cryingwife.com

[Argonaut]

So discomfort really does cause us to laugh! I've also read that a lot of humor relies on cognitive dissonance - putting two conflicting thoughts in our minds at once. This thread has really got me thinking about humor and what it signifies about us. My whole POV about what's funny is changing rapidly due to this thread. I can't believe I could be working on myself all this time, yet still find things like the "crying wife" humorous. Talk about buffers! And now I'm seeing the inconsistencies of so many things I tend to laugh at.

I wonder what's funny to an STO being? The C's have a great sense of humor, which they show through clever plays on words and such. But how can we develop a more STO approach to humor in our day-to-day lives? When hanging out with friends and family who are laughing at "inappropriate" things, are there ways that we can re-direct the situation gently? Since I've personally joined in with them in the past, how do I let them know that my perspective is changing on what is and isn't funny? I want to be externally considering and maintain strategic enclosure here... But I also don't want to pretend to find things funny that I'm suddenly seeing in a different light. So (for example) if a friend sends me a link to some "funny video," how can I explain to him that I no longer see that stuff as appropriate, all of a sudden? Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but it's like I'm seeing this stuff with new eyes now. All kinds of questions are popping up for me.

 

[Gimpy]

Same here. About 4-5 years a go- I noticed that I would have a very BAD reaction to uncomfortable situations. This bad reaction was that I would start laughing uncontrollably. Even though I was actually very upset by what I was witnessing, I couldn't stop laughing. I recall one time in particular when I saw my boyfriend and his sister have a very heated argument. And I was VERY upset but I couldn't cry... I just started laughing.

Ahhh, the old 'Hyena Response'. :D This sometimes happens to me when I'm close to saying something mean to someone. Instead of saying anything I get a wild look in my eye and laugh or smile, but there's nothing humorous about it. Its rarer now that I'm doing the EE breathing, but I avoid public television everywhere to keep that in check. (Lately if Hubby is even taking me out for a coffee, we find the furthest corner from any TV set)

I still laugh at some things that strike me as funny in public, mostly at movies.

 

[Keit]

Ahhh, the old 'Hyena Response'. :D This sometimes happens to me when I'm close to saying something mean to someone. Instead of saying anything I get a wild look in my eye and laugh or smile, but there's nothing humorous about it. Its rarer now that I'm doing the EE breathing, but I avoid public television everywhere to keep that in check. (Lately if Hubby is even taking me out for a coffee, we find the furthest corner from any TV set)

I still laugh at some things that strike me as funny in public, mostly at movies.

Here is a quote from Gurdjieff that might help to understand why it's happening.

At present we shall take only the intellectual center. There can be impressions which fall at once on two halves of the center and produce at once a sharp 'yes' and 'no.' Such a simultaneous 'yes' and 'no' produces a kind of convulsion in the center and, being unable to harmonize and digest these two opposite impressions of one fact, the center begins to throw out in the form of laughter the energy which flows into it from the accumulator whose turn it is to supply it. In another instance it happens that in the accumulator there has collected too much energy which the center cannot manage to use up.

Added: The above might also explain cases of "inappropriate" laughter (during funeral, for example) or "hysterical laughter" when instead of crying one bursts in laughter.

 

[Guardian]

I wonder what's funny to an STO being?

Him/herself?

I found that once I learned to laugh at myself, life got a whole lot easier :D

 

[Buddy]

Here is a quote from Gurdjieff that might help to understand why it's happening.

At present we shall take only the intellectual center. There can be impressions which fall at once on two halves of the center and produce at once a sharp 'yes' and 'no.' Such a simultaneous 'yes' and 'no' produces a kind of convulsion in the center and, being unable to harmonize and digest these two opposite impressions of one fact, the center begins to throw out in the form of laughter the energy which flows into it from the accumulator whose turn it is to supply it. In another instance it happens that in the accumulator there has collected too much energy which the center cannot manage to use up.

