Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There's no such thing as Santa Claus!!!
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not at all - I could see afterwards how it would easily have been picked up that way.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »It did seem personal. Apologies if that was the wrong way to parse it.
Sorry again, definitely meant towards anyone who was bringing religion or atheism into it - just happened to say it after quoting your post but I wasn't using your post as a springboard.Similarly I have not talked much about believers and atheists either. So I find myself wondering therefore why you are using my posts as a spring board to complain about others. If you have an issue with people talking about atheists, believers, or taking themselves too seriously.... perhaps it would be less confusing (for me at least) if you take it up with them directly?
Thanks for the detailed post - good points.0 -
Fantasy is created for children all the time and there's no issue with maintaining it because children grow up - you can't honestly state all deceit is the same.If you want to create a fantasy world for your child, maintaining it is your problem. Deceit is deceit.
Well that's not really relevant - seeing as they stop believing at nine or ten, not 18, and they don't have to be faced with every bit of reality as early as nine or ten.Reality has to be dealt with, you can't hide them away from it until their 18 and send them out completely unprepared or misinformed.
I have no doubt that you know full well Santa is for children. As for the last sentence: of course children who have never been told the Santa thing won't miss it - you can't miss what you don't know.I have no doubt that santa is for parents more so than kids. That's why I don't really accept this Christmas magic baloney. Kids only believe in magic because parents keep avoiding the truth of reality. Kids would get on just fine without santa, it's the parents that would miss it the most.
Think you're just arguing for the sake of it.
Some fair points though from a number of the non Santa doers - I was wrong, it's not all smug, joyless "Children need to be taught about reality from day one" stuff. Cheers for opening my eyes.
Just like not all Santa doers are materialistic and into belittling their children with the aim of them being shattered when they discover the truth. Children naturally start to question the logic of it themselves when they have the faculties to do so.
And while I don't know if it's that relevant to bring religion or lack thereof into it (belief in Santa as a child and indoctrination into a religion, do not have anywhere near the same ramifications for a person) plenty of atheists (including me) are well into the Santa thing.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »But again I think you are using "magic" in a very contrived and limited way here. You are merely equivocating over the difference between actually beveling it is magic.... and not.
I'm defining magic as the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.
I do however understand your broad definition of magic. As I said, we create that kind of magic at Christmas in our house too.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Well the "why" is obvious. They are protecting their profits.
Absolutely. I'm glad we agree. If everyone knows how the illusions work they won't bother going to see the "magic" show. The magic is gone.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »But actually this "rule" is merely for show anyway, to promote an air of mystique in the public,
We agree again !! Why do they need an air of mystique ? Because it contributes to the magic. It's the mystery, the not knowing that keeps the magic alive.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »because in reality the majority of magicians with decent acts patent their tricks and anyone can access and read a patent. So anyone who wants to know how a trick is done, can do so quite easily in fact.
Yet they don't. At least i've never met anyone in my 43 years who has looked up a patent to find out the secret to a magic trick. No doubt you know a good few but i'd hazard a guess that they're the exception, not the rule.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Again.... you are speaking for yourself subjectively. The only "magic" that appears to actually go is belief that it is actually true or real. And as I keep saying, no one has shown that is necessary at all in order to facilitate fulfilling a child's need for magic, imagination, fun, wonder, awe or any of those things.
Yes I am speaking subjectively. As are you and everyone else on every thread on boards ever.nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Again it sounds no different to me than a religious believer saying their relationship with god adds something to their life that I will never have. They say it. They have never substantiated it. Even a little. Nor have you.
I'm not religious but I have no doubt that they experience something extra. That's their reality. I don't understand it, i'm not part of it but i'm not going to doubt them or judge them. How can I when I haven't experienced it
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »What I claimed was that my children have every bit as much magic, awe, imagination, fantasy, play and so forth as any other child I have observed. I just attain that by different methods. It is you merely declaring by fiat that your chosen method is something "extra" or "more" or "real" that children such as mine are missing out on. But other than repetition of the assertion, assertion is all it remains.
I'm saying I've experienced everything you have and a little more. I've experienced the magic of Santa at Christmas first hand. I've experienced it again through my kids. It added a huge amount to my Christmas as a child and did the same again for my kids. I know because i've had the same experience as so many other people on here who had Santa as a child. Not one negative experience. Not one damaged adult as a result. Good memories all round. no-one feels betrayed, no-one feels lied to, no-one is more gullible as a result. We're all better for it and the vast vast majority of us chose to carry on the tradition. That says it all really.
