We laugh at all sorts of things besides jokes. The most popular explanation is that laughter arises from the perception of incongruity. Maybe so, but I think there is more to be said.
How often lately have you begun to read a novel, only to discover that you didn’t like any of the characters and didn’t care two nickels what happened to them? It’s not just that they lack admirable qualities. They even lack interesting faults.
Do the authors care about these characters? Why do they think their readers would?
The Framers of the U.S. Constitution viewed what we revile as “gridlock” or “stalemate” as a good thing, not a bad one. They assumed that most changes in the law would be bad ones. Consequently, checks and balances among the three branches of government were supposed to slow down decisionmaking and preserve the status quo.
Why should we obey the natural law? Some people say, "Because it is the law of our nature. To aspire to the good is not to conform ourselves to something alien to us, but to fulfill the requirements of our own flourishing."
Whether compulsive behaviors like using pornography or sex-hookup apps should be considered addictions is still under debate. Most of the debate concerns brain chemistry, but one does not have to be a neurophysiologist to see why the analogy with addiction is attractive.
Like drunks, people who practice these behaviors aren’t happy.
I was a math and science kid, and still love physics jokes. Don’t worry, I don’t do this too often.
Question: What do you get if you cross Schrodinger's Cat with Pavlov's Dog? Answer: A pet that salivates when you ring a bell. Or does it?