Umorul Si Experientele Asociate - HanuAncutei.com

LocuriFaine: Hoteluri si Pensiuni de Lux | Ferma Club

Regulament

Info Psihologie

Va invitam la dezbateri pe teme diverse, avand in centrul lor Omul. Domeniu umanist complex, relativ greu de surprins in ecuatii sau teorii unice, psihologia va fi si un pretext pentru a discuta despre emotii, minte si suflet.

Umorul Si Experientele Asociate, Psihologia umorului

Optiuni

calfa Vizualizare profil forumist	8 Apr 2005, 12:50 PM Mesaj #1
Cronicar Grup: Moderator Mesaje: 2.894 Inscris: 7 December 03 Forumist Nr.: 1.410	Ideea subiectului provine de aici. In articolul respectiv sunt cateva idei interesante despre natura umorului. De exemplu, ca un element cheie al umorului (in forma sa obisnuita) este ... paradoxul. O gluma obisnuita ar utiliza gandirea logica pentru a ajunge in final la un rezultat neasteptat, care surprinde. Apoi, e interesanta observatia ca umorul este legat adesea de subiectele tabu (sexul, moartea, religia, etc.) care sunt greu de discutat deschis ca urmare a existentei regulilor si conventiilor sociale. Umorul ar avea un rol social de provocare si contestare a conventiilor care, desi socialmente necesare, pot sa ne separe de radacinile noastre umane. (Ma intreb totusi, cum incadram bancurile cu politisti ? Ei ar reprezenta autoritatea contestabila ? Sau bancurile anti-minoritare ? O contestare a unor realitati care nu ne plac (asadar nu autoritatea si nici conventiile) ?) O alta categorie interesanta tratata in articol este cea a jocurilor de cuvinte. Care practic se bazeaza pe utilizarea neasteptata a unui sens diferit de cel conventional. In discutie apare si gandirea originala, care ar necesita crearea unor legaturi noi, neasteptate, care initial nu sunt evidente. Iar umorul ar fi bazat pe originalitate. Pe de alta parte, se afirma ca umorul poate fi o "afacere periculoasa", putand sa produca manie si indignare. Dar cea mai interesanta observatie mi se pare aceea ca multi dintre marii comedieni au personalitati foarte serioase, abilitatile lor pentru umor dezvoltandu-se adesea ca moduri de a evada din starile de prea adanca seriozitate catre care ii impinge personalitatea lor. Articolul mai lanseaza si alte idei, dar poate le voi aduce in atentie mai tarziu. Deocamdata, ce pareri aveti despre aceasta incercare de a explica umorul ? -------------------- ... incertitude in certitude ... independence in dependence ... insight in sight ...

Raspunsuri

calfa

7 Nov 2005, 05:43 PM

Mesaj #2

Cronicar

Grup: Moderator
Mesaje: 2.894
Inscris: 7 December 03
Forumist Nr.: 1.410

Iata prima parte din textul citat de mine in mesajul initial, si care vad ca nu mai este accesibil acum

QUOTE

Humour and Related Experience
Towards an Integral Appreciation
Peter Collins

Though at a much less refined level, humour bears an intimate relationship with the mystical spiritual process. As such it potentially possesses a very creative role in understanding. However appreciation of the true integral nature of humour requires proper recognition of complementary related forms of experience.
Introduction

Though humour fulfils such a valuable role in experience, its facility as a creative mode of understanding remains greatly under-appreciated.

The clue to this neglect lies in its inherent nature.

Unlike most standard forms, which aim at a somewhat fixed static view of reality, humour has an inherently dynamic rationale that enables the rapid switching of structures and states. Therefore - as well as providing a most welcome means of releasing emotional tension - appropriate humour has the capacity to play a truly constructive part in the challenging of fixed assumptions and the generation of unexpected new insights. Indeed, as I hope to make clear, the underlying nature of humour bears a very close relationship to authentic spiritual understanding. So the proper recognition of the creative capacity of humour is ultimately inseparable from appreciation of the nature of the mystical process itself and can only find fulfilment through pure spiritual attainment.

Thus from one perspective, the stages of spiritual development - especially more advanced - represent a deep refining of the capacity for humour. Looked at from an equally valid standpoint, authentic spiritual integration of the personality cannot be maintained in the absence of an appropriate sense of humour.

Nature of humour

A key element of humour - as with advanced spiritual development - is paradox.

