Abstract

Philosophical literature on humor is both minimal and entrenched in a logical space and language inadequate to the scope and complexities of the subject. By perscrutation of what has been said about humor and how it has been said, I identify a variety of problems with the content and construction of humor studies in the literature and attempt to effect disruptions in its theoretical construction. I do not confine myself to a specific methodology, but rather key into and develop contextual, theoretical and moral issues as they bear on the already formulated concerns and debates about theories and functions of humor, the perception of incongruity, humorous amusement as an aesthetic versus an emotional response, and the applicability of moral assessment of humor. My aim is to make some contribution to opening up a more generous logical space for future work on humor