Bergs

Laughter is such an interesting mechanism performed by the human body, of which there is no real understanding as to why people laugh, what causes it, and the effects it has on the human mood. Both Hobbes and Bergson make valid hypotheses as to why people laugh, though they certainly take different approaches to it. Hobbes states that laughter is a “sudden glory” caused by viewing the imperfections in others and favoring ourselves over others. Bergson, on the other hand, looks at laughter more philosophically. The way he discusses laughter through a “comic” is very interesting, and greatly helps with his point of view, discussing the inelasticity of the comic’s movements. Personally, I find Bergson’s much happier view on laughter closer to my own view. His view that “laughter always implies a kind of secret freemasonry” between people, or a brotherhood, is very valid in my own sense. I laugh when I’m with the people I love, but I don’t laugh around people I dislike. Hobbes, on the other hand, treats laughter much more cynically. He devises good points that make sense to me, such as other people’s errors being a cause of laughter, but his arguments are disconcerting to me. People laugh because they are cowardly just isn’t agreeable to me. Bergson does bring up the point that people laugh at others, such as in the case of the man running and falling because his body does not change its actions despite the change in circumstances. The way he words it is much friendlier, and a lot less spiteful. In Hobbes’s writing, I feel a lot of unhappiness, of which take away from the validity of his arguments. Bergson stays on the straight narrow, giving his view on the topic, and making understandable arguments towards his case.