For example with the standard "joke" we are led through conventional logical thinking towards a certain outcome, only to be presented in the punch line with an unexpected conclusion. Thus the very ability to "see" and thereby appreciate the joke depends in this context on the simultaneous embrace of - usually two - self-consistent frames of reference that are logically incompatible with each other. 1 In this way the dynamics of a joke are very similar - though generally at a much less refined level - to the appreciation of dualistic paradox (which is a necessary prerequisite for pure nondual awareness). 2

Indeed we can fruitfully examine the experiential effects of humour from a spiritual perspective. In this context the key effect of humour is a discrete injection of spiritual illumination into a situation that is associated with a momentary feeling of joy. Therefore a good joke - as with all good humour - has the wonderful capacity to induce, for however brief a moment, an altered state or mood enabling the release of light and happiness into phenomenal activity. 3

The experience of humour usually evokes the basic psychophysical response of laughter. Indeed at its best - when truly spontaneous - laughter has a very healthy effect. Here acting like an emotional syringe, it can substantially release deep pent-up emotion leading to a remarkable feeling of well-being. 4 In its more refined expressions, humour is likewise associated with the physical response of smiling, which - though perhaps in a less forceful manner - can also play a valuable role in releasing emotional tension. Not surprisingly therefore psychologists and doctors commonly report on the beneficial health effects of laughter (and smiling).

In spiritual terms the two fundamental poles (or aspects) relate to immanence and transcendence respectively.

Through immanence we are enabled to appreciate our humanity (as grounded in the phenomenal world of form). Through transcendence we are correspondingly enabled to go beyond limited appreciation of such humanity through a deepening of spiritual awareness (that is ultimately empty of all phenomenal form). Thus at all stages of development there is an inevitable tension as between immanence and transcendence. Too much immanent grounding can lead to experience that is unduly light and superficial (where ego-centric desires prevail); too much emphasis on spiritual transcendence can however lead to a personality that is too serious and deep (where one loses touch with one's physical humanity).

When looked at closely, humour entails a sudden switch in an immanent direction away from - what is perceived in a given context as - a false sense of transcendence.

Indeed humour often relates to taboo subject matter e.g. sex, death, race, religion that - due to inflexible rules and social conventions - people may have difficulty in openly discussing. Rules and regulations of course serve a very necessary role in moving beyond individual whim in the maintenance of a coherent collective order. In this way they serve a transcendent social function. However such conventions - even when well intentioned - can easily become stereotypical and thereby act in an inauthentic manner. Then instead of enabling genuine transcendence they can stifle feelings and honest expression. So for example in a strict religious society, it can be difficult to talk about sex. What is inhibited with respect to conventional discourse then becomes the subject matter of humour where false authority is more freely challenged. Humour therefore can serve a valuable social role in challenging conventions that - however socially necessary - may separate us from our basic human roots.

So when successful in this sense, humour safely debunks conventions removing a false sense of authority.

And such false authority potentially extends to every area of life necessarily defined by conventional rules of behaviour.

For example the use of language entails that we associate commonly accepted meanings with words. However through wordplay (e.g. puns) we can challenge this accepted usage creating unexpected new linkages. And in appropriate circumstances this can even prove a very creative source of new ideas. 5

Indeed truly original thinking - whether in art, science, philosophy, politics, business etc. - always requires the capacity to creatively make unexpected new linkages that initially are not obvious to the conventional mind. Thus because humour itself requires something of the same originality, it can - when used appropriately - serve as a valuable catalyst in the generation of such thinking. It this way it can help to displace old and somewhat outdated certainties with a new appropriate authority. In this way the false can give way to a more genuine notion of transcendence.

However by its nature humour is a very risky affair, which can easily backfire in its intentions. If one attempts to challenge authority in a social context, where such behaviour is not deemed acceptable, humour can cause anger and indignation. Thus what might appear "funny" to one may well be "nasty" to another.

For example this was well illustrated recently when Billy Connolly attempted to make light of the fate of the hostage Ken Bigley in Iraq (at a time when his life was still hanging in the balance).

Though one could perhaps attempt to justify Connolly's black humour on the basis that even the darkest situation (such as the prospect of an impending cruel death) has a funny side, the general consensus held that his remark was ill judged. In other words in failing to respect the true gravity of Bigley's condition - Connolly's "humour" was found deeply demeaning and offensive (even among his ardent fans). Thus, though humour so often attempts to debunk accepted norms, there is the further paradox, that it can only do this successfully within a cultural context of what is considered acceptable in this regard. Though the best-known comedians - such as Connolly - are often given considerable licence to push the boat out with respect to what is acceptable, there are definite limits - as the example of Ken Bigley illustrates - to this process.

So once again successful humour leads to a temporary injection of spiritual light into experience. It thereby gives an enhanced appreciation - however temporary - of the immanent nature of existence helping us to feel more at home with the world.

