OOTS #1258 - The Discussion Thread

[brian 333]

Nah, I found that pretty standard for this forum actually. I meant the whole "all humour is at someone's expense, no exceptions" diversion.

Check out Benign Violation Theory.

It is easy to dismiss something we don't want to believe; we just assume the guy who said it is an idiot and go about our business. But these guys have been working on the problem for decades. It may turn out that the world still moves, and everyone who said it doesn't is wrong.

[Peelee]

Check out Benign Violation Theory.

It is easy to dismiss something we don't want to believe; we just assume the guy who said it is an idiot and go about our business.

I, for one, did not assume that. I simply assumed the guy who said it in this thread boiled it down to an easily disprovable statement which was not defended in any way other than repeating it, making enormous stretches to make counter examples fit, and telling people to do their own research.

Frankly, any time I hear "do your own research", I immediately think less of the argument being put forth.

[brian 333]

I, for one, did not assume that. I simply assumed the guy who said it in this thread boiled it down to an easily disprovable statement which was not defended in any way other than repeating it, making enormous stretches to make counter examples fit, and telling people to do their own research.

Frankly, any time I hear "do your own research", I immediately think less of the argument being put forth.

That's just it: I wasn't making an argument. I made a reference to a well established theory of humor that has been known and discussed for decades. My earliest reference point was Stranger In A Strange Land written in the 1950's and published in the 1960's. Even back then it was assumed to be common knowledge. Since then there has been a lot of study, and a lot of refinement of the theory.

The idea that I could explain over seventy years of research about something I thought of as common knowledge was, to me, about as absurd as explaining what is meant when I say that the sky is blue. The easiest way to understand is to go look for yourself, because for all my years trying to write, I've never been able to discribe blue. What really struck me was that I was not, in fact, being trolled: you guys had never heard of this. It was a novel idea, to you, and one which conflicted with your established ideas about humor.

But it is nothing new, and scientific study and refinements of the theory have, especially in recent decades, simply proven it true. Disbelieve all you like, but the world still moves.

So, you can post an endless list of reasons why I'm wrong, or you can go look at the sky and see what blue looks like.

[tanonx]

You know, I wasn't a fan of the head bonking system at first, but I'm starting to see a fringe benefit. By combining the figurative banging your head against something with literally banging your head against something, you can realize the futility of carrying on with the person in question that much faster.

They can feel the sweet taste of victory, having taught you a harsh but necessary lession, and you can get on with things.

[Peelee]

That's just it: I wasn't making an argument.

my thesis

Could've fooled me.

[bunsen_h]

That's just it: I wasn't making an argument.

my thesis

Could've fooled me.

No, it's being-hit-on-the-head lessons in here.

[arimareiji]

Can we try a more peaceful subject, like [censored] or [no. just no.] or [what is wrong with you?]... or maybe evendebating the relative decency of Belkar, Miko, and Hilgya? (^_~)°

[Peelee]

(^_~)°

I don't recognize that temperature scale.

[Liquor Box]

Can we try a more peaceful subject, like [censored] or [no. just no.] or [what is wrong with you?]... or maybe evendebating the relative decency of Belkar, Miko, and Hilgya? (^_~)°

I'm not sure that Miko is really comparable to the other two.

[arimareiji]

I don't recognize that temperature scale.

Weird emoticon: A wink plus a sweat drop (nervousness).

I'm not sure that Miko is really comparable to the other two.

I dunno if she could win the World Series of evil indecency, but she's in the right league.

_{Edit: Correcting a poor choice of words, though I'm still not sure if "unethical behavior" might've been better still.}

[hroþila]

Check out Benign Violation Theory.

It is easy to dismiss something we don't want to believe; we just assume the guy who said it is an idiot and go about our business. But these guys have been working on the problem for decades. It may turn out that the world still moves, and everyone who said it doesn't is wrong.

