Name: Plurationalist Dialogue 305, “What is the Power of Humor in Communication?”
Start: 2025-11-17T19:00:00-06:00
End: 2025-11-17T21:00:00-06:00

The reasoning theists, atheists, liberals, libertarians, & conservatives of Secular Bible Study, First Minneapolis Circle of Reason, Circle of Ijtihad, & Winnipeg Circle of Reason join Interbelief Conversation Café for our **305th Plurationalist (Interbelief Reasoning) Dialogue** by Zoom, **“What is the Power of Humor in Communication?”**

Humor \| ˈ\(h\)yo͞omər \| noun
**•** the quality of being amusing or comic, especially as expressed in literature or speech: *His tales are full of humor*.
**•** the ability to express humor or make other people laugh: *I found his brand of humor funny as hell, but biting – I couldn’t stop laughing, but I’m glad I wasn’t the butt of his jokes.*

Jesus said to his followers, after a wealthy man slunk away after being advised to sell everything he owned and give the money to the poor before joining him, “It’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God!” Some of his followers were saddened, others were alarmed…but did others chuckle at the imagery? (That indeed would be a tight fit!)

Hitler in 1944 asked one of his officers, “So tell me Jodl, how far are we going to retreat today?” Alfred Jodl did not laugh. This was, in part, due to Americans’ switch from isolationism to support of the Allied powers against Hitler’s dictatorship -- stimulated in part by Charlie Chaplin satirizing him in the comedy movie, “The Great Dictator.” (But Chaplin later regretting making it, saying his caricature made too much light of the man who later became infamous for committing the Holocaust.)

In an apocryphal story, Einstein supposedly attended a party where an anonymous younger scientist mentioned he was always having to write down new ideas. Albert wistfully replied, “How wonderful! I’ve only had a few good ideas in my entire life!” (Both self-deprecating, *and* a sly insult!)

Is there an alternate Earth-1 somewhere where Trump never ran for President, because then-President Obama thought better of mercilessly roasting him as he sat in the audience during the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner?

Humor can be gentle, or harsh. It can be directed toward oneself, or toward others. But when effective, it mostly triggers real laughter by “coming out of left field” – by triggering surprise. (*The Dalai Lama’s touring New York City. He walks up to a hot-dog vendor and says, “Make me one with everything.”*) Suddenly reframing expectations and perspectives is apparently a powerful way to elicit pleasure in the *human* animal – and eliciting pleasure is one of the most powerful ways to elicit change in *any* animal.

Consequently, does our use of humor to change other’s emotional states and behavior create a moral issue? Is it moral to emotively manipulate others? Can humor be communicated morally only when it conveys emotional truths, or is humor moral at all times, because (at least in this country) it’s considered free speech?

Is biting satire, which uses humor to insult or degrade others, still the same type of humor as that which helps illuminate and uplift others? Should we have a language that makes distinctions and judgments about the types of humor, and the types of goals it is expressed to achieve? Is humorous ridicule of others just “all in fun,” or a tactic for Machiavellian emotive coercion of both those ridiculed, and of those who hear the ridicule?

Is there such a thing as “pure humor” instead of “calculated humor”? Is the former more *self*-deprecating than \*other-\*insulting? Is the former more about *ideas* than about *people*? Is the former *modest*, not *ambitious*? Is the former more *funny* than *combative*? Is the laughter the former humor engenders *genuine*, instead of *aghast*?

How much does human communication depend on our use of humor? When others laugh *at* us, does our communication *plummet*? When others laugh *with* us, does our communication *take wing*?

Is humor, for good or evil, always a form of emotive manipulation, and thus a form of coercion? Or is humor, when used with good will to convey only facts, not *emotively coercive* but *emotionally informative*? A moment of humor is a moment of new realization, a new reality or perspective. And isn’t new knowledge innately good, even if it’s of the reality that humans live in part through emotional perceptions – including those that make us ROFL?

At 7-9 pm CST Mo 11/17/25 by Zoom we'll reasoningly share our diverse or even disparate views on how we lead people to laughter and to where we lead them. Our reasoning dialogue’s agreements of open-mindedness, acceptance, curiosity, discovery, sincerity, brevity, & confidentiality should help us see ourselves more clearly in the fun-house mirror, distortions and all!

Frank Burton

TCOR

First Minneapolis Circle of Reason

Religion & Spirituality

Intellectual Discussions

Philosophy

Politics

Religion

Interfaith and Intercultural Dialogue

Christian

Atheist

Spirituality

Skeptics

Conservatives

Liberals

Humanism

Critical Thinking

Geek Culture

Plurationalist Dialogue 305, “What is the Power of Humor in Communication?”

Rationality and Reasoning

Online event

Share

First Minneapolis Circle of Reason

Plurationalist Dialogue 305, “What is the Power of Humor in Communication?”

First Minneapolis Circle of Reason

Details

Members are also interested in