However as immanence is necessarily associated with transcendence, the very ability to appreciate good humour requires complementary recognition of the dark and serious side of personality. Indeed true quality in humour depends on ready recognition of the sudden juxtaposition of these contrary aspects.

It is not surprising therefore that many of the great comedians (and comediennes) have very serious personalities. Indeed it seems to me that their humorous ability often develops as a self-serving need to escape the demanding challenge which proper exploration of such personalities requires.

So there can often be a somewhat manic-depressive element to comics. Because humour - in its conventional forms - can only offer a short-term solution to life's problems, they can at times become frantic in their humorous attempts to keep combating the dark side. However as ultimately such attempts are doomed to failure they are then prone to bouts of depression where conventional humour can no longer provide an answer.

So for true personal integration a degree of higher-level spiritual development is required (which varies for each individual). And just as this "higher" development relates to the conventionally recognised faculties of understanding, cognitive, affective and volitional, equally it applies to humour.

However, before we deal with this integral nature of humour we need to look at some other dynamic features of understanding that are closely related to it in complementary fashion.

Negative Humour

Just as the psychophysical phenomenon of laughing (and smiling) is associated with humour, the corresponding psychophysical phenomenon of crying (and weeping) is frequently associated with - what I term - negative humour. For convenience I will refer to conventional humour as "humour A" and such "negative humour as "humour B". 6 As we have seen conventional humour (i.e. "humour A") - in all its forms - ultimately serves to lead, however briefly, to an increased existential appreciation of the immanent aspect of existence. Negative humour however always entails an existential loss with respect to such immanence.

For example the sudden reception of distressing news such as the death of a close relative may well cause a degree of emotional sadness that one physically cries (or perhaps shed tears). Because earthly existence is so closely bound up with such relationships, our immanent sense of existence can be greatly affected through such a death. So in mourning the loss of a close relative or friend one is also mourning a corresponding loss in one's immanent grounding in the world.

Now of course the death of a loved one would be a major event. However the same phenomenon can occur on an everyday basis through all the little slights and injustices that one may experience. So an unexpected hurtful remark from - say - a colleague at work could cause the same type of loss (though of a more temporary nature).

Interestingly however, with negative humour, complementary physical expressions such as crying are not so well tolerated by society. Indeed there is an interesting difference here based on sex. Thus it is much more culturally acceptable for women in our society to physically express various forms of sadness and grief through weeping and crying. However - except in limited circumstances - this is generally not acceptable for adult men.

This could well be an important contributory factor to the greater difficulty that men seemingly experience in expressing their emotions. In other words though grief is equally experienced by both sexes, men are generally denied the same psychophysical release in expressing such loss. In other words in not being allowed to physically mourn the various "little deaths" that threaten their immanent grounding in reality, a considerable build-up of repressed emotion can result leading eventually to uncontrolled anger and violence. 7

A brief look at early childhood experience can reveal the close relationship as between both aspects of humour (i.e. "humour A" and "humour B").

Clearly when a baby is born neither the immanent nor the transcendent aspects of personality have yet undergone much differentiation. Therefore because both aspects are merged with each other in a confused fashion the capacity for humour (and its negative) is somewhat limited. So early baby humour is based on the attempt to imitate sounds, gestures, visual expressions etc. that can be accompanied by much primitive laughter However though this does indeed help to convey a sense of immanent grounding, because it is yet of a very superficial nature it is easily disturbed. So the slightest upset can then lead to the threatened loss of emotional security resulting in frequent bouts of crying. Thus there is a heavy emphasis in early childhood on the merely physical outward expressions associated with both forms of humour i.e. laughter and crying, which can alternate quickly from one state to the other.

By contrast, at the more advanced stages of contemplative development, where the transcendent and immanent aspects are integrated in mature fashion, both types of humour can be psychologically harmonised in a continual stable experience (with little direct need therefore for outward physical expression). 8

So to sum up at this stage, humour and its negative form (i.e. "humour A" and "humour B") both relate directly to the immanent aspect of experience. "Humour A" - what is conventionally referred to as humour - entails the sudden collapse of a false notion of transcendence leading to a discrete immanent injection of spiritual light into experience.

"Humour B" - what is conventionally referred to sadness - entails the sudden mourning of an immanent loss thereby revealing a present lack with respect to one's capacity to successfully transcend the situation. Thus properly coping with life's sorrows requires the development of an in-built capacity to transcend situations associated with such loss in a creative manner. So again though the psychophysical mourning of loss (e.g. through crying) may serve a valuable short-term need, like conventional humour, it cannot in itself provide a permanent solution to life's problems.