That you choose not to partake is fine. that's your choice. But how can you measure the effect Santa has on a child's Christmas when you don't partake. You can't. You have no idea. Yet you claim to match and beat the experience. How can you possibly know ? You have nothing to compare it to. Like the people you mentioned who believe in a God, how can you deny their reality ? Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it's not real. You're denying the extra magic that Santa has provided to generations of families and kids all over the world. You're projecting your view on everyone else and you refuse to accept that there may be something more to it just because you have no experience of it. How can you know you've recreated it when you've never experienced it ? For someone who appears to have a sound logical mind you really should see the flaw in this...nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »Yet not knowing the explanation but KNOWING it is magic and illusion does not take away from it? Which is closer to my point. You can not know the explanation of how it is done, but still know it is not actually magic. So when you watch a show all you are doing is "suspending disbelief" for the purposes of entertainment. And ignorance of how the trick is done merely helps you do that. Knowing how the trick is done does not PREVENT you from doing that. It just makes it slightly harder.
For you... For many others, it kills it.
This is our first year where both kids no longer believe. We'll still leave the presents and leave out the cake, beer and carrots. It's tradition now but the magic isn't there any more. We still have the magic you speak of but the special magic is gone. It left the day they figured out the illusion. This experience is shared by the many millions who follow the tradition. That's just the nature of it... They can't all be wrong...
Anyway, we're going round in circles, it's the weekend and no one ever wins an internet argument ever so on that note i'm out of here...
Cheers for the discourse and in the spirit of the season, sincerely, i hope you and your family have a great Christmas :-)
Santa or no Santa :-) :-)0 -
-
Based on this thread, I with bring my kids to see Santa tomorrow in IKEA and tell all the other kids he's not real
No need to tell my 5 year old as he figured out that the one in the shops not real and the real one is in the north pole making his 2 big guns.
My ,youngest will just point and laugh.0 -
-
I'm defining magic as the power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces.
And as I keep saying there is no requirement I can see for having children believe in any such thing. And not believing in any such thing does not appear to hamper or hinder their imagination, fantasy, awe, wonder, intellect, enjoyment or any other measure I can think of. Let alone at Christmas time.Absolutely. I'm glad we agree. If everyone knows how the illusions work they won't bother going to see the "magic" show. The magic is gone.
We agree again !! Why do they need an air of mystique ? Because it contributes to the magic. It's the mystery, the not knowing that keeps the magic alive.
Not sure I do agree with that though. I know how most tricks are done that I have seen. I still love seeing them done. Just the same way as I know how to play football, but I still love to watch others do it. Most people can sing, but they still go to watch other people and bands do it.
Watching a true expert doing it is enough. Knowing how the trick is done takes nothing away from it. Any of us can suspend our disbelief. We do it all the time watching movies and soap operas for example. Or reading Fiction. The air of mystique however simply makes that easier to do, and people are lazy that way. We can let ourselves be carried away by it even when we know it is fake and illusion. I know entirely when I go to a big production magic show that it is all fake, and I likely know how most of the tricks are done. But in the moment I like the smoke and production, to be taken away on the suspension of disbelief and that it is all "real". Knowing how the tricks are done take nothing away from that. Perhaps they do for you. Not for me.Yet they don't. At least i've never met anyone in my 43 years
You just did. Me. But I think I covered above why people do not. A) They are lazy.
They likely do not care really. And C) not knowing HELPS them suspend disbelief even when they know it is not real, but it is not a pre-requisite of doing so.Yes I am speaking subjectively. As are you and everyone else on every thread on boards ever.
Except the ones who are not. But the point I am making is that your speech makes it sound like you think it more than mere subjectivity. You outright asserted "the magic goes with it" and that something is "missing the very special magic" and so forth. You are taking as if one really is "higher" or "better" or "more" than any other. And I am pointing out that is subjectivity and little else.I'm not religious but I have no doubt that they experience something extra.
I however do doubt it. I think they are experiencing all the same things I am. No one has shown me a shred of substantiation to the contrary. I merely think they are parsing it differently.I'm saying I've experienced everything you have and a little more.
And I am saying the "more" appears to be entirely made up and not substantiated in any way. Least of all by anyone on this thread.But how can you measure the effect Santa has on a child's Christmas when you don't partake.
You tell me. I am not the one going around declaring it to be "more" and elevating it in all kinds of ways. Perhaps you can tell me what the measurement system is. Perhaps you can create an SI unit of measure for it. Let us call it "The Jolly" and show us how you measure the different in Jollys between one approach and another in order to declare the effects to be "more" or "better" or whatever language you plan to use for it todayYet you claim to match and beat the experience.
