In the twenty-fifth chapter of the second book of Etymologies, epitome of the Isagoge of Profirius, the sevillian philosopher Isidore of Seville, taking the example of the tyrian thinker, takes up the anthropo-philosophical theory of 'homo risv capax', that is, the human being defined as the only living being, mortal or immortal, irrational or rational, capable of laughing. Or, in others word, laughter understood as what is (most) proper -in the sense of exclusive- to the human being. A theory that (...) has a long trajectory in the history of ancient Western philosophy up to the approach of the philosopher from Seville (and also after him). This article presents the Isidorean proposal by showing the background, both general and specific, to the question of laughter as a singular and distinctive human property, as well as a delimitation of the sense exposed in the thought and work of Isidore of Seville, together with the existing differences between those of the Sevillian thinker and his philosophical precedents, that is, his specific contributions. (shrink)

In the twenty-fifth chapter of the second book of Etymologies, epitome of the Isagoge of Profirius, the sevillian philosopher Isidore of Seville, taking the example of the tyrian thinker, takes up the anthropo-philosophical theory of homo risv capax, that is, the human being defined as the only living being, mortal or immortal, irrational or rational, capable of laughing. Or, in others words, laughter understood as what is (most) proper -in the sense of exclusive- to the human being. A theory that (...) has a long trajectory in the history of ancient Western philosophy up to the approach of the philosopher from Seville (and also after him). This article presents the Isidorean proposal by showing the background, both general and specific, to the question of laughter as a singular and distinctive human property, as well as a delimitation of the sense exposed in the thought and work of Isidore of Seville, together with the existing differences between those of the Sevillian thinker and his philosophical precedents, that is, his specific contributions. (shrink)

The interjection הֶאָח appears nine times in the Hebrew Bible. It is a vocalization which expresses happiness for the misfortunes of an in-group/out-group individual or collective. In accordance with the social theories of humor, that study the hostile function of laughter, it can be said that הֶאָח expresses onomatopoeically a specific kind of laughter that can be either socially «abrasive» or «lubricant». This article examines all the instances of הֶאָח in the HB and considers this interjection in line with the (...) sociological studies of the disparagement humor. Finally, some conclusions are presented. (shrink)

Entre el ingente volumen de estudios sobre los diálogos platónicos no hay mayor acuerdo sobre el lugar que pueda tener el humor como forma de conocimiento. Aunque no es nuestro propósito liquidar tal asunto, sí se pretende contribuir con una lectura de algunos de sus diálogos en tal sentido, pues igual que el mito, el humor era acogido en el ambiente cultural y político de la Atenas de Platón y, como es de suponer, el filósofo nunca estuvo al m argen (...) de ello, es decir, del mismo modo como los grandes trágicos recurrieron al mito y los cómicos a la risa, Platón, aunque filósofo, no fue indiferente al espíritu que templaba las coordenadas espaciotemporales de la época. (shrink)

Quien lea sobre el gueto y luego lea algo pseudointeligente o incluso genuinamente inteligente sobre nuestra moderna “civilización de masas”, debe soltar una risa amarga. Masas, “hombre masa”: no es el telespectador en su casa unifamiliar, incluso si está expuesto a la presión de los medios de comunicación de masas. El habitante del gueto se había convertido físicamente en uno con la masa, al mismo tiempo que luchaba sin sentido y desesperadamente contra las otras células de esta masa de (...) carne. El gueto era un tumor maligno de la humanidad. Cada uno de los que estaban hacinados en él lo entendía como tal y se sentía como la célula enferma de un organismo, lo que, objetivamente, realmente era. Por lo tanto, podía amarse a sí mismo tan poco como a la persona de al lado. (shrink)