Is this a philosophy question : Is Santa Claus real ?/Does Santa exist ?

Red Sleeping Beauty

I'm new . I've never studied philosophy and outside of reading a couple of books at leisure I've no experience "philosophising" outside of my bedroom.

But here's one that came to me recently. Sorry if it's crap, feel free to hang me by my words.

So, Santa is visible as a character in films, books, magazines, adverts and even in phsyical form in shopping centers at Xmas. There's a history of Santa that's very interesting, especially the possible reintroduction of it by Coca-Cola. But does Santa exist ? Well, no , there is no fat jolly man that visits children at midnight everywhere in the world and gives them free gifts. However , these kids do seem to think that such a man or entity does exist.

They see the drawings, characterisations, the adverts, their parents reassure them that such a being or person exists even when the child has mounted a credible case for why he doesnt. In the end kids will usually hit a certain age and they will develop common sense of the wider world and will no longer accept that such an event happens. (That's of course a crude example but I'm trying to stay relevant here.)

So , Santa exists in a phsyical form in shopping centers. He exists in a visual form in film and television and of course in print. Santa exists in the minds of children who believe it - perhaps in the style of Plato's Allegory of the Cave ?
</armchair philosophy ref.>


But does people believing that such a thing/person exist make it credible ? There's a fairly real history myth or otherwise that have all kind of tumbled into this one story of a jolly fat man dressed in Coca-Cola red colours

Joe1919

Although its difficult to prove conclusively that Santa exists, there are a number of very strong arguments that seem to suggest that he does.
The Ontological argument. Because (1) Santa is the nicest existing person anyone could think of, and (2) existence is a necessary predicate for Santa therefore Santa necessarly exists.
The Cosmological Argument. Everything must have a cause and there must be a first cause for christmas and we call this first cause Santa.
The Argument from Design. No-one only Santa could be clever enough to think up of such a complicated and expensive thing as Christmas.
The Argument from Revelation. There are many people who witnissed Santa, especially coming home from the pub on christmas eve.

I think there no need to go on further. Everyone knows Santa exists.
But what does he exist as? and Where does he exist?

Of course there are cynics that say that he only exists as a myth or concept or idea , and therefore exists only in people's minds or exists as a sign or signifer or lable or name.

ChocolateSauce

I think the question is badly phrased. Santa obviously exists- as a concept. He's found in every shop and in the minds of children and adults alike.

A more rational question would be "Is there literally a fat magic man who gives us presents on a particular (western-centric) day of the year by means of flying magic raindeer who break the laws of physics?"

No, simply.

Red Sleeping Beauty

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think the question is badly phrased. Santa obviously exists- as a concept. He's found in every shop and in the minds of children and adults alike.

A more rational question would be "Is there literally a fat magic man who gives us presents on a particular (western-centric) day of the year by means of flying magic raindeer who break the laws of physics?"

No, simply.

Do God exist then ?
In the mind of children Santa exists 100% and is not just a concept but a reality. The concept lies with adults but the percieved reality lies with the child.

ChocolateSauce

alan dunne 27 wrote: »

Do God exist then ?
In the mind of children Santa exists 100% and is not just a concept but a reality. The concept lies with adults but the percieved reality lies with the child.

Children percieving him as a reality does not conjure him into literal existence.

Yes, god exists as a concept. If he didn't, there wouldn't be any debate about him. There are plenty of gods we never debate about because no one has invented them as a concept.

Joe1919

It could be said that if 'something' that can be thought of, it can be named and can exist as a concept. Some claim exceptions to this e.g. Square Circles?
However many realists would claim that for something to truly exist, its real existence (in the world) must correspond to our concept of that thing. (in our mind.)
However, not everbody are realists and so............

Capt'n Midnight

Santa = Satan ???

Ignore the Judeo-Christian import of good and evil from Zoastarianism and you drop the whole evil thing. People don't consider themselves evil. But Santa in his current guise is definitely is anti-christian in the message of commercialism and the symbolism.

http://www.av1611.org/othpubls/santa.html

UU

Well Santa Claus is only a concept. Of course, the argument saying "you can't prove Santa Claus doesn't exist" is rather poor. There is really evidence that he exists in reality. It is also based on probability. The fact that a fat man dressed the same colours as Coca-Cola, visiting children all around the world and giving them gifts is very improbable indeed. For a child who is generally more naïve, innocent and gullible and has a vivid imagination, then Santa exists even though they don't necessarily see him. Although often children see things that don't exist so some might claim they saw Santa when in bed but our eyes aren't always faithful. So the question really should be "What's the probability that Santa Claus exists?" It seems very very improbable. So improbable that it would be silly to even flatter the idea as an adult. Although the question of Santa's existence isn't so different on speculating over whether dwarfs, angels, fairies, unicorns exist or even I dare say the old gods like Amun-Ra, Zeus, etc. even Thor. Also if Santa Claus does exist how come in Latin countries like Spain and Portugal and Latin America, many children don't believe in Santa Claus but in the wise men, the Magi? If Santa Claus existed, why wouldn't they exist too?

Joe1919

Another approach is this:

Word such as 'Good' or 'Exist' are to some extent relative or even meaningless on their own. When we say 'Good', we must ask the question 'what is this good for ?'. Aristotle used the example of a knife, 'A knife is good for cutting'.

Similarly, when we use the word 'exist' we must also ask the question 'what does this thing exist as'. In a trivial sense, anything that can be thought of, can be said to exist. However, this existence is only in the mind and is not 'real' existence.
So perhaps rather than asking questions such as 'Does Santa exist?', it would be better or more productive to ask 'What is Santa?' or 'In what way does Santa exist?'.