I think you might be assuming that "violation" there can only apply to things that can potentially offend someone, but that doesn't seem to be the case:

According to the theory, a violation refers to anything that threatens one’s beliefs about how the world should be. That is, something seems threatening, unsettling, or wrong. From an evolutionary perspective, humorous violations likely originated as threats to physical well-being (e.g., the attacks that make up tickling, play fighting), but expanded to include threats to psychological well-being (e.g., insults, sarcasm), including behaviors that break social norms (e.g., strange behaviors, flatulence), cultural norms (e.g., unusual accents, most scenes from the movie Borat), linguistic norms (e.g., puns, malapropisms), logic norms (e.g., absurdities, non-sequiturs), and moral norms (e.g., disrespectful behavior, bestiality).

No one's necessarily the butt of jokes that violate linguistic and logic norms, for example. The benign violation is there, but no one is offended, and the joke doesn't work at anyone's expense.

[KorvinStarmast]

I dunno if she could win the World Series of evil indecency, but she's in the right league.

She's the MVP of Lawful indecency, unless we include the GTGU/HtPGhS leader of the Sapphire Guard, in which case his bust is enshrined in the Hall of Lame ... as the only winner of the award.

[mashlagoo1982]

However, I also don't think she'll manage to bonk everyone once, checklist-style. She'll probably have to work some of those into the epilogue.

...and now I want to make Bingo Bonk Cards.

Do we have enough realistically potential characters to fill one up?
Maybe we could double up on some characters and have spaces for two bonks?
Elan and Durkon strike me a good candidates for those.

[Quizatzhaderac]

I made a reference to a well established theory of humor that has been known and discussed for decades. My earliest reference point was Stranger In A Strange Land written in the 1950's and published in the 1960's. Even back then it was assumed to be common knowledge. Since then there has been a lot of study, and a lot of refinement of the theory.

The theory you're referring to was originated by the philosophers thousands of years ago. If we look at Theories of humor on wikipedia we can see there's no consensus and that the superiority theory camp is light on scientists. The philosophers who advocated superiority theory also advocated we stop doing comedy altogether.

At the time a stranger in a strange land was written, it's extremely likely the writers' education involved some classics, but zero scientific psychology.

Also, humor at the times of Aristotle and Epictetus was different than modern humor. Much less ephemeral injuries like in your examples, and much more things like "slave gets killed for something that's not his fault". Much fewer "sick burns" and much more "that guys has plague and was mutilated by fire".

There has been a deliberate and long standing effort to prove those philosophers wrong, and that has heavily shaped western humor. What was once a few trivial exceptions, not worth talking about, are now the basis for entire genres of comedy.

[Ionathus]

I don't think anyone was debating in terms of Serini's overall morality. Only objecting to a few people describing it as endearing or warranted. As if, because Serini did it, it must be seen as a positive thing. To those who say "well obviously it's not appropriate conduct, but it's pretty minor in the context of the hijinks in the comic, and I find it funny" I don't think anyone would quarrel with. That is the context which most people (including you) seemed to be discussing it. This drawn out discussion seems to have generated from those few who can't accept that it was a minor misdeed which is relatively minor and may be funny (usually because they refuse to accept it was a misdeed at all).

I found the arguments defending/approving of her actions just as inane as the ones condemning them. And people were definitely condemning it, as early as the first page of discussion after she bonked Lien on the head. I don't have strong opinions on the bonking either way, but I don't think it's fair to characterize the discussion as "only" getting "drawn out" by the commenters who refused to admit it was a rude/mean/bad thing.

Several people were on the other end of that spectrum, also prolonging that argument, theorizing that she was full-blown evil based on, at most, the bonk she did and that she'd lied to a paladin for kicks.

No, it's being-hit-on-the-head lessons in here.

Yes, but I came here for an argument!!

Good lord, the entire sketch applies pretty perfectly to this thread, doesn't it? Hopefully nobody gets called a vacuous toffee-nosed malodorous pervert...

Thank you for this delightful little realization

[bunsen_h]

...and now I want to make Bingo Bonk Cards.

Do we have enough realistically potential characters to fill one up?
Maybe we could double up on some characters and have spaces for two bonks?
Elan and Durkon strike me a good candidates for those.

