Mopac does not believe in Santa

Author: Discipulus_Didicit ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 12
  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,979
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    Intro

    This is a copy-paste of a post I made in a different thread with one key difference... I found out that the seven-year-old's definition of Santa actually can be supported with a dictionary definition. The seven-year-old is still wrong and still for the same reason that they were wrong before but I think this small detail improves upon the point of the post enough to justify its re-posting here.

    ----------------

    Seven year old child: I believe that Santa is Christmas, that Santa has magic that comes from Christmas Spirit, that Santa wants to give us all presents, and that if we are really good then he will! Hey Mopac, do you believe in Christmas?

    Mopac: Christmas? Uh yeah, that holiday that people celebrate. End of December for some, beginning of January for others.

    7YO: Well guess what, buddy? YOU BELIEVE IN SANTA! GOTCHA NOW SUCKER!

    M: Uh, what? No, I don't believe that days can be magic or... what was that other thing you just said? Oh, the -

    7YO: No no no no don't worry about that other stuff. Just the part where I throw a truism at you, that's all I want you to focus on.

    M: But that part about presents... I don't believe that any -

    7YO: No no no no you're really making this more complicated than it has to be. If I am in apologetics mode then when I say 'Santa' I really just mean that as a synonym for 'Christmas'. You aren't going to deny that Christmas is real like all those dirty wicked evil Hannuka celebrators do, are you?

    M: I seriously doubt anyone has ever told you that Christmas does not exist.

    7YO: It's settled then. Congrats on believing in Santa.

    M: But that's not how language works, little kid. You can't just redefine the word Santa just because you want to convince people that they believe in him. The word 'Santa' has an actual meaning to people that speak this language. The meaning behind this word is how people understand this word to work and if you arbitrarily use it differently you aren't contributing anything to the conversation about Santa at all!

    7YO: Actually I have a dictionary to support this definition of Santa. Look at this definition:


    See? Santa is defined as "Another term for Father Christmas" In other words SANTA = CHRISTMAS!!!

    M: Dictionary definition? Did you hear a single thing I just said? Even if you do have a dictionary which could be read that way I am telling you that people use the word Santa a certain way, a way that you understand perfectly well, and if you try to prove some weird point by just focusing on one aspect of it (the association between Santa and Christmas) you are not helping anything. There is so much more baggage to go with the word Santa than just what a dictionary says because that is how language works. Language is not created by dictionaries. Language is a social construct.

    7YO: Look dude, seriously. Belief in Christmas is belief in Santa. I don't care what the other several billion people who speak English think about Santa because that is just their opinion. If the only part about Santa that you believe is the Christmas part, you don't believe in the presents or coal or anything, then to you Christmas is Santa. I wouldn't say that, I would say Christmas is just one part of Santa, but if Christmas is the only part that you believe in then I INSIST that you call Christmas Santa.

    Mopac: That is absurd! I already have a word for Christmas. I call it Christmas!

    7YO: Well sure you can still call it that, just make sure you call it Santa too and don't forget that if anyone asks you whether you believe in Santa you have to say yes now!

    M: But that... That is so stupid... There are SO MANY flaws in what you are trying to do here. Nobody uses the word Santa that way. 

    7YO: Okay bye now! I am off to convince more people that Santa exists so that I can get on Santa's nice list! Bye bye Mopac!

    - Later that same day -

    Mopac: I believe that God is ultimate reality, that God created the universe, that God loves us all, and that the Orthodox Christian church is God's favorite church. Hey you, do you believe in ultimate reality?

    Innocent bystander: Ultimate reality? Uh, you mean that like, reality is real? Yeah sure. Reality is real.

    M: Well guess what, buddy? YOU BELIEVE IN GOD! GOTCHA NOW SUCKER!

    IB: Uh, what? No, I don't believe that the universe was created or... what was that other thing you just said? Oh, the -

    M: No no no no don't worry about that other stuff. Just the part where I throw a truism at you, that's all I want you to focus on.

    IB: But that part about the Orthodox Church... I don't believe that any church -

    M: No no no no you're really making this more complicated than it has to be. If I am in apologetics mode then when I say 'God' I really just mean that as a synonym for 'reality'. You aren't going to deny that reality is real like all those dirty wicked evil nihilists do, are you?

