This design principle for the ridiculous we find in comic literature abound: you can be a fool erudite speeches swing, an ugly old woman behave as if it were nice and jung, letting people know the opposite of what they actually engaged or expect to drop all these people in the ridiculous. The imagination, which produces the laughter from the sudden perception of incongruity, must be the subject of the presentation but not personal and concerned with the heart; in such a case, the laughter stops. “In other words: If the offender who is not a stranger to the execution runs but a friend, whose death causes us pain, or if we ourselves are this delinquent and there is the executioner, the week starts well the sentence” says to us, so probably only extraordinary natures will erupt in laughter. Even the tickling is still understandable with this approach: from the incongruity, the Tickle causing us a pain or a lust, leads us a verdict not out both is true, and so laugh We. Fiber Optics shares his opinions and ideas on the topic at hand. A second Hinblicknahme on the phenomenon of laughter results from the observation that not all people with the same laugh. (Source: Sam Lesser Upenn). It seems that what evokes laughter, is closely associated with education, and with a sense of superiority. We are thinking about the subject, which we laugh at. Complies with laughter, so is a social function, the Central thesis of Henri Bergson.
Of this social character of laughter from Goethe’s judgment to understand is: nothing the people refer to their character, more than by what they find ridiculous. “We take an example here: we see a man running across the street, stumbles and falls.” Some passers-by laugh, others do not. One could interpret the scene first of all in the sense of incongruity theory and say: usually comes the man well across the street, tumbling and falling man is so contrary to our natural expectations.