I believe in Santa Claus

PairTheBoard · #1 04-04-2005, 11:32 PM

When I was a child I was taught to believe in Santa Claus. I understood this to mean that a man named Santa Claus lived at the North Pole and gave presents to kids on Christmas. I was sorely disapointed when I discovered that this understanding was flawed. I was especially disapointed to think that my parents had lied to me. Yet today I believe in Santa Claus and I don't think my parents lied to me. If David were to apply his probability arguments to my belief in Santa Claus I would have to laugh at his naivete.

PairTheBoard

PGarlic · #2 04-04-2005, 11:42 PM

What occured between your childhood and now that has renewed your believe in the big man?

PairTheBoard · #3 04-05-2005, 02:55 AM

I grew up?

I can just see David now, hounding some poor little 3 year old kid with arguments like, "how can you believe Santa travels all over the world in one night in a sleigh pulled by reindeer? Don't you know the odds against that are a gazillion to one?"

PairTheBoard

Bartman387 · #4 04-05-2005, 03:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I grew up?

I can just see David now, hounding some poor little 3 year old kid with arguments like, "how can you believe Santa travels all over the world in one night in a sleigh pulled by reindeer? Don't you know the odds against that are a gazillion to one?"
PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]
I could see him doing that to an adult, not a child though.

Is there a point to this thread? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

d10 · #5 04-05-2005, 03:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a point to this thread? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the point is that David seems to be debating logically against people whose beliefs don't rely on logic. Theoretically he may have the most correct arguments, but they will only be compelling to those who already agreed with those arguments in the first place. Those who don't believe in David's reasoning won't find any reason to accept anything David says as logically sound, therefore his arguments, as correct as they may be, are inherently pointless given the audience.

It's like the concept of betting on the end in poker. Putting as much money in the pot as you can when you are 100% to win it may be theoretically correct, but often checking it through is more correct in the practical sense, when betting will accomplish nothing against those who are in fact the losers of the hand.

Or it's like when a helicopter pilot tries to explain to you why the flight controls are set up as they are by using the term "gyroscopic procession" but then goes on to explain a concept that is not even close to gyroscopic procession. Sure, I could try to explain how gyroscopic procession actually works and its application on a helicopter, but it's obvious this guy is not thinking in terms of physics, but only what he was taught in flight school, so instead I just smile and nod.

Gin 'n Tonic · #6 04-05-2005, 08:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think the point is that David seems to be debating logically against people whose beliefs don't rely on logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or - in the words of St. Thomas Aquinas "To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible."

The words 'faith' and 'belief' tend to indicate a position that is not amenable to logical arguement.

PairTheBoard · #7 04-06-2005, 03:03 PM

PGarlic:"What occured between your childhood and now that has renewed your believe in the big man?"

Here's what happenned PGarlic. I'm not against giving presents. But I don't like the idea of being Forced to give presents. I especially dislike being forced to give presents because a comercialized culture hypes a certain day with the design to sell sell sell for the sake of Retailing Profits. So I adopted the policy of never giving presents on Christmas. I might give presents any day during the year that I felt moved to do so but I refused to give presents on Christmas. Well, one Christmas a certain family member's feelings were very badly hurt. Maybe my Grinch policy had caught on or something. I'm not sure. But she cried because she didn't get any present on Christmas. She was in her 80's at the time. I decided I needed to make a change. What I came up with was this. I still refused to give presents on Christmas. But what I did do on Christmas was deliver presents to my family from Santa. Lo and Behold I found that it was good Ho Ho Ho. I've been a believer in Santa ever since.

PairTheBoard

einbert · #8 04-05-2005, 10:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Yet today I believe in Santa Claus and I don't think my parents lied to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just like SOME OF the people Sklansky argues against today, you either say that you believe in something that you really don't, OR you completely lack the ability to reason logically.

PairTheBoard · #9 04-05-2005, 03:27 PM

einbert:"Just like SOME OF the people Sklansky argues against today, you either say that you believe in something that you really don't, OR you completely lack the ability to reason logically. "

Exactly Wrong. And very on point in your wrongness. When I say I believe in Santa Claus I'm not lying. I DO believe in Santa Claus. Do I believe like a 3 year old child believes. Well, yes and no. If an exhastive expedition were sent to the North Pole do I think Santa would be found? No. But I do go along with the Santaology which says Santa lives at the North Pole. It's not central to my belief in Santa but I can go along with it. If you say I am either being illogical or lying you are wrong. You just don't get it.

I wouldn't raise my belief in Santa to the level of Faith but it's similiar. And when it comes to matters of faith there are many adults who understand their faith like the 3 year old kid understands Santa. David is like the 9 year old kid who wants to argue with the 3 year old kid.

Here's the thing. Matters of Faith involve, for lack of a better word, METAPHYSICAL concepts; like God, the Word of God, the Son of God, the Emaculate Conception, etc. Whatever a person's understanding of these concepts, from the point of view of the faithful, the important thing is that it brings them to the faith. If a person's understanding is from a mundane perspective, the Church does not discourage it. David does. When he does he is simply out of his depth.

PairTheBoard

gamblore99 · #10 04-06-2005, 02:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
einbert:"Just like SOME OF the people Sklansky argues against today, you either say that you believe in something that you really don't, OR you completely lack the ability to reason logically. "

Exactly Wrong. And very on point in your wrongness. When I say I believe in Santa Claus I'm not lying. I DO believe in Santa Claus. Do I believe like a 3 year old child believes. Well, yes and no. If an exhastive expedition were sent to the North Pole do I think Santa would be found? No. But I do go along with the Santaology which says Santa lives at the North Pole. It's not central to my belief in Santa but I can go along with it. If you say I am either being illogical or lying you are wrong. You just don't get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what you have said you don't believe in Santa like a 3 year old. A 3 year old would believe that an expedition to the north pole would find santa, as well as that presents will appear under the tree because of santa. If you felt the same your family would have no presents, and you would be a very bad parent to ruin christmas for your family.

As for him being wrong, you haven't shown any reasoning as to why he is wrong. You have just stated that he is wrong. That isn't a valid refutation.

[ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't raise my belief in Santa to the level of Faith but it's similiar. And when it comes to matters of faith there are many adults who understand their faith like the 3 year old kid understands Santa. David is like the 9 year old kid who wants to argue with the 3 year old kid.

Here's the thing. Matters of Faith involve, for lack of a better word, METAPHYSICAL concepts; like God, the Word of God, the Son of God, the Emaculate Conception, etc. Whatever a person's understanding of these concepts, from the point of view of the faithful, the important thing is that it brings them to the faith. If a person's understanding is from a mundane perspective, the Church does not discourage it. David does. When he does he is simply out of his depth.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with david. There are good reasons to believe in god and your religion I am sure, but blind faith is very troublesome. Many people rely on their religion to tell them what is morally correct, and this can cause big problems. A clear example of this would be islamic extremists who interpret the koran in a way that leads to terrorists activities. A 3 year old who believe's in santa doesn't harm anyone, but when other peoples actions and decisions have a big influence on other peoples lives, they have a moral responsiblity to make informed, rational decisions. Blindly following a religion or anything for that matter is an obstruction in reason, and is a bad thing.