Book 4 / Chapter 8
Paragraph 2 - The Nature of Tact and Jesting
Explanation - Part By Part
"To the middle state belongs also tact; it is the mark of a tactful man to say and listen to such things as befit a good and well-bred man; for there are some things that it befits such a man to say and to hear by way of jest, and the well-bred man's jesting differs from that of a vulgar man, and the joking of an educated man from that of an uneducated."
This part explains that tactfulness falls into the "middle state"—a balanced, virtuous way of behaving. A tactful person knows how to say and listen to things in a way that aligns with the character of a good, well-mannered, and educated individual. Aristotle contrasts this with two extremes: the humor of vulgar or unrefined people and the more thoughtful, appropriate humor of someone well-bred or educated. Essentially, the way someone jokes (or reacts to jokes) reflects their character, upbringing, and education. A mark of virtue here is engaging in humor that is respectful, suitable, and reflective of good taste.
"One may see this even from the old and the new comedies; to the authors of the former indecency of language was amusing, to those of the latter innuendo is more so; and these differ in no small degree in respect of propriety."
Here, Aristotle is drawing attention to how societal attitudes and standards of humor evolve over time. He contrasts "old comedies" with "new comedies" to illustrate this point. In the past, comedy often relied on indecency of language—crude, explicit humor that some might find vulgar or inappropriate. In contrast, the "new comedies" (more refined works of his or later times) leaned toward innuendo—subtle, indirect humor or double meanings that rely more on wit and suggestion. By comparing these two approaches, Aristotle highlights a shift in what people consider tasteful or proper in humor. This evolution in comedy reflects broader differences in what is thought to be appropriate or "well-bred" in society.
"Now should we define the man who jokes well by his saying what is not unbecoming to a well-bred man, or by his not giving pain, or even giving delight, to the hearer? Or is the latter definition, at any rate, itself indefinite, since different things are hateful or pleasant to different people?"
Aristotle is wrestling with the idea of what makes a person skilled at joking or being humorous in a socially acceptable way. He questions whether such a person should be defined as someone who avoids saying things unbecoming or improper (things inappropriate for a well-mannered, refined individual), or as someone whose humor doesn’t cause harm but instead brings enjoyment to the listener.
However, he recognizes a problem with the latter idea: what people find offensive or enjoyable varies greatly from person to person. What might make one person laugh could deeply offend another. This uncertainty makes it hard to solidify a universal rule for what constitutes "good" humor or joking in every situation.
In essence, Aristotle is highlighting how subjective the experience of humor and appropriateness can be, as people's reactions are influenced by differing values, sensitivities, and personal tastes.
"The kind of jokes he will listen to will be the same; for the kind he can put up with are also the kind he seems to make. There are, then, jokes he will not make; for the jest is a sort of abuse, and there are things that lawgivers forbid us to abuse; and they should, perhaps, have forbidden us even to make a jest of such."
This part emphasizes the idea that the kind of jokes a person appreciates is closely tied to the kind of jokes they make themselves. In other words, a person's sense of humor reflects their character. Aristotle points out that while joking can be entertaining, it has limits. Some jokes cross the line into being abusive or harmful, which makes them inappropriate. He suggests that just as laws prohibit certain types of disrespect or harm, they might also forbid making jokes that target similar sensitive or harmful topics. The key idea is that joking, when done improperly, can blur the line between humor and harm, and a person of good character naturally avoids crossing that line.
"The refined and well-bred man, therefore, will be as we have described, being as it were a law to himself."
Aristotle is saying that a refined and well-bred person—the kind of individual who has internalized good character and proper behavior—doesn't need strict, external rules to dictate how they act. Such a person naturally governs themselves with a sense of what is appropriate, kind, and respectful in their interactions, especially when it comes to humor. In a way, their inner moral compass acts as their "law," guiding them to behave in a way that aligns with decency and good taste without needing someone else to tell them what’s right or wrong.