

There's only really up or down. "Insanity" is only a measure of our location within culture.

 

According to Jim Morrison all the children are insane. And who laughs more? Adults or kids.

 

Keeps us on our toes

 

maybe we just havnt finished evolving and once we do we will laugh no more.

 

On the surface that sounds like an awful thought, I cannot imagine the species that gives up laughter to still be considered human, it's difficult for me to picture them as "we".

However it's perhaps conceivable that laughter could be viewed at as an undesirable trait in the scope of evolutionary efficiency. If you think of comedy movies, late night talk shows, stand-up comedians, internet memes, etc. We do "waste" alot of time on laughter.

 

well i had the thought before thinking about it, but with the way comedy mostly is...it plays off stereotypes or exaggerations or others misfortune. at least most of the time. with the over PC crowd that gets offended by everything that isnt far left and fair and cushioned...i agree its an awful thought but i see it as a possibility.

 

How would PC culture eradicate a presumably intrinsic characteristic?

 

When I have my bouts of hystericalness and laughter, usually just before bedtime, I really do feel at ease with everything and for that short moment, nothing matters.

 

-Valentine Michael Smith, Stranger In A Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein

 

Norman Cousins cured himself with laughter. I do believe it the best medicine there is...I never laugh at people. I laugh with them.

 

"come on evolve! it can be fun;

it is the dawning of the age of zootopia"

 

When asked about the evolution of humor in general and laughter specifically most people take 2 routes. One is to claim that we are social animals and that humor is a part of that social aspect. The other is to point out the health benefits of laughter. While both are almost certainly correct neither one does anything at all to answer the question of how humor exists.

First it is important to note that both of those ideas really only explain the laughter part (explaining outward signs of finding something humorous) but do not at all shed light on the fundamental questions: What is humor, what does it mean to find something to be humorous, and how is it even possible to find something humorous?

General explanations of laughter are probably correct. There are clearly health benefits from laughter, and this is important because presumably the structures that allow us to appreciate humor and to laugh are probably biologically expensive, so we should expect to see some benefit that outweighs the biological cost (and the cost of audibly laughing at time that it is very important to stay quiet). It is also easy to imagine various social reasons why humor and laughter would exist.

But I am more interested in the ultimate origin of humor. I have virtually no insight into this except that I think any serious attempt should start by creating a catalog of the types of things people find humorous, and attempting to reduce them as much as possible to a smaller subset of types of humor (for example many humorous occurrences fall into the category of 'slapstick' whereas others seem to fall into a sort of 'violation of expectations'). This of course becomes very complicated because a violation of expectations could be very upsetting instead of humorous. Then of course there could be 'levels' of appreciating humor, for example when a person is capable of perceiving that a situation is tragic and hilarious at the same time (which may or may not require more cognitive sophistication than appreciating slapstick). And then there are situations such as witnessing irony being lost on someone. To me that is hilarious, but I wonder if it can be reduced to some other more basic form of humor.

One thing is certain: The idea that someone can use a god as an explanation for humor is itself hilarious (same goes for morality too).