English

In combination with disability studies practices and philosophies, I draw from glitch theory, deconstructionism, and new technological capabilities to argue that we, as new media writers and writers with disabilities, never simply compose and consume in the universal manner tradition leads us to believe. I argue not only for a model of creating and consuming media (textual or otherwise) that resists normalizing conceptions of revision, polished (finished) writing, coherence, and linearity, but also one that embraces irregularities and glitches as essential, inherent features. Finally, I provide examples of how to perform these models and practices, which I call glitch writing and hyperactive teaching.

Extensive listening is generally defined as learners “doing a lot of easy, comprehensible, and enjoyable listening practice” (Chang & Millett, 2013). Modeled on the practice of extensive reading, extensive listening typically involves large quantities of aural target language input that interests students and is within their linguistic competence (Renandya & Farrell, 2010; Yeh, 2013). Extensive listening can range from teacher-directed dictations or read-alouds to self-directed listening for pleasure at home. Unfortunately, L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive listening has received relatively little research attention. Most of what is assumed stems from research on first language (L1) and L2 child vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories or studies on L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading. Consequently, this paper will first explore what is known about how vocabulary is learned through extensive reading. Subsequent sections will review the literature on vocabulary acquisition through listening and podcast use for vocabulary learning. This paper will conclude with a discussion of practical applications that stem from this research in light of a specific teaching issue.

In this class, we will apply the three classical theories of humor (the Superiority Theory, the Incongruity Theory, and the Relief Theory) to contemporary comedy, with a focus on stand-up, improvisation, and sketch comedy. We will take a philosophical look at comedy by considering cultural (race, gender, etc.), political (satire, parody, etc.), and ethical implications (when jokes hurt, etc.), as well as discussing the nature of knowledge, belief, and perspective as it relates to comedy. We will watch clips of various figures in class in order to facilitate this discussion. Comedic figures and organizations of study will include, but are not limited to, Louis CK, Tina Fey, Dave Chappelle, Steve Martin, Saturday Night Live, The Second City, The Daily Show, The Nightly Show, and The Colbert Report. If available, we will also have a local comedian serve as a guest speaker.

The aim of this dissertation is to offer a new theory of humor that takes seriously both the universality and power of humor in culture. In the first chapter, I summarize historical and contemporary theories, and show how each either 1) fails to give any definition of humor, 2) fails as a theory of humor, and/or 3) underappreciates, dismisses, or does not consider the power of humor in experience.

The second chapter explains the failures of prior theories by understanding the problem in terms of Ernst Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic forms. These forms of culture are perspectives through which we express and understand our world, and each presents its own unique perspectives through which we can understand ourselves and the world. In the third chapter, I argue that humor is one of these necessary and universal symbolic forms of culture. I argue that confusions in the philosophy of humor stem from approaches to humor that understand it as part of some other symbolic form rather than as a form itself.
In the fourth chapter, I argue for the function of humor as that which reveals and exposes epistemic vices –laziness, arrogance, and closed-minded thinking about ourselves and the world. I support this argument by showing not only that all previous theories of humor have within them epistemic revelation as a consistent commonality, but also by showing that this revelation is necessary to the form of humor while it is, at best, accidental to other forms.

In my final chapter, I suggest that we ought to approach humor objectively, and that the normativity of the symbolic forms guides us toward such an approach. I offer two objective questions to ask about a given instance of humor: 1) does the humor idealize a liberated end? and 2) does the humor fulfil the cultural function of the symbolic form it represents by disrupting epistemically vicious thinking? If the answer to both of these questions is affirmative, then it is likely that the humor in question is morally praiseworthy. I conclude by offering suggestions for further study.

In 2014, Louis CK was unquestionably the philosopher king of comedy, a commercial, cultural, and creative icon who dared to explore the most vulnerable parts of society, culture, and himself. His jokes raised philosophical issues in epistemology and mirrored the philosophy of some of the greats. Then, with the revelation of sexual misconduct in 2017, CK was dethroned overnight. Many believed that CK's actions forfeit his access to the cultural marketplace the only way to truly show disgust and disapproval of CK would be to ban him from comedy clubs, remove him from creative roles, cancel the release of his films, and strip his work from streaming archives.

There is stark disagreement on what has been, and ought to be, done with Louis CK. Some comedians and commentators have understood CK as a sexual predator whose continued presence in the comedy world would only serve to reinforce rape culture, effectively telling victims that they don't matter and men that assault is forgivable. Other comedians and comedy audiences rejoice at the return of CK, believing that his comedy remains entertaining and worthwhile despite his behavior. There are several philosophical layers of this case to unravel, but after exploring the ways in which CK was the philosopher king of comedy before his fall, the present study focuses on the following two questions: (1) was the industry response to CK ’s actions the correct one? and (2) should CK be allowed to return to comedy?