I have more trouble imagining her bonking Elan. The characters who are notably combat/fighter types seem to me to be more "reasonably" targets of such a thwack; a bit of rough-and-ready teaching would be part of the usual training process. For a bard, not so much, and especially not for a naive guy like Elan. To me, there's an element of "response to a stupid question": Elan can't be expected to think some things through in the same way that Lien or Durkon should.

I think you might be assuming that "violation" there can only apply to things that can potentially offend someone, but that doesn't seem to be the case:

No one's necessarily the butt of jokes that violate linguistic and logic norms, for example. The benign violation is there, but no one is offended, and the joke doesn't work at anyone's expense.

A large part of "nerd" humour is stuff that can't be considered to be based on hurting someone, without applying unreasonably narrow definitions of "humour" or unreasonably broad definitions of "hurting".

Spoiler: What do you get if you cross an elephant and a zebra?

Show

Elephant zebra sin theta.

Spoiler: What do you get if you cross a mountain climber and a mosquito?

Show

Nothing: you can't cross a scaler with a vector.

I first encountered this notion that "all humour is based on someone getting hurt" in Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land, and even when I was young and relatively uncritical, I thought it was pretty absurd.

[dancrilis]

And people were definitely condemning it, as early as the first page of discussion after she bonked Lien on the head.

That was less a condemnation and more a curiosity as to whether the Giant might have been using it to setup something down the line - i.e a shocking reveal of her being evil which causes the reader to review all her appearances in a new light.

Even at the time I didn't think it was likely.

[Ionathus]

That was less a condemnation and more a curiosity as to whether the Giant might have been using it to setup something down the line - i.e a shocking reveal of her being evil which causes the reader to review all her appearances in a new light.

Even at the time I didn't think it was likely.

Fair point. "Condemning" might be a bit strong -- I was mostly just trying to say that people were examining that action as possible evidence of legitimate wrongdoing or evil, and continued to make that argument when others disagreed. In addition to those saying "bonking people on the head is understandable and justified" there were also arguments from the far other side, ascribing or suggesting more malicious weight to a very minor act.

[Vikenlugaid]

I agree there's no damage, an I think that was widely agreed quite some time ago. But I think it caused pain, as evidenced by the exclamations from the victims.

No dmg no pain, only annoyance at most.

Probably the same annoyance Elan can cause just talking.

[Duncun]

No dmg no pain, only annoyance at most.

Probably the same annoyance Elan can cause just talking.

Agreed. I have banged my shin on a table before and said "ow", then realized my leg did not actually hurt. It was more of a surprise expression.

[Quizatzhaderac]

No dmg no pain, only annoyance at most.

Annoyance at what? A trivial amount of pain is still pain. I think everyone has agreed this is a molehill, and we're all just arguing about what side of the molehill is the right side.

I don't see what aspect of being bonked in the head is annoying, apart from the pain.

[brian 333]

Annoyance at what? A trivial amount of pain is still pain. I think everyone has agreed this is a molehill, and we're all just arguing about what side of the molehill is the right side.

I don't see what aspect of being bonked in the head is annoying, apart from the pain.

When I was much younger there was a television program that popularized Daisy Duke shorts for women. On that show a character named Roscoe would hit Elan... I mean Ennis, on the head with his hat.

While annoying there was obviously no pain associated with it. Why was it, at the time, considered funny?

[Quizatzhaderac]

While annoying there was obviously no pain associated with it.

That's just assuming the conclusion. I'll grant there obviously wasn't much pain, but I don't understand what you imagine was unpleasant about being struct with a staff or hat outside of the pain.

Also note that the only evidence we have of how much pain was involved is that durkon cried out "oww!" which is pretty clearly a pain response, not flinch response or whatever.

[brian 333]

That's just assuming the conclusion. I'll grant there obviously wasn't much pain, but I don't understand what you imagine was unpleasant about being struct with a staff or hat outside of the pain.

Also note that the only evidence we have of how much pain was involved is that durkon cried out "oww!" which is pretty clearly a pain response, not flinch response or whatever.