Gregory Bateson's application of the Theory of logical types to his observations of communications had an interesting way of saying the same thing [bolded below]. The reference to analogic is a reference to the creative hemisphere of the brain, while digital refers to the language half (binary, digital, on/off, yes/no, etc.).

The beginnings of cybernetics in 1943 (the word wasn't coined until'46) provided an overarching theoretical framework so that Gregory Bateson's broad concepts could be related to each other. In this time period, Bateson was introduced to Bertrand Russell and WHitehead's Theory of logical Types, consisting of 3 assertions:
1) No class can be a member of itself. A name is not the thing so named.
2) A class cannot be one of the members of its 'not class'. EX: we can separate from the class of 'furniture' all the 'chairs' and consider that the rest of the class of furniture is "non-chairs" and we say that it is formally incorrect to assert that the class 'chairs' can be classified among the 'non-chairs'.
3) If these 2 rules are contravened (to violate, infringe, or transgress), a paradox will occur.

At the heart of this theory is Bertrand Russell’s Theory of Logical Types, which Bateson applies to communication; specifically, communication between parent and child. The idea is this: certain communication – often really important communication – is ABOUT communication. The mode of this meta-communication is usually but not always nonverbal: posture, gesture, facial expression, intonation, etc. We need this information to determine what people REALLY mean; whether they’re serious or joking, or what they are. Schizophrenics are notoriously bad at this kind of communication, both in giving it and interpreting it. Why? Bateson and his colleagues theorized that Schizophrenics have been conditioned through repeated “double binds” (Bateson’s term) to ignore all meta-communications. Oddly, this enormous and in many ways debilitating blind spot is necessary to their survival.

It was the application of the Theory of logical types to his observations of communications that led to the distinguishing of the 'analogic' (non-verbal) and 'digital' (verbal) levels. Confounding these message levels may lead to pragmatic paradoxes as evidenced in play, humor, pathology, therapy, and creativity.

Bateson noted that paradox comes from the cognitive dissonance when the types become confused due to the message and the meta-message containing negatives. This became the leading thought that led to the later conceptualization of the double-bind (or pathological deutero-learning).

Also, Ouspensky, in The Psychology of Man’s Possible Evolution, points out that the differences in individual psychology explains the differences between what various people find funny as well as the influence of one's "identifications".

Let us take the emotional center. I will not speak at present about negative emotions. We will take only the division of the center into three parts: mechanical, emotional, and intellectual.

The mechanical part consists of the cheapest kind of ready-made humor and a rough sense of the comical, love of excitement, love of spectacular shows, love of pageantry, sentimentally, love of being in a crowd and part of a crowd; attraction to crowd emotions of all kinds and complete disappearance in lower half-animal emotions: cruelty, selfishness, cowardice, envy, jealousy, and so on.

The emotional part may be very different in different people. It may include in itself a sense of humor or a sense of the comical as well as religious emotion, aesthetic emotion, moral emotion, and, in this case, it may lead to the awakening of conscience. But with identification it may be something quite different, it may be very ironical, sarcastic, derisive, cruel, obstinate, wicked, and jealous – only in a less primitive way than the mechanical part.

I had another reference from the 'category' of neuroscience, but I can't find it now. If I run across it later, I'll add it to this thread.

 

[knowledge_of_self]

When hanging out with friends and family who are laughing at "inappropriate" things, are there ways that we can re-direct the situation gently? Since I've personally joined in with them in the past, how do I let them know that my perspective is changing on what is and isn't funny? I want to be externally considering and maintain strategic enclosure here... But I also don't want to pretend to find things funny that I'm suddenly seeing in a different light. So (for example) if a friend sends me a link to some "funny video," how can I explain to him that I no longer see that stuff as appropriate, all of a sudden? Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but it's like I'm seeing this stuff with new eyes now. All kinds of questions are popping up for me.