The same argument has often been used about the pointlessness of arguing about Gods existence for some. If I say 'God is someone whom I pray to', then God obviously exists for me as someone I pray to. It is only when I go beyond the concept and try to attribute some 'hard reality' to Santa or God that some sort of fruitful discussion can take place. (i.e. similarly, to argue effectively about God, we must break the concept of God down into paticular attributes & discuss these individually)

However, its important to bear in mind that many things that exist in the world are only concepts. Examples are contracts, promises,(marriage), friendships?, associations, laws, political borders, money,(your bank balance exists as a mere magnetic particle on a hard drive), ownership of property, measurements, language itself?, culture, (some argue even time itself?)..........and may have no reality in the real sense. However, they do get a 'sort of reality' by been culturaly accepted and reinforced by sanctions (e.g. The contract of marriage is reinforced by law and all laws are ultimately meaningless without enFORCEment, so marriage (and contracts)gets its power and become reality in the courts if the contract is broken and also by been sociably accepted etc. )

So this is why, IMO, much confusion exists in discussions on 'existence'.

Red Sleeping Beauty

I hope ye see the humour in this post..


well it's after midnight and no fat man in a suit has arrived down our chimney to give me or my sisters presents. At least one of them will wake up in the morning thinking that such a man has.

He exists for them, not for me.

Shinji Ikari

alan dunne 27 wrote: »

I'm new . I've never studied philosophy and outside of reading a couple of books at leisure I've no experience "philosophising" outside of my bedroom.

But here's one that came to me recently. Sorry if it's crap, feel free to hang me by my words.

So, Santa is visible as a character in films, books, magazines, adverts and even in phsyical form in shopping centers at Xmas. There's a history of Santa that's very interesting, especially the possible reintroduction of it by Coca-Cola. But does Santa exist ? Well, no , there is no fat jolly man that visits children at midnight everywhere in the world and gives them free gifts. However , these kids do seem to think that such a man or entity does exist.

They see the drawings, characterisations, the adverts, their parents reassure them that such a being or person exists even when the child has mounted a credible case for why he doesnt. In the end kids will usually hit a certain age and they will develop common sense of the wider world and will no longer accept that such an event happens. (That's of course a crude example but I'm trying to stay relevant here.)

So , Santa exists in a phsyical form in shopping centers. He exists in a visual form in film and television and of course in print. Santa exists in the minds of children who believe it - perhaps in the style of Plato's Allegory of the Cave ?
</armchair philosophy ref.>


But does people believing that such a thing/person exist make it credible ? There's a fairly real history myth or otherwise that have all kind of tumbled into this one story of a jolly fat man dressed in Coca-Cola red colours

He exists within the subjective but not the objective. It really is that simple.

Black Swan

Santa is a social construction (Peter Berger), and if you believe something to be real, it will be real in its consequences (W.I. Thomas).

Evilsbane

The way I look at it is this: a few centuries ago, there was a man from Turkey named Nicholas who gave presents to those less fortunate. He died, was canonised and eventually his name came to be interpreted as Santa Claus. To this day, there are presents given to children and the act is attributed to Santa. Even if you point out that parents are the ones who give presents, you must still concede the fact that St Nicholas was a real person and his noble spirit lives on in the generous actions taken each Christmas, even from beyond the grave. In 100 years' time, Santa Claus' spirit will endure while you and I and even supposedly important people like Simon Cowell and Jerry Springer will be forgotten.

So one could argue that Santa Claus is more real than most people you'll meet.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Nice first post. Welcome to Boards.

Evilsbane

Why thank you sir:D. I've always been fascinated by the Richard Dawkins' idea that biological organisms aren't the only things to evolve - sometimes memes like 'Santa Claus' can continuously adapt in order to survive. Example: though not technically a living thing, the concept of 'Santa' has adapted itself continuously for quite some time now, each time honing the succesful aspects of the phenomenon and discarding the unsuccessful aspects. When secular society started to reject the dogma of the church, 'Santa' evolved to become more secular himself, attaching himself to commercial hosts like Coca-Cola in order to thrive. 'Santa Claus' has survived the death of St Nicholas by embracing his new state of 'cultural phenomenon'. St Nicholas, by inspiring enough people, has survived death by evolving to the next stage, the way 'survival of the fittest' has always worked - propagate yourself enough times where others fail to thrive, and adapt when necessary in order to continue to thrive.

Húrin

Perhaps Santa is a simulacrum (a la Baudrillard)? The continuous reproduction of copies* (the various forms of Santa Claus) have covered up and consigned the real man (St Nicholas) into obscurity.



*or should that be 'procession of simulacra' in pomo speak?

Evilsbane

Húrin wrote: »

Perhaps Santa is a simulacrum (a la Baudrillard)? The continuous reproduction of copies* (the various forms of Santa Claus) have covered up and consigned the real man (St Nicholas) into obscurity.



*or should that be 'procession of simulacra' in pomo speak?

Well, according to Plato, sometimes simulacra are necessary in order to properly convey the truth of the matter to someone who doesn't have the benefit of the proper perspective. For example, when trying to convey to a child the concept that someone with that much generosity is a 'magical' thing, using the example of St Nicholas giving a poor man three bags of gold to use as dowries for his three daughters (who would then not have to become prostitutes) would not only not be a bit advanced for a 3-year-old, it would also not stick in their mind as much. By making the story more relevant to a 3-year-old (Santa is a nice man who'll give you toys if you're nice too), you get the point of the story across much more effectively. Then, once the child grows up and Santa Claus becomes a permanent part of his/her remembrances of a happy childhood, they embrace the original form of St Nicholas: charity towards your fellow human beings makes the world a happier place. They're both the same story; one just conveys the point to a child and the other conveys the point to a grown-up.