I swear I'm not going to turn this into the OTB

[What is the standard dress code where you work?]

What is the standard dress code where you work?

Business Professional - suits and nice dresses only

Business Casual - nice shirt and non-jeans pants or skirt

Casual - Jeans, tee shirts, shorts and tank tops all the time

Super casual - as long as I'm not naked it's fine

Uniforms

Naked

Business Casual or Professional, with Casual Fridays

I don't have a job or I work from home

[Nixlimited]

Edited to add: Did I pick up on enough subtleties for you? 

Given my statement: "I have absolutely never seen a woman stand-up that I thought was funny"
The following two situations are possible:
a) The female comedians I have seen were simply not funny on any scale
b) I may NEVER have seen a female comedian at all, regarless of the relative quality of their humor.

Thus, my argument stands.

[Texas]

I think you guys may be missing out on another factor that may influence ones sense of humor, and that is knowledge...

For the first 6 months that I lived in London, I found most of their humor painfully "unfunny". It wasn't until I understood the language, the culture, and particularly the current events better that I finally "got" it.

Or to use US comedy...many of Dennis Miller's punchlines involve references to authors or composers or directors...without a preexisting knowledge of those individuals or their work, the joke simply is not as funny. Or, think of the South Park episode where Tom Cruise refused to "come out of the closet." It is the knowledge of Tom Cruise, and the knowledge of what that phrase can mean in our culture, that made that premise funny to some...

[Nixlimited]

I think you guys may be missing out on another factor that may influence ones sense of humor, and that is knowledge...

Clearly... Thus the reason it took me several episodes of Family Guy before it became my favorite comedy on TV.

[LitDoc]

I think you guys may be missing out on another factor that may influence ones sense of humor, and that is knowledge...

For the first 6 months that I lived in London, I found most of their humor painfully "unfunny". It wasn't until I understood the language, the culture, and particularly the current events better that I finally "got" it.

Or to use US comedy...many of Dennis Miller's punchlines involve references to authors or composers or directors...without a preexisting knowledge of those individuals or their work, the joke simply is not as funny. Or, think of the South Park episode where Tom Cruise refused to "come out of the closet." It is the knowledge of Tom Cruise, and the knowledge of what that phrase can mean in our culture, that made that premise funny to some...

I agree with you -- but I was considering "knowledge" as a subset of "intelligence," so that when I was saying that it takes a certain intelligence (or understanding, or comprehension) to find humor in certain things, this was meant to entail at least the possibility of a kind of knowledge. In a way, I think you're just renaming "intelligence" as "knowledge," which might provide clarity for some, on some level, but which I think is too limited in its scope. (There are many instances of humor where the presence of "knowledge" per se is less obvious, even nonexistent, but nevertheless a kind of intelligence or understanding exists that enables the sense of humor.)

[LitDoc]

Edited to add: Did I pick up on enough subtleties for you? 

Given my statement: "I have absolutely never seen a woman stand-up that I thought was funny"
The following two situations are possible:
a) The female comedians I have seen were simply not funny on any scale
b) I may NEVER have seen a female comedian at all, regarless of the relative quality of their humor.

Thus, my argument stands.

Hmmm. First, I don't recall you making much of an argument. You basically provided a claim -- that "never have" and "never could" were not the same thing -- and this included the implication that you do possess the intelligence necessary to finding a female comedian funny. But where's your argument in support of this claim, or this implication (which, so far as I can see, rests solely on the claim that "never have" and "never could" are not the same -- not a very strong argument in favor of you possessing a particular kind of intelligence for a particular kind of humor)?

Look. If, as I've asserted, it takes some kind of intelligence (or understanding, or comprehension) to find something funny; and if not finding something funny is indicative of the absence of the kind of intelligence necessary to finding that thing funny; and if you have never found a female comedian funny (and this verb form is intended to describe your condition in both the past and the present); then simple logic tells us that you do not possess the kind of intelligence necessary to finding female comedians funny.

Yes, we could modify -- for specificity's and accuracy's sake -- that last line to say something like "you have not possessed the kind of intelligence necessary to finding any of the female comedians you have seen to be funny." But I think you're splitting hairs here, just to defend yourself. Your assertion (b) is ridiculous: it was clear from the context of your post that you HAD seen female comedians, and had failed to find any of them funny. I don't think that you can, with any honesty, claim that you were holding open the possibility that you had not ever seen any female comedians. You're only clinging to that possible loophole to save yourself -- and, as I've shown, the loophole is easily closed.

