Jump to content

Santa Claus DOES Exist (a philosophical exercise)


Recommended Posts

OK I’ll bite; there is no jolly fat bearded  white guy who maintains a naughty and nice list and flys around faster that the speed of light with reindeer distributing toys made by elves in the North Pole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you can think of can be said to exist even if it's only in your mind.

So for some children and even some adults Santa Claus existed.

However it is not a fact it is an opinion. Since facts are subject to falsification, whereas opinions are not. Due to them not being factual even if they are based on facts.

There's a difference between a theory a theorem and a hypothesis. Although I could be mistaken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Delano

 

I figured you'd probably get it early.

I actually started this threat to make a point to Troy but YOU are helping to make it for me with the opening lines of your response.


I agree with the first part of your statement but after the "however" I began to distance myself from it a little.

For example, you said:


However it is not a fact it is an opinion. 


I'm of the position (and I thought YOU were as well, based on your initial statement) that even if something just exists in YOUR MIND ALONE....it still can be said to EXIST.

If it DOES exist...then it's a FACT (not a mere opinion) that it exists.

 

We can argue over the STATE of that existence, but there should be no argument over whether or not it actually exists.


If Santa Claus exists as a mythological character...he still exists none the less.

 

 

 

 Since facts are subject to falsification, whereas opinions are not. 

 

That's correct that facts are subject to falsification.
However we keep in mind that it's not the fact ITSELF that should be considered false but it's REPLACEMENT.
 

But as to opinions NOT being subject to falsification....are you sure about that?


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a preteen. I used to do logic puzzles.

 

The structure is as follows. You make a statement, then your assumptions. Then your conclusion. So if you follow the assumptions to heir logical conclusion your statement is logically true but it maybe false overall.

Men are taller than women. Serena is taller than me so she must be a man. Logically that statement is true. And it is verifiable, but it is also false.

 

So in arguments if the assumptions are not always true or the reasoning is faulty, the conclusion will be wrong.

 

I personally don't feel there are facts that you are easily verifiable, however that argument is about he scientific method which I am not prepared to either argue or discuss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

 

?????
You posted BEFORE Delano and myself?
I wonder why I didn't see your comment earlier.

 

 

 

OK I’ll bite; there is no jolly fat bearded  white guy who maintains a naughty and nice list and flys around faster that the speed of light with reindeer distributing toys made by elves in the North Pole.

 

You're denying a statement that was never made...by me in this thread.

 

I said Santa Claus exists.
I didn't say a man of THAT description exists.

 

The question remains, do YOU...Troy....dispute the FACT that Santa Claus exists?

And if so, on what grounds?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




Del

 


When I was a preteen. I used to do logic puzzles.

 

When I was a preteen I used to do something else...lol.

 

 

 


The structure is as follows. You make a statement, then your assumptions. Then your conclusion. So if you follow the assumptions to heir logical conclusion your statement is logically true but it maybe false overall.


I understand the point you're making but I don't think it's accurate enough.

The way you outlined it was:

 

STATEMENT -> ASSUMPTIONS -> CONCLUSION

 

And LOGIC was the thread that ran through them to keep them aligned with eachother.

 

 

Perhaps a more accurate way of making your point would be to say that the LOGIC (not "statement") can be CORRECT (not "true") even if the original statement was false.


Similar to your "Men are taller" analogy.....
I can make a false STATEMENT that humans have only 3 fingers on each hand.  A man lost one of his fingers.  The logical conclusion is that he only has 2 fingers left on one of his hands.

Again, the statement was false, but the logic was CORRECT (not "true").
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look up the definition of logic.

In order to properly discuss something you have to agree on terms and definitions. You don't really have to agree but if you define your terms your assumptions, then state your conclusion. Then we can discuss whether your reasoning is logical.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Delano

 

I hear what you're saying, however to keep it simple-
I need you to clarify a statement for me:

You said:

Quote

 

Posted 16 hours ago
Whatever you can think of can be said to exist even if it's only in your mind.


So for some children and even some adults Santa Claus existed.

 


Does this mean that you agree that Santa Claus DOES exist in the minds of some adults and children?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Delano said:

Whatever you can think of can be said to exist even if it's only in your mind.

