讲座标题：ONLY JOKING 只是开玩笑

主讲人：Deborah Brown 澳大利亚昆士兰大学中文无码 教授

主持人：方卫  中文无码-中文无码av-一本道无码 副教授

时间：2025年11月5日15：00

地点：中文无码 锡昌堂801室学术报告厅

主讲人简介

Deborah Brown系澳大利亚昆士兰大学中文无码 教授，也是澳大利亚人文科学院（Australian Academy of Humanities）院士，曾任大洋洲中文无码 协会主席。Brown教授的研究兴趣包括心灵中文无码 ，尤其关注疼痛的中文无码 视角、中文无码 史以及批判性思维在教育和领导力发展项目中的应用。Brown教授与神经科学家布莱恩·基（Brian Key）教授共同建立了昆士兰大学首个神经中文无码 实验室，并担任澳大利亚最大的疼痛健康研究联盟——疼痛与健康研究创新中心（CIPHeR）的指导委员会成员。

内容简介

Is there a category of ‘phthonic’ or malicious humour that is morally wrong because it endorses negative stereotypes or is humour always or for the most part morally neutral? De Sousa argues that humour that trades in racist or sexist stereotypes to ‘land’ involves an implicit endorsement of those attitudes. To think otherwise while telling or laughing at such humour is to engage in self-deception, either of belief or emotion, and doing something morally wrong. His critics label this view as ‘extreme’ and advocate for the dissociation of humour from any endorsement of immoral attitudes. It is argued here that while de Sousa’s critics are right that a joke teller need not be either asserting or implying the truth of an associated stereotype, it cannot be inferred from this that the dissociationist thesis is correct—i.e., that the status of phthonic humour is independent of pernicious stereotypes. Utilising speech act theory, I argue that the illocutionary force of such jokes serves to give them immunity to criticism with the consequence that such jokes threaten to undermine our rationality, not just our morality. This claim is born out empirically in disparagement humour studies that suggest that jokes function psychologically to impede argument scrutiny.

是否存在一种“语音式”或恶意的幽默，因其支持负面刻板印象而在道德上是错误的？还是幽默总是或在大多数情况下在道德上是中立的？德索萨认为，用种族主义或性别歧视刻板印象来“打压”的幽默，实际上隐含着对这些态度的认可。在讲述或嘲笑此类幽默时持有不同想法，就是在信仰或情感上自欺欺人，做出违背道德的事情。他的批评者将这种观点称为“极端”，并主张将幽默与任何对不道德态度的认可区分开来。本文认为，虽然德索萨的批评者认为笑话讲述者不必断言或暗示相关刻板印象的真实性是正确的，但并不能由此推断分离主义论点是正确的——即语音式幽默的地位与有害刻板印象无关。运用言语行为理论，我认为这类笑话的言外之力使其免于批评，其结果是，这类笑话不仅威胁着我们的道德，还威胁着我们的理性。这一观点在贬损性幽默研究中得到了实证验证，这些研究表明，笑话在心理上会阻碍对论点的审视。