What Does It Mean to Laugh?

Laughter is a type of agreement. Whether a slight chuckle or an explosive burst of hysterics that brings you to tears, laughter is only possible if three conditions are met: agreement, recognition, and knowledge. Absent even one of these, a joke flatlines.

This reflection explores the philosophy of humor, political comedy, and the ethical power of laughter in a divided society.

Recall the last time you laughed. Perhaps an absurdity abruptly tickled your sense of logic. Perhaps a comedian pointed out a truth neglected in your everyday habits of being. Perhaps a flawed assumption was suddenly laid bare.

It is important for us to be rather un-funny about what happens when we find something funny, because laughter exposes the depth of our understanding and the extent to which we are willing to challenge ideas once presupposed to be set in stone.

Laughter unveils our character to ourselves and to others. It is an honest expression of our disposition at its core.

With this in mind, it becomes easier to understand the cultural divide over the joke made by the President of the United States to the Men’s Olympic Hockey Team that he would have to invite the Women’s Team to the White House too.

For those who laughed, all three elements necessary for laughter were met.

For those who did not laugh, at least one of those elements failed — most notably, agreement.

The disparity in reaction hinges on this point.

In order to laugh, one must agree, at least on some level, that the value of an athlete depends in part on gender; that ideas about women are inconsistent with ideas about athleticism; that the company of women is less desirable than the company of men.

To not laugh is either to disagree with this sentiment or to find the attempted distinction entirely meaningless.

But to dismiss such jokes as flippant or “not that deep” is disingenuous. There is a heightened awareness of the power of laughter and the way it binds people together. Jokes and laughter unveil power structures. This is why the art of comedy, and its free expression, is an essential marker of a free society.

I suspect the Venn diagram of those who want the joke about the Women’s Hockey Team to be shrugged off as harmless and those who argue for the removal of late-night hosts like Colbert, Kimmel, and Meyers is, in fact, a circle.

Because laughter rests upon shared agreement, the acceptance of jokes that diminish women’s sports alongside the rejection of jokes aimed at the President should give pause to anyone who values freedom of expression. A flourishing society depends upon the protection of both athletic excellence and comedic critique, each nurturing the personal growth of citizens and, in turn, strengthening the culture as a whole.