I've been hit with both. I've been hit in the head with both. A 'love tap' with a staff doesn't hurt, but it could. A full out assault with a felt hat is just annoying. At least, in my experience.

But I'll grant that pain to some degree resulted from the bonk on the head. You decide the degree. It's not something you'd want to do or have done to you. It's not funny.

But, a former employer needed a golf buddy. He paid my hourly wage, so we went golfing. I discovered exactly how good I'm not at golf.
A golf ball from another fairway struck him in the head. It wasn't a direct hit, but it obviously hurt. That was not funny at all.
The next time we went golfing he was hit in the head again, this time breaking his sunglasses. That wasn't funny either.
The next time we were In a large group, and he chose to wear an industrial hard hat. We made jokes, but we were all surprised when a ball hit him in the head for the third time.
Now that was funny.

[Liquor Box]

I found the arguments defending/approving of her actions just as inane as the ones condemning them. And people were definitely condemning it, as early as the first page of discussion after she bonked Lien on the head. I don't have strong opinions on the bonking either way, but I don't think it's fair to characterize the discussion as "only" getting "drawn out" by the commenters who refused to admit it was a rude/mean/bad thing.

Several people were on the other end of that spectrum, also prolonging that argument, theorizing that she was full-blown evil based on, at most, the bonk she did and that she'd lied to a paladin for kicks.

I was talking about the present discussion arising out of her hitting Durkon. I'm not saying it was only drawn out by the people who wouldn't admit that it was at all inappropriate. it was drawn out by everyone who participated (which includes you and I, each of us with several posts on the topic). I just find the position of those who are not just saying it's not a big deal and is funny, but are going so far as to say it was entirely warranted as being less reasonable.

Going back to the original discussion from around the time Serini hit Lien, I dont think there was anywhere that someone theorised that Serini was "full blown evil" based on "at most" her hitting Lien. If I have missed someone saying something like that, please do link to the post.

I did see people (including myself) speculating early on that Serini might have been evil (something that has not been disproven IMO) based on a whole lot of things she did, including drugging paladins, kidnapping them, hitting and mocking them while in captivity, and then expressing the intent to drug them again so they would forget the whole ordeal. I think I expressly said that the mocking and hitting was a minor part of that, only really relevant because it seemed to have been done for Serini's own amusement (while the other acts were done out a misguided sense that it would assist the protection of the gate. I stand by all those comments.

No dmg no pain, only annoyance at most.

Probably the same annoyance Elan can cause just talking.

I disagree. I don't think that no hit point damage means no pain. I think it did cause pain, but not hit point damage based on the exclamation.

[Vikenlugaid]

Annoyance at what? A trivial amount of pain is still pain. I think everyone has agreed this is a molehill, and we're all just arguing about what side of the molehill is the right side.

I don't see what aspect of being bonked in the head is annoying, apart from the pain.

Annoyance at being shut up in a rude way.

[KorvinStarmast]

Annoyance at being shut up in a rude way.

Shemp Howard wept.

[arimareiji]

She's the MVP of Lawful indecency, unless we include the GTGU/HtPGhS leader of the Sapphire Guard, in which case his bust is enshrined in the Hall of Lame ... as the only winner of the award.

Thank you for making my day. XD

Now I just need to find out how to commission the doujinshi Lawful Indecency, starring you-know-who.

[KorvinStarmast]

Thank you for making my day. XD

Now I just need to find out how to commission the doujinshi Lawful Indecency, starring you-know-who.

Glad I could lighten the tone somewhat, the conversation was getting a little heavy.

[mjasghar]

I've been hit with both. I've been hit in the head with both. A 'love tap' with a staff doesn't hurt, but it could. A full out assault with a felt hat is just annoying. At least, in my experience.

But I'll grant that pain to some degree resulted from the bonk on the head. You decide the degree. It's not something you'd want to do or have done to you. It's not funny.

.

Good to know we’ve persuaded you to change your mind and you acknowledge that it’s not funny.