"So I says to him, I says..." Norm's style was a beautiful mashup of square Midwestern folksiness, puppy dog enthusiasm, drunk uncle energy, and stealth razor-sharp brilliance. RIP to a master of his craft.
@@joetheplumber8884 Sure, but that's a style. It's like how Picasso painted people looking all crooked and with weird angles and colors, that would have gotten him kicked out of a figure drawing class.
I love how immediately after he says “the guy says no I don’t own a doghouse” the audience starts laughing cause the jokes already completed in their heads
Well sure as hell it wasn't his inviting the logician round for Chcken - But the audience *still* laughted ike drains at that. (You gotta suspect they didn't own a doghouse either).
I thought the punchline was gonna be "I'm on my way to buy a doghouse" or "After standing around the bus stop for a while, I realized....I don't own a doghouse"
@@silversrayleigh1399 20 hours ago I was binging some of his best bits, and today I'm back again for a completely different reason. Utterly blown away by the news.
I told this joke to my dad once and he laughed hysterically and continued to laugh randomly throughout the day every time he thought about. He loved the joke so much that I had to tell it to any guests that came over and he so happened to remember about it
Not an anecdotal fallacy, or any other type of fallacy. No argument is being made. I would assume the "hidden joke" is that you would think a professor of logic would be able to define logic.
He once made a rare out of character comment about saying "you know" and "uh" he said it made him seem stupider subtly so he could deliver the punchline better
So right... I started laughing with tears streaming down my face when he said told the guy at the bus stop he met his neighbor today. My God, what a genius!
I love the way Norm breaks for a second when he refers to the University of Science for the second time. He was always right there with his hand on the wheel, even when he seemed three miles off course
There is a great University of the Sciences in Philly... devoted primarily to health sciences and trains doctors, researchers, nurses, organic chemist-types, etc. Part of it is the nation's oldest College of Pharmacy founded in the 1820s,
@@Rex-gu1bu He died from cancer, he has been battling it for years, stop peddling your beliefs of what people should do in terms of getting a vaccine, it is their choice.
Well Norm was a comedian lol your sentence implied that he wasn't a comic but rather a writer. His muttering or words and structure was purely for the punchline. No where near a "anti punchline" like how Mrs.Dumbshit up there assumed
@burteriksson Dad joke = a joke viewed as lame. They usually contain cheap puns or tired cliches, and mostly contain clean language. Room leveler = A joke which results in an explosion of laughter from the audience.
@burteriksson dads predominantly make cheesy jokes to their kids to annoy them, hence being called dad jokes. Dont be so politically correct, that's fascism.
Hercules Brofister i think it did! Cause it was an instance of where intended logic fails („always when I light a cigarette the bus comes“ - bus doesn’t come) kind of anticipating the next/main false logic story.
@@MRegah : right, norm prepares with the cig-illogic the punchline-illogic. From what I know, Norm built his shaggy jokes very meticulously...not a word superfluous
There's also a surprise punchline that comes after the end of this clip. Something like: "And get this: then the guy asks me to have a chicken with him at his house."
@@emanuelmota7217 we realise that this was before his cancer (im not fully retarded), that does not make the statment any less true, maybe not true for this particular talk, or act or whatever, but he was still suffering for years and kept the jokes rolling.
@@jonathanrandom7837 Who's "we"? Are you speaking for knucklehead? Because his original comment clearly indicates that he thinks Norm had cancer while doing this performance on Conan. Your point is irrelevant.
This was the first Norm joke I ever heard and I was instantly hooked. I had never heard anyone talk this way or tell a story in such a funny & quirky manner. He brought so much joy to people's lives. RIP 🙏
i think its because he is an avid reader and he is wicked smart... he throws in so much comedy through his stories that its hard to keep up... just watch his 12 minute joke.
I always thought he was over-rated. He ALWAYS did these meandering lame jokes which I could see the punchline from a mile away. I don't know why he was so celebrated but whatever. Different tastes.
The way Andy laughs when Norm says the dialogue 'Come by and have some chicken with me sometimes' always brings me back to this video. A true entertainer till the end.
The genius here is that he actually bothers to complete the badly told joke right to the end despite the punchline being obvious minutes earlier and without improving his telling of the joke at any point throughout. Genius.
I'm a "professor of logic" (although that's not my actual title - I teach an intro to logic course to philosophy undergrads) and I show this video to my class to illustrate the fallacy of *_denying the antecedent_* (that's the "mistake" Norm makes at the end of the clip). He manages to make it funnier than any other example I've found. For those interested, the fallacy of denying the antecedent takes the form: If P, then Q. (In this case: if doghouse, then heterosexual) Therefore, if not P, then not Q. (If no doghouse, then not heterosexual)
yeah, this second layer to this joke is really wonderful, especially since he's playing an ignorant guy in this bit. according to wikipedia, he dropped out of university, but he enrolled in mathematics while he was there. so i'm sure this joke was very intentionally crafted
Unfortunately we can’t lose anymore comedians like Patrice and Norm that aren’t afraid to speak their mind…they’re a dying breed and we need them more now than ever…I would absolutely love to hear Patrice’s take on certain things these days
This joke would land flat for most of the people when they try to crack it, but with him it's the entire act, the narration that makes it become alive and we actually imagine standing on the bus stop and this happening that gets us laughing. Makes us realize talent isn't just in writing the jokes, it lies more in delivering them.
I LOVE that little part about the man he meets at the bus stop. Love how he brings us into this cutaway where we can see a bunch of people waiting for the bus and one eccentric guy who says he has a trick or two. What a LEGEND.
zargmatt Mm, yeah, on my count there were only 14. I think it seemed like there'd be way more bc he loaded up 11 of those RIGHT at the start, and if you kept going at that rate, you'd either be dead or COVERED in vomit
I had a professor (at the University of Science) that was like this with the word, "basically". Granted he was from Russia and English wasn't his first language, but people already came up with a drinking game for it and said you'd probably die after a full lecture.