No, what I claim is that no one, least of all you, has shown that the experience is anything "more" or "better" or whatever than any I have had or provided. You are the one claiming something is missing, not me. So it is you claiming to be doing the "matching" and "beating" more so than me.
All I am saying is I have seen nothing, not even a little, to suggest that the imaginations, awe, wonder, fantasy, enjoyment, fiction or any of those other things I have listed numerous times is in any way reduced from your standards by anything I do (or do not do). And in SOME cases it is quite the opposite in life. Some people think, for example, that scientifically understanding how a tree grows, eats, lives and reproduces destroys the beauty of it. I think it augments and increases it. Some people think a scientific theory of art, which we are currently doing well producing, will destroy art. Again I think the opposite.
So yes, I see little to no reason to think that failing to subscribe to unsubstantiated nonsense reduces anything, and many reasons to think there are times when it does quite the opposite.You're projecting your view on everyone else
No again, that is you not me. It is you, not me, for example going around claiming others are "denying children" certain things. Yet I have done no such thing. I have presented my view pretty much entirely without judgement or belittlement of any kind. So I have projected nothing. You however, have not returned the same in kind.i hope you and your family have a great Christmas
So far so good. Advent Calanders when done right are a real boon. Really have to work harder on home made ones too. Have also been sharing one of the other "real magics" of Christmas with my Daughter as best I can. Which is the world full of examples of where people put down the reigns of their own lives and really band together to help other individuals or groups to a level of self-sacrifice that beats the general average over the full year. I would like to see any evidence that the beauty of true human solidarity and self-sacrifice can be excelled by woo, fantasy or selling the supernatural as true.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Unsurprisingly you're missing the point. The "better" or "worse" was for analogy purposes only. We've already agreed on a similar position with regards to judgment of others choices so not sure why you'd go back their other then to derail the discussion...
Anyway, let's make it a little simpler...
Same 2 guys, same scenario..
Which of the 2 would you say has the more informed perspective on the merits of both cars ?
The guy who's only driven one of them ? Or the guy who's driven both ?
Straight forward answer will do...
It's not really a good analogy though. Just because one guy has driven more cars than the other guy doesn't necessarily mean he has a more informed perspective on how good it feels to drive different cars.
He may have better technical knowledge but from a subjective point of view? No.
Unfortunately for you one guy could say "well, the Maserati is faster and has more features" and the other guy could just say "but the Micra is small and blue and I like small blue things".
The are biological limits on how good a person can actually feel about something. So, if the first guy gets a euphoric feeling from driving his Micra and the mere thought of driving any other car makes him feel sad he isn't driving the Micra then no amount of experience of other cars can trump that.
The only way we could have an informed perspective would be if we hooked both guys up to some kind of device to measure brain activity or body chemistry to see who is actually getting the most from their driving experience.
So there! :P0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Of course you would argue that. You also think kids who believe into Santa are 'obedient passengers'.
There is no magic in the world but there are grand delusions where parents who think if they teach the kids science and reasoning since the age of three months the kids will become little Einsteins. I met a few , they were usually crying at teacher's table asking for better grades because they were outshined by truly talented kids and a lot of average ones and daddy wouldn't be happy with that.
Haha. The bitterness of this quote.
Listen, if you are going to misrepresent what I've said then I'm not going to participate in the discussion.
"I'm with Nozzferrahhtoo on this one. With a bit of creativity and a bit of effort it's pretty easy to create a sense of magic that really connects with children's imaginations. No Santa required."
So, I was never arguing against "magic" nor was I having any "grand delusions".
My point was that Santa is not required to imbue the kids with a sense of wonder or magic. This can be done just fine while the kids are fully aware that it's just pretend. Santa does not provide an extra special level of magic.
When they find out that Santa isn't "real" it really shouldn't make any difference.So no there is no special magic but there is a bit of fun and I like that even though that means I am raising sheep.
Ah, so you actually agree with me. 0 -
-
You called other kids obedient passengers not me. Also you know the meaning of sarcasm?Haha. The bitterness of this quote.
Listen, if you are going to misrepresent what I've said then I'm not going to participate in the discussion.
"I'm with Nozzferrahhtoo on this one. With a bit of creativity and a bit of effort it's pretty easy to create a sense of magic that really connects with children's imaginations. No Santa required."
So, I was never arguing against "magic" nor was I having any "grand delusions".
My point was that Santa is not required to imbue the kids with a sense of wonder or magic. This can be done just fine while the kids are fully aware that it's just pretend. Santa does not provide an extra special level of magic.
When they find out that Santa isn't "real" it really shouldn't make any difference.
Ah, so you actually agree with me.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement