>From: Sasha Chislenko <sasha1@netcom.com>
>Subject: Re: Humor and Intelligence
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 01:08:03 -0500
>
>At 12:20 AM 99/10/21 , Phil Osborn wrote:
> >Similar to Koestler's analysis in "The Act of Creation." Koestler,
>however, demonstrates the bio/cognitive mechanism by which this occurs,
>which might be important in upload/AI considerations. Suggest you check it
>out.
>
>As most likely not everybody would research the book, could you (or
>somebody)
>summarize the argument?
>
Koestler's argument is quite detailed and is part of a larger picture of an
analysis of humor, creativity and - oops forgotten the third one momentarily
(it's been about 30 years since I read the book). I recall that I disagreed
or was not convinced about some of his other arguments, but most of the
humor analysis made perfect sense. Here is a small portion of his argument
and position as I recall it:
All humor can be shown to resolve to perceiving or grasping something in two
contradictory lights simultaneously, the pun being the simplest example.
The brain, simplifying greatly, involves not just the "digital" kind of
behavior involving discrete signals and switching by neurons, axon,
dendrites, etc., but also the hormonal/emotional system that sets up both
brain and body for particular value orientations - good/bad, fight/flight,
etc.
The reason humor works is that the two systems function at very different
speeds and via very different mechanisms. The "digital" processing can
switch between the two mutually exclusive contexts of a humorous situatiion
very rapidly, giving the impression subjectively of holding them both
simultaneously. The hormonal/emotional charge associated with each
position, however, cannot switch nearly as rapidly. In fact, even though
the value charge associate with each perspective may be only slightly
different, and very slight to begin with, each digital switch forces the
emotional system to try to follow. But there isn't time enough to reabsorb
the hormones, so the emotional system has to override them instead, with a
higher concentration with each cycle.
Thus, even though the pun or joke may have little intrinsic charge
associated with either position, the natural following function of the
emotional system escalates the concentrations of hormones rapidly in
successive overrides, building to a critical threshhold similar to an
orgasm, in which any other data is being lost, at which point we laugh, as a
physical response designed to relieve that pent-up charge.
As an aside, I saw a marvelous little outtake in the recent 9/6/99 Time in
their article on animal intelligence. Seems that this researcher had at
least two parrots, one of whose name was Paco. The other parrot was
observing her prepare dinner, and, at the point she brought out a cornish
game hen, announced loudly, "Oh no, Paco!"
So she went and got Paco, just to reassure the bird that he was alive, at
which point the parrot said, "Oh no!" and then burst into peals of laughter.
I find nothing unbelievable about the idea that a parrot can have a finely
tuned sense of humor. I've seen coyotes in captivity react in ways that
appeared to be deliberately ironic or sarcastic. On the other hand, it is
harder to seen how an upload that was not modeled after real consciousness
in some way in its actual circuitry would be able to experience or enjoy
humor.
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>Sasha Chislenko <http://www.lucifer.com/~sasha/home.html>
>