Posted by Lou Pilder on April 21, 2009, at 5:41:02
In reply to Jokes » Lou Pilder, posted by Sigismund on April 20, 2009, at 14:58:21
> Lou, a good joke for me is one which makes me laugh, and it's only going to do that if the unexpected is involved. It doesn't have to be kind or unkind to do that. I didn't find the joke funny, but I'm not sure we show our concern for the disabled by not making jokes of this kind. Having public facilities (like wheelchair ramps) would be better. Maybe having a humane infrastructure in our cities? In Japan there are public toilets (not many, but I was in one) catering to people with colostomies. All we (in the anglosphere) do is cut taxes.
>
> Is it suitable for a mental health website?
> There's lots worse here, in particular capricious blocks.Sigismund and friends,
It is written here,[...a good joke...makes me laugh...doesn't have to be kind or unkind...I am not sure we show our concern...suitable for a mental health website?...lots worse here...]
In my thinking, I have listed criteria that I would use to determine if a joke on a mental health site is acceptable or not by first identifying the subject(s) of the joke.
This identification process could be done by asking:
A.Is the subject identified by evidence?
B. Is evidence needed to identify the subject(s)?
If no evidence is needed to idntify the subject(s), then it is generally acceptesd that the subject falls into the catagory of being (self-evident). This happens like when Scott identified the subject(s) as a fat lady, for there was not needed evidence to substantiate that the subject was already defined, thus being (self-evident).
Then after the subject(s) could be identified, a determination could be made as to if the subject is the object of ridicule or amusement. This can be self-evident or there could be substantiated evidence. One way for this determination to be made could be by examining if or if not the subject(s) could be the object of ridicule or amusement. This is generally accepted as being called the {butt} of the joke. This could be needing evidence to substaniate or it could be (self-evident). One way to determine it is to take out the subject and sse if it makes sense. If not, then it is generally acepted that it is needed to have the subject in the joke so that then the subject is the (butt) or target of the amusment or ridicule as being self-evident.
Now it is generally accepted that for one to be an object of ridicule, that the subject(s) becomes the object of laughter, or that the joke is dependant on the subject being the object of the amusment or laughter. I posted a classic song, (How Can You laugh, When You Know I'm Down), for reasons undisclosed by me yet.
There is much more to this in a mental health community that I would like to share with members or readers here by email.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:887367
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20090421/msgs/891895.html