Knock Knock: Meta-Argumentative Humor, Who?

Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 33 (2):143-154 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this essay, we give a theoretical overview of how humor can play a meta-argumentative role, particularly in making clear the norms and stakes of arguments. This, we think, has salutary consequences for teaching critical thinking and argument evaluation—humor is a useful tool for making those things clear. However, there are troubling features of humor’s functions that problematize its use in teaching settings. These are what we call the cruelty, audience, accessibility, and gender gap problems for humor as a pedagogical tool.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,449

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-12-16

Downloads
31 (#763,697)

6 months
4 (#864,415)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Scott Aikin
Vanderbilt University

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references