I have discussions to exchange ideas.I am not trying to convince or convert

Link to post
Share on other sites


Delano

 

 

I have discussions to exchange ideas.I am not trying to convince or convert

 

How can you have a discussion with anyone when you refuse to answer simple questions they ask you?
 

I asked you a simple question and you gave me a statement about convincing and conversion totally UNRELATED to the question I ask, lol.
 

I asked you do you AGREE that Santa Claus exists in the minds of some adults and children?
It's a relatively simple question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

 

I said Santa Claus exists.
I didn't say a man of THAT description exists.


OK, then tell me who Santa Claus. Is he your brother-in-law from Detriot?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

First.....will you please answer the question.

Do you DISPUTE the existence of Santa Clause?    

YES    -   NO  -   YOU DON'T KNOW

 

After you answer, then I will proceed and tell you EXACTLY who Santa Claus is!

 


LOL....is this what you and Del learned in college?
How to evade questions, or respond to them with a flurry of unrelated questions of your own?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow man.  I already know you can read an article and interpret to support your world view when it direct contradicts it, but my first response was abundantly clear. 

 

Please simply read my response:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Troy

 

 

but my first response was abundantly clear. 

 

Your response was a DIATRIBE.
An unsolicited strawman of presupposed descriptions.

 

 

I didn't ask you did you believe in the existence of a "jolly fat bearded  white guy who maintains a naughty and nice list and flys around faster that the speed of light with reindeer distributing toys made by elves in the North Pole."

 

I asked you do you dispute the existence of Santa Claus.

It's a simple YES or NO question, yet you refuse to answer it.

 

 

 

 

 


Delano

 

...and as for you.


You should be ASHAMED of yourself.
Displaying such pitiful yet OBVIOUS grand-standing and contrariness.
 

 

A Mule's Prayer – Sisters of Christ

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2021 at 1:17 AM, Delano said:

Whatever you can think of can be said to exist even if it's only in your mind.

So for some children and even some adults Santa Claus existed.

 


Some would argue that there is NO SUCH thing as "existed" except as a word.

The argument says that -that which DID exist....DOES exist, even if it exists in a different state than before.

 

 

 

 

image.jpeg.3d44fa104e5f70019fd64439e74d00ee.jpeg

"Yall can't handle that one......"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

 

 

OK then, Santa Claus existed in your space/time continuum, but I did not experience that timeline.

 

Well, keep in mind that just because YOU didn't experience something in your timeline (parallel universe??) doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

While something may exist IN a Universe, it's "existence" isn't limited to a particular Universe.


But atleast we're making progress since you now acknowledge the existence of Santa Claus!


Now we can move on to social constructs.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, if your definition of “existence” means anything that can be conceived in one’s own mind or things that exist elsewhere in the multi-verse, well sure, Santa Claus exists.

 

If you are now going to try to shoehorn that definition into one to justify the reality of a social construct you’d be hard-pressed to do that. Actually, no, you do that every day of the week ... never mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

 

 

OK, if your definition of “existence” means anything that can be conceived in one’s own mind or things that exist elsewhere in the multi-verse, well sure, Santa Claus exists.

 

👍 I'm glad we agree...but it's not MY definition....it's THEE definition.

If you discounted the existence of something simply because it exists ONLY in the mind then you'd have to say IDEAS don't exist.

 

Come on man.

 

 


If you are now going to try to shoehorn that definition into one to justify the reality of a social construct you’d be hard-pressed to do that. Actually, no, you do that every day of the week ... never mind.

 

My question for you is why would I have to "justify" the reality of something that we both agree has been constructed?

 

If it's "constructed" then that means it was built; it IS.

 

The word "outcast" is a social construct used to designate certain people.

If we are both talking about "outcasts"....you obviously accept their reality even if only in concept for the sake of discussion.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Troy said:

Are you aware that there is a distinction between an idea and a physical thing?


Yes.

See how easy that was to answer a simple "yes" or "no" question?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK good.  So you you believe in a jolly fat bearded  white guy who maintains a naughty and nice list and flys around faster that the speed of light with reindeer distributing toys made by elves in the North Pole, commonly know as Santa Claus?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Troy

 

 

 So you you believe in a jolly fat bearded  white guy who maintains a naughty and nice list and flys around faster that the speed of light with reindeer distributing toys made by elves in the North Pole, commonly know as Santa Claus?


