No abstract

The authors describe the integration of service learning into 2 upper-division general education death-related courses. An overview of these courses, 1 in sociology and 1 in political science, is followed by an explanation of the rationale and the specific ways in which service learning infused these educational offerings. The discussion then proceeds by outlining the preparation, action, reflection, and evaluation involved in making service learning an indispensable course feature. Feedback gathered from students, on-site supervisors, and the authors clearly indicates that this pedagogical strategy offers exciting potential for grounding death education in real life experiences.

This article introduces the themes of the special issue. It offers a provisional working conception of “political humour.” It then notes some of the tendencies and challenges for scholarship on political humour, namely, that political humour interacts contingently and conditionally with intentions, contexts, and audiences. The individual articles of the special issue are briefly summarized, and some concluding lessons drawn.

The mid-seventeenth century English social movement known as the Levellers was perhaps the first liberal-democratic social movement. Among their communicative strategies, to garner supporters while challenging the authorities, humor figured prominently. In this article, the nature of this levelling laughter is highlighted and juxtaposed against Puritan injunctions to mourning and objections against humor. Regarding the latter, four such objections are distinguished and elucidated: “damnable heresies”, “strange opinions”, “fearful divisions”, and “loosenesse of life and manners”. Finally, it is suggested that the Puritan repudiation of the Levellers highlights the need for social movements of democratic dissent against various aspects of the given status quo to use incongruous and relief humor to prompt reflection without relying too heavily on boorishly flouting social prohibitions for the sake of the pleasures of superiority and release. It also suggests that humor will do better in a culture already tolerant of pluralism, comfortable with a measure of non-literal ambiguity, and committed to democratic deliberation.

No abstract