Stephen Colbert and Philosophy - Aaron Allen Schiller [85]
Each one of these theories, however, is limited to a particular kind of humor. The problem is that they try to account for all facets of Stephen Colbert’s humor with one explanation. The superiority theory explains why we laugh at how desperate Stephen Colbert becomes in dealing with his withdrawal from Starbucks coffee; we feel elevated to a higher status when we see him suffer. And this explanation carries over to the other examples of his humor. The superiority explanation becomes the only focal point of the humor, while in fact we may laugh for other reasons. If we were to continue with this theory, we would have to explain that the reason why we laugh when Stephen Colbert pours coffee on himself while showering is because we think we are better than that. The theory would not take into account our surprise and the oddity of pouring coffee over oneself in the shower.
The relief theory explains that our laughter is due to some pent-up fear or other emotion in desperately needing coffee and having to continue on without it. The relief theory would explain why we laugh at Stephen Colbert pushing his co-workers out of the way. In this case the reason again is because we too have a secret desire to be mean to the people we work with, and who wouldn’t after what they said about us last week? The theory reduces the reason why we laugh at Stephen Colbert’s humor always to some repressed desire we have. The relief theory doesn’t give a satisfying account for why we laugh at the ridiculousness of Stephen Colbert on an exercise machine, unless, of course, we say that we have all been there and have done that before, and we are relieved from some sort of hidden anxiety we feel about having to go through it again.
While it’s true that in most scenarios what Stephen Colbert does is contrary to our expectation (the incongruity theory), it’s not clear that this is the reason why we laugh. Sometimes we laugh because we are surprised, but other times we laugh because of the extent of the ridiculousness. The problem with these theories is that they focus on a single cause while there seem to be multiple reasons for why we laugh. Just as there are varieties of people and paralyzing phobias, there are a variety of ways people can understand humor and different reasons for why they laugh, and why they’re afraid of small flightless birds. Sometimes we laugh in a silly way, since what Stephen Colbert says is absolutely true and he is revealing something about the way we live, act, and think. What is needed is a complete theory of humor that can account for all the different ways Stephen Colbert makes people laugh.
The theory should also be able to do more than that, though. It should also be able to explain why some people laugh at Stephen Colbert’s humor while others do not. And, while no one comedian can be funny all the time, how can we account for the fact that even when Stephen Colbert bombs his jokes, he can still be funny?
What we need is a theory of humor that does not force us to accept one explanation for all the different kinds of humor. We need a theory that allows for multiple explanations for why we laugh, and the same theory should do the dishes and make us breakfast in the morning.
That Quirky Philosopher Wittgenstein and his Language Games
Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian philosopher who devoted his life to articulating the problems of philosophy that are due to language. He had many innovative ideas in the philosophy of language, logic, mathematics, and psychology. Though much philosophical work has been done with Wittgenstein’s writings, there is still more we can gain especially with what he has written on humor. Keep in mind that in this chapter I’m drawing my ideas from Wittgenstein and not at all claiming to be channeling him from his grave.
“Humor is not a mood but a way of looking at the world.”144 This way of looking at the world is particular to specific cultures and time periods