Thinkers and philosophers from Plato and Aristotle

眾多思想家以及哲學家從柏拉圖、亞里士多得到

to Hobbes, Freud, and beyond,

霍布斯、弗洛伊德等等，

including anyone misguided enough

包含所有曾錯誤

to try to explain a joke,

解釋這件事的人，

have pondered it,

都曾深思過這個問題，

and no one has settled it.

至今無人能夠解答。

You're lucky you found this video to sort it out.

這個影片將解開這個千古之謎，你能看到個影片真是太幸運了。

To define comedy, you should first ask

要定義喜劇，你必須先問

why it seems comedy defies definition.

為甚麼喜劇沒辦法被定義呢。

The answer's simple.

答案很簡單。

Comedy is the defiance of definition

喜劇就是在挑戰定義

because definitions sometimes need defiance.

因為定義有時候就是需要被挑戰的。

Consider definition itself.

來想定義是甚麼。

When we define, we use language

當我們下定義時，我們使用語言

to set borders around a thing

去為一個東西制定界線

that we've perceived in the whirling chaos of existence.

我們利用隱約感知一個混亂的東西的存在

We say what the thing means

來給他下定義

and fit that in a system of meanings.

並且把它融入一個有意義的系統

Chaos becomes cosmos.

混亂即變得井然有序。

The universe is translated

宇宙被翻譯

into a cosmological construct of knowledge.

成宇宙哲學。

And let's be honest,

老實說，

we need some logical cosmic order,

我們的宇宙需要秩序，

otherwise we'd have pure chaos.

不然我們除了混亂甚麼都沒有了。

Chaos can be rough,

混亂可以很粗糙，

so we build a thing that we call reality.

所以我們打造了一個我們稱之為現實的存在。

Now think about logic and logos,

現在想想邏輯和圖形，

that tight knot connecting a word and truth.

這個緊密的連結連接了一個字和一項事實。

And let's jump back to thinking about what's funny,

現在讓我們回頭想想甚麼東西好笑，

because some people say it's real simple:

有人說這個問題的答案其實很簡單:

truth is funny.

真相是好笑的。

It's funny because it's true.

它很好笑因為它是真相。

But that's simplistic.

因為它過分單純化。

Plenty of lies are funny.

很多謊言是好笑的。

Comedic fiction can be funny.

喜劇也好笑。

Made-up nonsense jibberish is frequently hilarious.

亂編出來的胡言亂語也滿滑稽的。

For instance, florp --

比如說，florp --

hysterical!

歇斯底里的!

And plenty of truths aren't funny.

很多事實就沒那麼好笑了。

Two plus two truly equals four,

二加二真的等於四，

but I'm not laughing just because that's the case.

但是我並不會因為這個事實就笑。

You can tell a true anecdote,

你可以講一件真實的奇聞軼事，

but your date may not laugh.

但是你的約會對象可能也不會笑。

So, why are some untruths and only some truths funny?

所以，為甚麼只有一部份的真實和一部份的不真實好笑呢?

How do these laughable truths and untruths

這些真實和不真實

relate to that capital-T Truth,

又跟真正的事實，

the cosmological reality of facts and definitions?

宇宙的真理和定義有甚麼關係呢?

And what makes any of them funny?

他們這麼好笑的原因到底是什麼？

There's a Frenchman who can help,

這裡有個可以幫得上忙的法國人，

another thinker who didn't define comedy

又是個沒有給喜劇下定義的思想家

because he expressly didn't want to.

因為他完全不想

Henri Bergson's a French philosopher

Henri Bergson 是一位法國的哲學家

who prefaced his essay on laughter

他以笑聲為他的創作寫序文

by saying he wouldn't define "the comic"

他說他不會去定義

because it's a living thing.

因為那是活生生的東西。

He argued laughter has a social function

他爭論笑聲有社會功能

to destroy mechanical in-elasticity in people's attitudes and behavior.

可以消滅人類態度和行為上的機械無彈性。

Someone doing the same thing over and over,

有人一直重複進行同一個動作，

or building up a false image of themself and the world,

或是建立一個自己和世界的虛擬影像，

or not adapting to reality

或是無法融入現實

by just noticing the banana peel on the ground --

單靠注意到地上的香蕉皮 --

this is automatism,

這是一個自動的機制，

ignorance of one's own mindless rigidity,

忽略一個人本身愚蠢的僵化，

and it's dangerous

和它的危險性

but also laughable

但卻也很好笑

and comic ridicule helps correct it.