To answer your question directly again:  No.

Why should I?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

It's ONE STEP in the process of attempting to get you to understand that just because something is  a CONCEPT (such as "social constructs"), that doesn't mean it's not real or doesn't exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

Yes, and the two are not necessarily opposites.
Some concepts ARE real.

But I'm not focusing on what is "real" so much as what EXISTS.
We are talking about that which EXISTS.

Social constructs EXIST.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

40 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Social constructs EXIST.


That was never in dispute. You keep changing the conversation. Race as a social construct exist that’s obvious. That however does that make it real any more than The concept of Santa Claus Makes him real.
 

Playing around with the definition of words it’s not gonna change this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy

I'm not playing with words, I'm trying to get to the bottom of an issue and solve it.

I'm glad we can agree on the existence of race as a social construct.
Do you also agree that the various races that different nations and cultures classify/group people into....whether you agree with them or not...are also social constructs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Delano The concept of race as a social concept is real. The concept of race as a genetic construct is not real. 

 

Pioneer wants to play games and say that all "concepts" are real and therefor the conceptualized thing must also be real is just silly ploy he is using to say race has a genetic basis rather than just accepting the science.

 

@Pioneer1 "the existence of race as a social construct" was never in dispute.  It is your assertion that race is defined by our genetics that has been rejected by science.

 

3 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Do you also agree that the various races that different nations and cultures classify/group people into....whether you agree with them or not...are also social constructs?

 

For the upteenth time, NO. I do not agree with the "various races that different nations and cultures classify/group people into." 

 

Obviously, they are social constructs which one day I suspect more and more people will come to reject, because it is a dumb social construct, which ignorant people have only used to justify the ranking of people based upon the stupid shit some white boys made up a few hundred years ago to justify the enslavement of African people.  I reject the "concept" of race on that basis alone.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Troy



 

Quote

 

That was never in dispute. You keep changing the conversation. Race as a social construct exist that’s obvious. That however does that make it real any more than The concept of Santa Claus Makes him real.

 

 

 


 

Quote

 

Obviously, they are social constructs which one day I suspect more and more people will come to reject, because it is a dumb social construct, which ignorant people have only used to justify the ranking of people based upon the stupid shit some white boys made up a few hundred years ago to justify the enslavement of African people.  I reject the "concept" of race on that basis alone.

 

 

 

 

 

Alright!
 

If race is a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT


and


If a social construct does EXIST 


and


You acknowledge that they (races) are MULTIPLE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS. 


then


Although you reject them, you DO ACKNOWLEDGE THE EXISTENCE OF MULTIPLE RACES.



Congradulations baby boy!
 

Gimme fiiiiive...

Pimp C | Diskographie | Discogs

 

....alriiiiight.

 

 

 


which one day I suspect more and more people will come to reject, because it is a dumb social construct, which ignorant people have only used to justify the ranking of people based upon the stupid shit some white boys made up a few hundred years ago to justify the enslavement of African people.  I reject the "concept" of race on that basis alone.

Well...

What you choose to reject has no more bearing on REALITY or whether something EXISTS or not...than your rejecting strawberry icecream means it "doesn't exist".

 

I'm glad that after all these years we finally come to agree on the existence of MULTIPLE races!

Break out the Cognac!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1 reread (with comprehension this time): 

 

3 hours ago, Troy said:

Pioneer wants to play games and say that all "concepts" are real and therefor the conceptualized thing must also be real is just silly ploy he is using to say race has a genetic basis rather than just accepting the science.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Troy

 

 

Your assertion has been that there IS ONLY ONE RACE.


Through logic, I have compelled you to bear witness and agree with me that there  ARE INDEED MULTIPLE RACES.

All this stuff about genetics and concepts is besides the fact.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Del

 

Do you accept Troy's statement of:
"The concept of race as a genetic construct is not real." ...as being an adequate example of an "unreal" concept?

 

How could a concept be "unreal" simply because one doesn't understand or agree with it.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...