I know exactly how you feel Argonaut. I too have friends that send me not funny links that they think is hilarious but I think it's stupid/vile/not funny.
I find it’s easier to ignore those kinds of links if they are being sent to you on facebook or something-
Because then you can take the approach of just not commenting. You can read other people’s comments to see where their mentality is at- but you don’t need to add to it, especially if you think the opposite of what they think. I think this is in a way practicing strategic enclosure. At least that’s what I’ve been doing..

It gets a little bit harder if it’s like a movie your friends want to watch. Like let’s say a new Will Ferrell movie or something. I used to find a lot of his movies funny, but now I think they are mostly very stupid and I try not watching them as much but if I ever do end up watching it, I make notes on parts of the movie where I think ‘psychopathic humour’ is being used. I.e. Instances like “crying wife”. I don’t necessarily share those thoughts with people around me- I just make mental notes of them in my mind. I think in a way, that’s watching something objectively, rather than letting yourself completely dissociate and begin to laugh at things you would otherwise not find funny- if they were happening right in front of you. Meanwhile, you can pretend laugh with friends, so that they don’t think you’ve “lost your sense of humour.”

Of course there is always the honesty approach. You could just tell them that you do not find something funny, and state the reason why. Perhaps you will learn something about the people you are watching things with through that interaction- but it’s a rocky area for me as I’m one of those people who avoids confrontation whenever possible.

 

[Gertrudes]

Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but it's like I'm seeing this stuff with new eyes now. All kinds of questions are popping up for me.

Same here Argonaut. The one really big thing that I have noticed since...I think since having started EE, is that I no longer find the same things funny.

I used to find a lot of his movies funny, but now I think they are mostly very stupid and I try not watching them as much but if I ever do end up watching it, I make notes on parts of the movie where I think ‘psychopathic humour’ is being used.

I find myself doing exactly the same. I have actually wondered "where was I" when I used to find certain things funny?!

Because then you can take the approach of just not commenting. You can read other people’s comments to see where their mentality is at- but you don’t need to add to it, especially if you think the opposite of what they think. I think this is in a way practicing strategic enclosure. At least that’s what I’ve been doing..

Yes, I think an effective way of dealing with it is to just not feed it. Some people will likely sense that you are not in the same "page" as they are if your just don't add to their humorous interventions.

Thank you Keit and Bud, for your quotes. It is giving me food for thought and I would like to look deeper into this subject. I have often had issues with inappropriate laughter, laughter that I just couldn't control and never knew where it came from. It is very strange, for sometimes I was perfectly conscious of there being nothing to laugh about, but just couldn't control it.
I just realized reading this thread, that nowadays that rarely, if ever, happens! I think somethings are being dealt with under the surface, under he radar of my conscious awareness, so to speak.

 

[Argonaut]

<snip>

I still laugh at some things that strike me as funny in public, mostly at movies.

Here is a quote from Gurdjieff that might help to understand why it's happening.

At present we shall take only the intellectual center. There can be impressions which fall at once on two halves of the center and produce at once a sharp 'yes' and 'no.' Such a simultaneous 'yes' and 'no' produces a kind of convulsion in the center and, being unable to harmonize and digest these two opposite impressions of one fact, the center begins to throw out in the form of laughter the energy which flows into it from the accumulator whose turn it is to supply it. In another instance it happens that in the accumulator there has collected too much energy which the center cannot manage to use up.

Added: The above might also explain cases of "inappropriate" laughter (during funeral, for example) or "hysterical laughter" when instead of crying one bursts in laughter.

Thank you Keit for posting this. It perfectly explains the "cognitive dissonance" aspect of laughter in terms of the Work. And thank you too, Bud. The information you quoted was very thought-provoking. I look forward to seeing the other reference if you come across it.

I wonder what's funny to an STO being?

Him/herself?

