hughbiquitous

John Mark Reynolds has given me my best Christmas present this year. He has written a brilliant apologetic for Santa Claus in the finest Clarkian/Van Tillian epistemic tradition. (Or is it Vincent Cheung?)

(If you’ve never heard of presuppositional apologetics, you might still enjoy this, but just understand that this is hilarious in ways you won’t appreciate.)

It’s a bit of a straw man, but that’s allowed in satire.

John Mark, thank you, thank you, thank you.

Read the whole thing, but here’s an excerpt:

Even to express doubts indicates a humanist, Enlightenment mindset. Santa comes to those who seek Santa. He chooses to reward his elite with special knowledge of Santa that they cannot doubt. Only then will their cognitive faculties work. This truth is evident in their failure to see Santa as we have seen him.

Everyone has presuppositions, but the mistake some people make is to challenge those presuppositions and to think about them! The mere fact that we like our epistemological cocoon is sufficient reason to stay in it.

The unbelievers ask for evidence, but there is no evidence they can understand. Only we can understand through the magic that Santa has given us. He will not give it to them, because they cling to human reason. They don’t realize that Santa hides from those who insist on thinking about him.

Santa comes to their house, but he wears gloves. He never leaves fingerprints that they can see. We could see his fingerprints, but we don’t bother looking since we already know they are there. We surely will not tell you about them, since that would be too much like philosophy.

The Santa doubters think they have an excuse, but it is good that Santa has left no evidence in nature for his existence.

Unbelievers cannot see him, but we can!