Sketch of why they might be incapable: it's not a technical problem. Mutuality relationships require a counterparty able to experience pain, make promises, offer forgiveness. So the capability is largely in our own ability to see the counterparty as "essentially" human.
-
-
For eg. This by
@sarahdoingthing is epistemic view of humor "The essence of a joke, in Hurley, Dennett, and Adams’ view, is that the teller of the joke surreptitiously introduces a certain epistemic commitment, and then reveals it to have been mistaken."https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2016/01/07/on-some-possibilities-for-life-as-a-joke/ …Show this thread -
The first link makes the important point that you cannot get at the essence of humor by looking for the essence of jokes. Humor (and this is my gloss on the implication, not the argument in either article) is a posture of being, not doing.
Show this thread -
tldr of this thread... the problem of meaning is a problem of life-force in disguise, and has historically been addressed via one of 3 stances: serious, crazy, and humorous. Meaning-making, gonzo-experiential, and humor. Maps to sorokin's ideational, sensate, idealistic perhaps?
Show this thread -
New conversation -
-
-

apply_emoji *.*
- "Temporal Collation" - 
I find there is no "Merge" button here...
"Follow" is the strongest agreement I can offer
* Waking from a nap to find this thread was like a gift from beyond * 
- 2 more replies
New conversation
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.