Acest topic a fost editat de calfa: 7 Nov 2005, 05:50 PM

--------------------

... incertitude in certitude ... independence in dependence ... insight in sight ...

Mesaje in acest topic

calfa Umorul Si Experientele Asociate 8 Apr 2005, 12:50 PM

contraste QUOTE sunt greu de discutat deschis ca urmare a ex... 8 Apr 2005, 12:56 PM

Don Quijote Umorul - umorul acela sanatos,puternic , ironic, a... 12 Apr 2005, 07:42 AM

yuanescu QUOTE umorul acela sanatos,puternic , ironic, auto... 17 Apr 2005, 04:40 PM

agora Umorul e una din cele mai sublimate defense ale Eu... 17 Jun 2005, 09:23 AM

calfa Bun venit la Hanu Ancutei, agora ! E si asta... 17 Jun 2005, 12:10 PM

agora Mersi de urari. Umorul ca si manifestare nu e spo... 20 Jun 2005, 01:40 PM

simonsays agora, nu stiu daca pot zice ca "umorul se in... 20 Jun 2005, 06:01 PM

agora Cred ca umorul se invata. El este o evolutie a amu... 21 Jun 2005, 10:07 AM

simonsays da, cert, este o descarcare de tensiune QUOTE Umo... 21 Jun 2005, 10:29 AM

gypsyhart Intr'adevar rasul este o eliberare de energie.... 21 Jun 2005, 11:08 AM

simonsays ce-ar fi sa iesi din sedintele cu tine insuti, si ... 21 Jun 2005, 11:43 AM

gypsyhart @simon pai nu stii cum se spune "cand doi se ... 21 Jun 2005, 12:18 PM

agora Cred ca distinctia cea mai pregnanta ar fi intre a... 21 Jun 2005, 02:00 PM

dascalita Mi se pare tare elaborata definirea notiunii de um... 21 Jun 2005, 06:43 PM

agora Potentialul de a dezvolta umor al unei persoane e ... 22 Jun 2005, 09:51 AM

gypsyhart Din punctul meu de vedere, umorul cultivat de care... 22 Jun 2005, 12:47 PM

agora Umorul cultivat probabil ar putea fi ceva fals nu ... 22 Jun 2005, 01:12 PM

gypsyhart "non mental"= dincolo de ganduri.... 22 Jun 2005, 01:52 PM

agora Si atunci rasul e un fel de reflex? 22 Jun 2005, 01:58 PM

Grabillion Umorul este un mijloc de a te pune in centrul aten... 7 Nov 2005, 05:31 PM

Leonardo analiza stiintifica a umorului mi se pare lipsita ... 7 Nov 2005, 05:37 PM

calfa Iata prima parte din textul citat de mine in mesaj... 7 Nov 2005, 05:43 PM

calfa continuarea... QUOTE Reverse Humour We have defi... 7 Nov 2005, 05:47 PM

calfa continuarea... QUOTE Notes 1. Groucho Marx was ... 7 Nov 2005, 05:48 PM

aburelius n-am citit articolul, este lung, da' o sa-l ci... 7 Nov 2005, 05:59 PM

Grabillion @Leonardo Ai dreptate in ceea ce zici, dar trebui... 7 Nov 2005, 06:25 PM

Leonardo Grabillion am apreciat scurta ta dizertatie dar ... 7 Nov 2005, 06:35 PM

Grabillion Da, umorul este important, mai ales la teme serioa... 7 Nov 2005, 06:42 PM

Leonardo Grabillion am un defect esential: nu pot urmari su... 7 Nov 2005, 06:46 PM

actionmedia QUOTE (gypsyhart @ 22 Jun 2005, 12:47 PM) Din punc... 7 Nov 2005, 08:12 PM

Grabillion @actionmedia Da, ai dreptate, la rasul unui copil... 7 Nov 2005, 08:35 PM

aburelius Grabillion, aşa cred şi eu, ăla e r... 8 Nov 2005, 06:44 PM

actionmedia QUOTE (aburelius @ 8 Nov 2005, 06:44 PM) cauza ori... 9 Nov 2005, 04:35 PM

aburelius actionmedia am avut în vedere toate astea când am... 9 Nov 2005, 05:51 PM

calfa QUOTE (aburelius @ 9 Nov 2005, 06:51 PM) m-am gând... 9 Nov 2005, 06:32 PM

aburelius calfa, nu cred, m-aş fi bucurat să fie a... 9 Nov 2005, 10:01 PM

jet li Scriu dupa ce am citit ceva de Mark Twain si exper... 21 Nov 2005, 07:54 PM

« Cele mai vechi · Psihologie - Teorii si Aplicatii. Dezvoltare personala · Cele mai noi »