而且滑稽的喜劇給予矯正的協助。

The comic is a kinetic, vital force,

喜劇是活躍的、富有生命力的，

or elan vital,

或是一股生命衝動，

that helps us adapt.

幫助我們適應。

Bergson elaborates on this idea

Bergson 延伸了這個想法

to study what's funny about all sorts of things.

來研究所有事物到底哪以好笑了。

But let's stay on this.

但我們先不要講太多。

At the base of this concept of comedy is contradiction

就這個論點，喜劇的基礎在於矛盾

between vital, adaptive humanity

生與死，人類適應

and dehumanized automatism.

和非人類自動化。

A set system that claims to define reality

一組設定好的系統聲稱要定義現實

might be one of those dehumanizing forces

或許就屬於那些非人類的勢力

that comedy tends to destroy.

就是喜劇試圖消滅的勢力。

Now, let's go back to Aristotle.

我們現在回頭看看亞里斯多德。

Not Poetics, where he drops a few thoughts on comedy,

他並未在詩中專研過喜劇，

no, Metaphysics,

而是於純粹哲學 (宇宙哲學)之中，

the fundamental law of non-contradiction,

不矛盾的基礎原則，

the bedrock of logic.

邏輯的根基。

Contradictory statements are not at the same time true.

矛盾對立並非同時正確。

If A is an axiomatic statement,

如果 A 是個不言自明的聲明，

it can't be the case

那麼

that A and the opposite of A are both true.

A 和 A 的相反都是正確的這種情況就不可能成立。

Comedy seems to live here,

喜劇似乎長居於此

to subsist on the illogic

維持不合邏輯的存在

of logical contradiction and its derivatives.

在合理的毛段和其衍生物之中。

We laugh when the order we project on the world

當我們在世界上設計出來的規則

is disrupted and disproven,

被打亂的時候我們大笑，

like when the way we all act

就像我們都會表現的

contradicts truths we don't like talking about,

矛盾，針對我們不願談論的事情，

or when strange observations we all make

或是我們都有了奇怪的新發現

in the silent darkness of private thought

在獨立思考中的寧靜時刻中

are dragged into public by a good stand-up,

被一個良好的立場拖入公眾之中，

and when cats play piano,

當貓彈琴

because cats that are also somehow humans

因為貓在某種程度來說也是人類

disrupt our reality.

分裂了我們的現實。

So, we don't just laugh at truth,

所以我們並不只取笑現實，

we laugh at the pleasurable, edifying revelation of flaws,

我們也笑快樂的，有教訓意味的啟示，

incongruities,

不協調，

overlaps,

部分重疊，

and outright conflicts

和直接的衝突

in the supposedly ordered system of truths

在這個應該保持秩序的現實中

we use to define the world and ourselves.

我們習慣為世界和我們自己下定義

When we think too highly of our thinking,

當我們太高估自己的認知

when we think things are true

當我們認為一切皆為真實

just because we all say they're logos and stop adapting,

單單因為我們說他們都只是標誌並且不再繼續調適我們的認知，

we become the butt of jokes played on us

我們就被愚弄了

by that wacky little trickster, chaos.

被那古怪的騙子，混沌。

Comedy conveys that destructive, instructive playfulness,

喜劇傳達有害的，有教育意義的戲碼，

but has no logical definition

但毫無邏輯定義可言

because it acts upon our logic

因為它建構於我們的邏輯之上

paralogically

邏輯倒錯

from outside its finite borders.

在有限的界線之外。

Far from having a definite definition,

遠遠超過於擁有一個明確的定義，

it has an infinite infinition.

它的定義是莫可名狀無窮無盡的。

And the infinition of comedy

而喜劇的無窮無盡

is that anything can be mined for comedy.

是任何事情都可以被建構成喜劇。

Thus, all definitions of reality,

因此，所有現實的定義，

especially those that claim to be universal,

尤其是那些被宣稱為全球通用的，

logical,

邏輯性的，

cosmic,

宇宙的，

capital-T Truth

公認的事實

become laughable.

就變得可笑。