I found that once I learned to laugh at myself, life got a whole lot easier :D

Sounds good to me. :) I've also been thinking that STO humor is probably used to bring people together. It would be harmonizing. Whereas STS humor is used to alienate, express negative emotions, or to draw attention to one's self (feed). I've also noticed that some people identify strongly with the things they find humorous. If someone else doesn't find a joke funny, the joke-teller often takes it as personal rejection. This wouldn't be the case with STO humor.

I know exactly how you feel Argonaut. I too have friends that send me not funny links that they think is hilarious but I think it's stupid/vile/not funny.
I find it’s easier to ignore those kinds of links if they are being sent to you on facebook or something-
Because then you can take the approach of just not commenting. You can read other people’s comments to see where their mentality is at- but you don’t need to add to it, especially if you think the opposite of what they think. I think this is in a way practicing strategic enclosure. At least that’s what I’ve been doing..

That's true. People don't usually think much of it if you simply don't respond to those things online. In those cases, it seems like jumping in and saying "I'm sorry, but I don't think it's funny" is just begging for a negative reaction.

Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but it's like I'm seeing this stuff with new eyes now. All kinds of questions are popping up for me.

Same here Argonaut. The one really big thing that I have noticed since...I think since having started EE, is that I no longer find the same things funny.

Interesting. Maybe that's part of it for me, too. It was surprising how quickly my perspective changed after reading this thread. Maybe EE has been preparing me for it somehow. I haven't been doing EE every day, though. I need to buckle down and do it more regularly. I'm sure that will help a lot.

[quote author=Gertrudes]

Thank you Keit and Bud, for your quotes. It is giving me food for thought and I would like to look deeper into this subject. I have often had issues with inappropriate laughter, laughter that I just couldn't control and never knew where it came from. It is very strange, for sometimes I was perfectly conscious of there being nothing to laugh about, but just couldn't control it.
I just realized reading this thread, that nowadays that rarely, if ever, happens! I think somethings are being dealt with under the surface, under he radar of my conscious awareness, so to speak.
[/quote]

I have much food for thought, too. And I'm also seeing another aspect of my predator. It seems terrified that if I stop finding certain things funny that I'll lose my sense of humor altogether. That I'll become bland and "lifeless." This idea falls apart when it's examined objectively... Still, I keep getting images of Doctor Manhattan from "Watchmen." Due to his objectivity and timeless perspective, he became "out of touch" with humanity. He kept his full range of emotions, but others still saw him as cold and distant because his emotions had a broader scope - he viewed things on a larger scale. He understood everyone perfectly, but was isolated because none of them could understand him or how he saw things. They were also intimidated by the fact that he knew so much about them. My predator fears that this is the ultimate plight of someone doing the Work. There is truth in this to a degree, but the fears are silly and wrong-headed. For one thing, nobody involved in this network is alone! :) But this humor thing has my predator worried greatly. Because to IT, sharing humor with friends and family has been a major way to connect with them. And what to do once our senses of humor are no longer colinear?

 

[D69]

I found that once I learned to laugh at myself, life got a whole lot easier

I so totally agree on that ! :D

And what to do once our senses of humor are no longer colinear?

I think that will work as a benefit , it will be easier to see who is who then.

 

[FireShadow]

What an excellent discussion!

Just to add my personal experience:

When I was a child, my stepmother would taunt me and make fun of me. When I cried, I got yelled at for being "too sensitive", "too thin-skinned". She made it sound like something was wrong with me because I was upset. I learned to not show how upset I was and learning to laugh was a great cover for my hurt. By not showing upset, it ruined her fun and she got bored with it eventually.

As a result, I have never enjoyed the type of humor that is about someone's pain. America's Home Videos are just too painful for me to watch, I do not think they are funny. Strangely, my biological mother and her husband are both pretty compassionate people yet they love that show. I think many here have pinpointed how that happens. They are ponerized and do not realize it. I think they would be horrified to realize how very "not funny" some of that stuff is to the people involved.

However, learning to laugh at my own foibles and mistakes is a great gift. It helps me keep perspective and not take myself too seriously. Perhaps intent and attitude makes the difference.