The way I look at god is that, I probably know nothing about how or why he exists. Im pretty sure of my "feelings" about god, and so I take no quams on others "feelings". Cause at this point in history, I see know way of explaining such an existence. All I can say is that false information can corrupt our understanding of such things. Aka, current science and philosophy. We are still taking baby steps.



This was St. Nicholas's companion, Black Pete, who either gave presents or, if the children had misbehaved, whipped them and dragged them to hell. He was the one who came down the chimney, so he could be close to the fire and so he could more easily travel to the hellish flames that spawned him.

And why do they think Santa likes children. I mean, he picks the lamest job for that, he's huddled all the way up in the north pole where no kids are around. I mean... what a jerk. And then you wonder why its only western society where Santa seems to visit. I mean... we're spoiled enough, can't he find the right priority.

Seriously though, ofcourse Santa isn't real.

I believe in Santa Claus

No, you're an atheist. Agnostic means you do not know if God exists. Atheist means you do not believe in God.

You are presenting a sort of extreme dichotomy here between a belief nearly universally held by western theists (i.e. God exists) versus a cultural tradition that is mostly held as allegorical by adult western theists (i.e. Santa Claus...)

But it raises an important point -- as soon as you give God, or give religion a SINGLE specific attribute, there will be disagreement. If you call god omnipotent, people will disagree about what that means. If you call god good people will disagree with what that means...

And as you add different traditions, different perspectives, and a billion different variables, you'll find that no two people believe the same thing.

Which begs the question of how we ever can know what is when there is no external measure.

Priests:Parents::God:SantaClause

What "is" what? real you mean?

I think we have to use the internal measure then, that is, we decide what exists and what doesnt... now, we will just have to be very complacent towards others to avoid some unecessary violence

Only philosophical chit-chat could turn something as silly as Santa Claus into a serious thought experiment.

Just the other end of the spectrum from God, though. I mean there are intermediate steps -- what about the historical Saint Nicholas? What about sainthood in general -- is it literal, is it allegorical?

It's just picking an extreme example to make a good case that it's arbitrary where certain traditions evolve to be legendary rather than holy.

So do I! What is all this crazy talk?

I'm not sure. To me, Santa Claus is a personification of Christmastime.

Santa Claus is a marketing figure invented by Coca-Cola and adopted by pretty much any industry that sells stuff that can be given as presents in the hopes of increasing their sales and by the movie/cartoon industry as a theme. Happy?

Absolutely not! Coca-Cola was not created until 1886. Here is a drawing by the American cartoonist Thomas Nast from 1881:


Nast created the popular image of Santa Claus that we know today.
Not to mention, the poem "A Visit from St. Nicholas", better known to most as "'Twas the Night Before Christmas," was first published in New York in 1823.

But the current personification is from Coca-Cola, he was green before then

Well, actually not sure if he was green before, but he wasnt like he is now.

As christmas has become more comericialsied, so has its anthropamorphic representation

I don't believe in Santa.
I used to,
and I hope to believe in him at some point in the future.

By this I am pointing to the way that Santa has become less about giving, and more about expecting to recieve. Its become a commerical enterprise with guilt as the overiding emotion. Did you get what you wanted? Were others disappointed with your gift? How much did it cost? Is it better than what someone else got?

If gifts were given privately they would have more meaning.

Its also easy for rich people to buy stuff and give it out. And yet when it comes to giving time and effort, they turn and run away. On an emotional level, people are very stingy, whilst thinking that material goods can compensate for compassion, emotional support, and genuine unity of spirit.

I am thinking here of the broken families, where the child would rather just have a decent bit of quality time with their distant family member on a regular basis, rather than a big cold expensive gift once per year as the norms of tradition and guilt dictate.

This is why I dont like culture: People are pressured to do things that they oftenly dont know the reason for or dont agree with.

If you had paid my post a closer look, you would have seen the quotation marks. I dind'n say that i don't believe in God, i said that an atheist would say so. I don't feel that I can draw any conclusion about god's existance. When I'm talking about God, i don't say that there is no God, I say "If there is a God" Isn't that defined as agnostic? Thats what I thought.