Something that humans and animals share in common, at many differing levels of intelligence, is their need to have fun. Humans, of course, do this in all number of ways, to the point where doing enough work to earn our day of leisure is our driving goal in life. Dogs, cats, foxes, and other animals play with toys. Dolphins leap through the air and play tricks on people. And so on.
What compels humans and animals to have fun?
Having something to live for would probably be part of the equation.
I don’t really grok the question: our basic biology is set-up to reinforce certain behaviors and discourage others; it’s a survival trait.
Dopamine, endorphins
Evolution. Whatever humans and animals consider fun, probably has some evolutionary advantage
I can’t address why humans like knock knocks jokes. But kittens chasing string, teaches hunting.
But this “doing enough work to earn our day of leisure” isn’t fun; it’s planning to have fun in the future. Do other animals do this?
It’s a very good question. I believe Gregory Bateson, the epistemologist, social anthropologist, cyberneticist, semiotician and a lot of other things, thought it one of the most interesting of questions.
He didn’t have an answer, and neither do I. A reductionist answer is an insult to the depth of the question.
I think that’s the point. Why have so many species evolved to enjoy doing things for “fun”. Let’s define fun as activities we do for purposes other than obvious survival.
On first thought, you’d think a species would have evolved in the opposite direction. Doing things for fun is a waste of resources. It would seem like the individuals whose genes made them content to sit around whenever they weren’t doing something related to survival would have an advantage over the individuals whose genes made them want to run around wasting their energy on non-survival activities. But this appears not to be the case; the enjoyment of having fun seems to be a widespread evolved trait.
So what advantage did animals gain from having fun that outweighed the cost in wasted effort?
In that case - animals don’t have fun, as the survival-linked benefits from their “fun” - group cohesion, safe hunting practice and skills training - are not “wasted effort” and are obvious.
Fun = training & practice.
Well I guess we can parse the OP in one of two ways:
The first is easier.
Sex is fun, and individuals that find sex fun would overall procreate more often. Practicing hunting is fun, and individuals that practice chasing and subduing behaviors will probably fare better when it comes to the real thing.
In general, games of agility and planning will also have benefits, although it’s all “common sense” and likely a difficult thing for biologists to actually study and put concrete metrics on.
The second question is a bit harder and is a fundamental part of how intelligent life developed on our world. A conscious mind, that experiences “bad” and “good” sensations may have arisen to give more flexibility in behavior. If you have a knee jerk instinct to avoid sunburn you may retreat at a point where you were about to take down your prey; but if you have a “bad feeling” of sunburn you can choose to tolerate it because you deem it worthwhile.
Once we accept we have minds with good and bad feelings, it makes perfect sense for play to be among the things giving a good feeling.
Is it fun seeking, or is it boredom avoidance? Avoiding boredom has evolutionary advantages in learning to adapt to new conditions.
What do you think a strong instinct is? “We find it fun to do X” means exactly the same thing as “We have a strong instinct to do X”.
To expand slightly (and this is part of my general pediatric schtick to parents who sometimes worry about optimizing their little ones’ development):
What is most fun? Generally speaking those activities right at the edge of our skillset. Too hard and it is frustrating and not fun. Too easy and it is boring. Just barely within our skillset and it is fun. When we play with our kids in ways that they are clearly having fun we are automatically guided to doing those activities with them that optimize their development, the skills they are working on at that time.
We do not need to understand that babies at 7 to 8 months are developing objecting permanence - we play peek-a-boo with them (which works on that skill) because they laugh when we do it. We don’t play peek-a-boo at 3 months because it gets no reaction and is not fun for the baby. Fun is the marker that guides us as parents as well as each individual to best develop our skills exactly at their emerging edges.
Active play, having fun, optimizes development in all domains, across all ages, for both individuals and groups.
As others have said, it’s training.
Not quite.
Fun implies a pleasant subjective state. Instinct is more general and could be positive, negative or neutral.
A parent might instinctively run into danger to protect their child. They would be unlikely to call that “fun” though.
OK, I’ll grant that. Say, then, that “fun” is one of the more common mechanisms by which instinct works.
Thanks for the insight. So, the activity is not a universal. Something for everyone. Lacrosse, Polo, Chess for the capable, Golf for the challenged.
I have wondered why I considered whitewater rafting or a long hike through the desert to an archaeological site ‘fun’. Your definition explains it. My adventures would have been trivial for some, beyond reach for others and at the edge of my ability for me. Makes survival sense.
I think the answer is mental health. Fun is curiosity, problem solving, discovery, imagination, interpersonal skills, focus, disciple, etc, etc. Those are the life skills that keep us pressing forward with anticipation.
Fun is the lubricant that’s keeps the whole machine functioning at its highest level I think. It absolutely affects your world view or attitude, which we are repeatedly told is the biggest indicator for long life and good mental health.
We have a crisis of addiction and mental health because we have forgotten the importance of play. Free from the pursuit of excellence, wealth or standing. Nor high competition or professional sport, but fun to no particular end. Amusement. It’s partly what makes us resilient and able to overcome too, I believe.
It’s an integral part of who were meant to be, I suspect.
There are animals that do things that are not training and appear to be just for fun. National Geographic did a story on it once, which of course I cannot find. I present instead another well known example, the skiing crow:
I don’t believe there’s a scientific conclusion about why animals do things that are (or seem to be) just fun.