    IB: I seriously doubt anyone has ever told you that they don't believe reality is real.

    M: It's settled then. Congrats on becoming a theist.

    IB: But that's not how... You know what, nevermind. I don't actually care. Congratulations Mopac I believe in God. Just let me get back to what I was doing.

    ----------------

    I truly, without any sarcasm, cannot see a single flaw in Mopac's argument against this child's flawed apologetic. If anyone else can please do tell.
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 810
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    mopac's ultimate realist stuff is illogical. i'm guessing even theists here recognize that. obviously the atheists do. are there any theists here who thinks his reasoning makes sense?
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 292
    Forum posts: 8,902
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    --> @n8nrgmi
    Would you like me to explain his reasoning?
  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,979
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    --> @n8nrgmi
    At first glance Mopac's... argument I suppose, for want of a better word... is just a slightly mutated form of the ontological argument. I do not know whether the resemblance there is coincidence or the argument is actually inspired by the ontological argument in some way but in either case the resemblance does exist and I have dubbed this type of thinking "proto-ontological apologetics" as a result.

    You may be suprised (though you almost certainly won't be) to learn that Mopac did not actually come up with the idea of the proto-ontological apologetics he uses. You can see in the link below a video about someone making almost word-for-word the same argument (though to their credit they don't treat Merriam-Webster's as divinely inspired the same way Mopac does so they at least have that going for them) This person also cites another apologist's book as an inspiration for the idea within the video.


  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @Discipulus_Didicit
    Nice find.  It also covers pga's presuppositionalism as a bonus.
  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,979
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    --> @keithprosser
    Nice find.

    Thank you. I spend a lot of time doing things around the apartment listening to YouTube on autoplay in the background. When I stumbled across that video about a week and a half ago I was nearly convinced that Mopac was the apologist in the video before I took a second look!
  • keithprosser
    keithprosser avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,289
    2
    3
    3
    keithprosser avatar
    keithprosser
    --> @Discipulus_Didicit
    I suspect that the god=truth thing was taught to Mopac along with the dictionary nonsense when he was coverting to orthodoxy.  pga is apparently chaneling a presuppostionalist theologian called van Till, who he names as a favourite author on his profile.


  • crossed
    crossed avatar
    Debates: 60
    Forum posts: 498
    1
    2
    6
    crossed avatar
    crossed
    Santa is Satan rearranged. pus santa last name is claws

    satan claws


    both are depicted as red satan is red and santa is red

    santa was created  to take away attention from christ

    Christmas has turned to xmas



    santa was created to take people away from Christ. it is used this way by saying believing in Santa is like believing in Jesus.
  • crossed
    crossed avatar
    Debates: 60
    Forum posts: 498
    1
    2
    6
    crossed avatar
    crossed
    and modpac is right there is a god
  • Discipulus_Didicit
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Debates: 9
    Forum posts: 3,979
    3
    4
    10
    Discipulus_Didicit avatar
    Discipulus_Didicit
    --> @keithprosser
    I suspect that the god=truth thing was taught to Mopac along with the dictionary nonsense when he was coverting to orthodoxy.

    Taught as an apologetic? Very likely, yes. Taught as a litteral teaching? Maybe, but not any differently than the way that other denominations teach that God is litterally love or that Jesus litterally makes truth possible. Based on my experience with various Christian groups Mopac heavily overexaggerates the differences between Orthodox Christianity and other denominations.

    pga is apparently chaneling a presuppostionalist theologian called van Till, who he names as a favourite author on his profile.

    I don't recall ever having much of a conversation with pga so I won't say anything about them specifically but in general presupps and YECs really give a bad name to theist apologists in my opinion. There are plenty of perfectly sane apologists that belong to neither group but it seems that sadly most of the better-known ones fall into one of the two categories.
  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @crossed
    There's actually millions if there's one.
  • Polytheist-Witch
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,932
    2
    2
    3
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Polytheist-Witch
    Santa - a lie told by parents. No one who posts here does yet one guy is targeted for it? Bigotry.