@kennethamy,
kennethamy;150092 wrote:What would it mean for Santa to have mental reality? If that means the thought of Santa, or the idea of Santa, that is not Santa. It is the thought or idea of Santa. Why would the thought or idea of Santa be Santa? Would the thought or idea of the Eiffel Tower be the Eiffel Tower? Of course not. The Eiffel Tower is a structure in Paris. The thought or idea of the Eiffel Tower is not the Eiffel Tower. So why would the thought or idea of Santa be Santa?
(1) I now have the thought of Santa in my mind
therefore
(2) I am now thinking about Santa
therefore
(3) Santa is now being thought about by me
therefore
(4) Santa has the property of now being thought about by me
therefore
(5) Santa exists.
Where is the flaw in this argument? Bear in mind that I am thinking about
Santa, not (only) the
thought of Santa. Sentence (3) expresses the same proposition as (2), but in the passive rather than the active voice.