As for your assertion (a), you'll have to provide an actual argument to flesh out what you're claiming here, because on the surface I simply don't buy it. There is no such thing as a categorically funny person, or a categorically unfunny person (i.e., someone who is inherently funny/unfunny, regardless of whether or not anyone thinks so). Why? Because people have to think you're funny/unfunny in order for you to be so. Even the person who laughs at herself (who finds herself funny when no one else does) is only funny (to herself) because she thinks she is -- and unfunny (to others) because others think she is. It simply does not make sense to say "I saw a funny comedian, but I didn't think she was funny" -- or, "I didn't think she was funny, but that's because she isn't funny."

In order to hold to your assertion (a), you have to hold that it DOES make sense to say these things. Is that what you're saying?

[LitDoc]

I suspect everyone going to UT is pretty intelligent.  Otherwise they wouldn't be going to UT.

Incidentally, did you know that one only needs a 162 on the LSAT to qualify for MENSA?

Please don't spread that around.  Those of us who actually took a valid IQ test to qualify don't want it getting out that to be in the top 2% of the world, you only have to be basically in the top quartile of aspiring attorneys...

I hope this is tongue-in-cheek. Otherwise, you just boasted openly of your high IQ, which seems in really bad form to me. I'll assume the former.

[Felsen]

I suspect everyone going to UT is pretty intelligent.  Otherwise they wouldn't be going to UT.

Incidentally, did you know that one only needs a 162 on the LSAT to qualify for MENSA?

Please don't spread that around.  Those of us who actually took a valid IQ test to qualify don't want it getting out that to be in the top 2% of the world, you only have to be basically in the top quartile of aspiring attorneys...

I hope this is tongue-in-cheek. Otherwise, you just boasted openly of your high IQ, which seems in really bad form to me. I'll assume the former.

I hope it is also joking as well.  Those of us smart enough to know that you don't have to pay a group like Mensa to tell you you're smart are otherwise going to be laughing at you. 

[pocho]

My mom thinks I'm smart.

[Nixlimited]

In order to hold to your assertion (a), you have to hold that it DOES make sense to say these things. Is that what you're saying?

No, what I am currently saying is that I will conceed whatever point you are trying to prove - whether that is that I am  not intelligent enough to understand female comedians or you are not intelligent enough to discern tongue-and-cheek discussion from serious discussion and answer accordingly i.e. with something other than a treatise. 

I know I am not the only one that finds this kind of discussion tiring and ironically, totally devoid of humor.

You win, congrats, please respond only if concise.

[pocho]

While we're on the topic of the LSD, I guess we all use it for different reasons.  I personally like it because it gives me an idea of the various personalities of those attending UT with us. It also gives us an opportunity to work through the various aspects of starting law school together.

(Warning perceived ranting coming on)

I too get tired of long, philosophical debates that really are, in my opinion, pointless.  I'm not dogging on this topic or anything, because I think it gives an opportunity to, once again, get an insight into our classmates.  In a way it has, I guess. 

One of my fears of law school is just getting sick of everybody trying their best to assert their opinion about anything and everything just to prove they can create a good argument, even if it is just for fun or a joke.  Some people enjoy it and that is fine, but for me it gets tiring.  I mean who really cares if Nix thinks women comedians are funny or not?  A total broken down analysis of each of our statements is boring and in a way immature. 

I understand as lawyers our entire profession is based on creating well organized, logical arguments, but if we were to do this always in our everyday life we would be adding to the stereotype as being ostentatious jerks. 

Don't get me wrong, I have strong opinions on many things and I like to assert them as much as anyone else.  However, going on and on bores me to death.  It probably has to do with my non BA background, but if I know every statement I make in a casual conversation is going to be analyzed for logical flaws, which are subsequently pointed out, I just get rubbed the wrong way. 

With that said, I don't think anyone here is a ostentatious jerk and this is just my opinon. I acknowledge people care about things I have no affinity towards whatsoever, and vice versa.  It just feels like we've degraded to analyzing every nitpicky detail in people's statements. I also realize there are most likely flaws in my reasoning here, but as I said, I really don't care, I'm just putting down my thoughts.