Is this argument logical or not?

Hi all,

is the below argument logical to you (does it make sense), or am I wrong somewhere (p.s. yeah, I know it's a weird argument...).
All feedback welcome, but please keep it classy :D

Hypothesis:
A joke is funny if and only if:
1) When I think of it, it is abnormal.
2) When I feel it, it feels good.
3) I cannot experience it continuously for it to still remain funny.

Forward Proof:
Assume a joke is funny --> prove that all 3 above are true:
1) If when I thought of it, it was normal, it wouldn’t surprise me. Yet a successful joke always surprises me.
2) If when I felt it, it felt bad, it wouldn’t be a joke to me.
3) No matter how good a joke is, I can only experience it from time to time for it to be funny.

Backwards Proof:
Assume all three above are true --> prove it is funny
Start from 2.
2) it feels good. It belongs in the set of experiences I want to live.
1) I think it is abnormal. It is a surprise/unknown experience I want to live.
3)I cannot experience it continuously. It is an unknown experience I want to live, but once…or from time to time…but I’m not sure when…isn’t it ?

In the above text, by definition the following words provide answers to the following questions in life:
1.Think: If I calm down from emotion, what conclusion do I reach?
2.Feel: which emotions come to me?
3.Experience: within everything, it is me, it is the rest (rest = everything-me). What is my connection with everything, this time?