Final answer:
Humor keeps an audience engaged, can diffuse societal tension, and adds memorability to an argument, but it's subjective and can lead to misunderstandings. Literature uses humor, irony, and satire effectively to critique society. In an argument, humor must be balanced with clear, evidence-supported viewpoints and an understanding of the audience.
Step-by-step explanation:
Humor plays several important roles in an argument. It can serve as a means to keep the audience interested and engaged, making the content of the argument more memorable. However, the effectiveness of humor is subjective and can vary between individuals and cultures, sometimes leading to confusion or offense. In the context of formal communication, it is often recommended to avoid humor and sarcasm to prevent misunderstandings, whereas in creative contexts there is more room for using these linguistic tools.
Humor also serves as a societal valve, according to the work of Mary Douglas, allowing the expression of thoughts and behaviors that challenge the social order in a non-threatening way. This functions much like a release mechanism, diffusing the potential disruptive power of taboo topics by making light of them. In literature, famous writers may use humor, irony, and satire to criticize and manipulate readers, leading them to reflect on serious issues beneath the entertainment. This skillful use of humor can ridicule authority and liberate laughter, but it can also risk overshadowing the serious message intended.
In the construction of an argument, one must consider the audience, presenting a clear viewpoint supported by reasoning and evidence, while addressing counterclaims empathically. Humor can be part of this process but must be used judiciously, as it can shape the emotional reception of the argument and thus influence its effectiveness.