I still can't get over that this comedy legend passed away so soon and so unexpectedly. One of the greatest comedians of all time. May Norm Rest in Peace.
Yes, part if Norm's style was that the punchline sometimes was obvious to everyone with half a minute left of the joke - but him still pushing on as if it wasn't.
No, Conan is a full fledged butterfly, but he was smart enough to take his gig to streaming now. Colbert, Kimmel, and Fallon are dropping in the networks with their high octane DNC political commentary. Conan is fine.
I meant it as a way of entertaining students in an introduction to logic class to highlight deductive and inductive logic and to highlight faulty forms of reasoning. You'll also notice that many jokes actually rely on invalid inferences, if you really want to be a smartarse. It's also odd that you've guessed from my sentence that my intention is to use the joke as an example of pristine reasoning, when it's the point of the joke that it isn't. I really can't stand smart arses over the internet. What, really, is the point of your response? Make yourself feel smart by assuming my motive?
The joke is a bit dated too. The part about the dog and the family made perfect sense at the time, but Hollywood has done such a great job convincing White People not to have children and to replace them with dogs in the years since that you cities like Portland that have more dogs than kids.
Me too but I just realised from googling professor of logic norm MacDonald ripped this joke off of Another comedian.. find it.. it's a goldfish instead of a dog 8 years ago.. to be honest I found Bert's version the funniest
@@AVERYhornyMrDinosaur funny thing. I'm not broke enough to need it but still enjoy it.. Mostly when I travel. and luckily I have the social skills to do it.. But living in NYC gives you a whole different experience 🙊😂
@@noahepker8212 Thought it was a intended as a euphemism for "cock". Little jab at the having a family thing and something to laugh back at after the punchline. Other guy might be right tho
I'm pretty sure it's a racist joke - the way he first said neighbors and continued to say it. The looks him and Conan have on their faces saying it , then the chicken line...
I 'discovered' him like last year and he immediately became my all-time favourite. I was so eagerly waiting for the new season of Norm Macdonald Live. RIP 💔
Still watching and forgetting about all that’s going on in my crazy life. You’re one of the only people that can do that for me. Thanks for everything norm. Miss ya
Norm MacDonald is the King -- the unidisputed King -- of the Bad Joke and the Shaggy Dog Joke. He has a delivery that is unique and undeniable. So shut up
Well, if McDonald's goal had been to point out the fallibility of logic (I believe it isn't), then he's doing a rather poor job of it here. Firstly, the professor of logic in MacDonald's story was not inferring the sexual orientation of MacDonald from the fact that MacDonald owns a doghouse. After every question from the professor, MacDonald answered in the affirmative. Thus, the professor received new information after every inferential step in his reasoning. This means the professor was only inferring from the fact that MacDonald owned a doghouse to the fact that he owned a dog, from the fact that he owned a dog to the fact that he has a family, and so on. These are discrete inferential steps, all of which are much more plausible than the ridiculous inference from ownership of a doghouse to sexual orientation. Secondly, these are all cases of inductive inferences, not deductive ones. Here's the difference: In an inductive inference from A to B, that inference is justified by the accumulated experience of cases where A is true tending to be cases where B is true. If your previous experience tells you that people who own doghouses tend to own dogs, that gives you reason to believe of someone you know owns a doghouse that she owns a dog. If it turns out she doesn't, that only means that your previous experience was not a good guide to this particular situation. In fact, it is in the nature of induction that this will sometimes be the case: After all, drawing inductive inferences essentially means estimating something unknown based on what is known. Logic tells us that inductive inferences are fallible, any concrete example of a failed inductive inference merely confirms what logic tells us. Deductive inferences, on the other hand, are the ones found e.g. in the syllogisms MacDonald refers to. Generally, logic concerns itself with deductive inferences, induction and abduction are better left to epistemology and the philosophy of science. Therefore we say of a good case of deductive inference that it is a logically valid inference. For an inference from A to B to be logically valid, it must be the case that A being true and B being false leads to a logical contradiction. It is not a logical contradiction for someone to own a doghouse and not own a dog. (The dog might be dead.) Thus, the argument "A owns a doghouse, therefore A owns a dog" is not logically valid. If MacDonald had presented a logically valid deductive inference from a true premise to a false conclusion, he would have made a devastating argument not just for the fallibility of logic but for logic in its current form being fundamentally misguided. He has not. I think most every logician would agree that logic is fallible, but in a relatively straightforward sense: The study of logic is done by humans. Human beings are, alas, fallible. The great logician Gottlob Frege himself managed to overlook Russell's paradox, a paradox rendering large swathes of his work false. Presumably, logicians will continue to make mistakes in the future, making logic fallible. I suspect you wanted to say that MacDonald has shown logic to be fallible in a much more dramatic sense. I hope I have helped show you this is not the case.
We know the punch line halfway in the joke but we can't stop listening. It's brilliant. I've watched the moth story every night since I heard about his passing and it cracks me up more and more
He takes a simple joke and stetches the setup, makes tge setup the funniest part, then finishes, eventually with the so so punchline, which somehow then seems hilarious. Bravo.
I just listened to his standup piece earlier today for the 100th time to cheer me up, came to this late evening and found out of his passing... No words. RIP Norm MacDonald.
One of the best deadpan comedians of all time. Always bucked the trends and stood up for what he believed in. You will be sorely missed Norm. Enjoy those cigars and big breasted women in paradise my friend.
