advancedresearch.github.io
Christmas and Inauthentic Polytheism
by Sven Nilsen, 2023
When you ask Christians what they believe in, they usually answer “Jesus”. If you are asking them why they celebrate Christmas, they usually answer “The birth of Jesus”.
However, just like Christianity have saints (not all versions), but no other deities besides God, there is one character that is perhaps even more recognizable than Jesus when it comes to Christmas:
Now, while Santa Claus is often seen as embodying the spirit of Christmas, people do not think of Santa Claus as a particularly “christian” character.
You might ask: Why is this in particular interesting?
The reason is that Christianity has historically been heavily influenced by Platonism and other philosophical ideas from ancient Greece. In modern mathematical philosophy, we treat Platonism as a language bias. The corresponding dual to Platonism is Seshatism, named after the ancient Egyptian Seshat, a goddess of writing and wisdom.
Since Platonism is a language bias found frequently in all aspects of society and cultures around the world, it is also interesting to look for Seshatism as a language bias.
Particularly in Western part of the world, Seshatism often appear in “inauthentic” sense (aka Heidegger’s philosophy).
Santa Claus is in many ways fitting a secular narrative of Christmas, perhaps from pragmatic commercialization of this character by the capitalistic advertisement industry.
To attribute dogmatic or Christian spiritual properties to Santa Claus, is a very controversial position. This is despite that “Santa” comes from “Saint” which is related to Christian doctrine within some traditions.
Santa Claus is a mythological character that erases social boundaries.
Three reasons that Santa Claus fits a Seshatic bias, is due to playfulness, non-duality and make-belief.
In all traditions and rituals, there are elements that are not strictly necessary, but produces “surplus” and “desire” which is a deep human psychological phenomena.
Where the narrative behind the birth of Jesus might seem a little heavy for children, Santa Claus provides an alternative which is more fun and also more socially accepted across Christian and secular boundaries.
The interesting thing about Christianity is why there are such characters who are associated with traditions yet are not perceived to be “authentic” part of the doctrine.
Christianity is a wide spectrum of beliefs that simultaneously is very picky about precise notions of divinity within respective traditions, yet at the same time serving popular narratives around “inauthentic” characters.
From this perspective, I think it is wrong to characterize Christianity as a “serious” religion only.
Some people through history claimed that Christianity was masqerading as monotheistic, while being polytheistic underneath. In defense, many Christians claim that “true” Christianity is monotheistic and the polytheistic aspects are syncretized from pagan roots (for an example, see this article).
However, I do not agree with this position, because it over-simplifies Christianity as a wide spectrum of belief systems. One thing is to argue about “true” Christianity seen from the perspective of individual beliefs. Another thing is to include boundaries between belief systems as part of the history of Christianity.
The “inauthentic” character, like Santa Claus, serves as a “narrative messenger” between incompatible sets of doctrine. Not just across one kind of boundary, but among many dimensions.
You can not rule out secular influence in how people perceive Santa Claus today. At the same time, I think most Christians would agree that taking away Santa Claus in the tradition of Christmas, would not make kids happy.
The playful or “inauthentic” aspects of religious traditions might be just as important as doctrine.
Therefore, I think Christianity might be called “inauthentic polytheistism”. In some ways, it is not polytheism in a strict sense, but precisely in a “non-serious” or “inauthentic” sense.
You are not supposed to take it seriously, but you also have no choice but to include Santa Claus in the Christian tradition of Christmas. So, you are not forced to believe in Santa Claus, in the sense of a doctrine, but you are forced to make-believe in order to respect social boundaries.
The “strict” doctrine of Christianity can be seen as Platonic biased. When a religion is Platonic biased in its doctrine, we often find that its leaders are male. This might be because males tend to be a little more Platonic in their thinking compared to females.
However, it would be a mistake to say that Christianity is not Seshatic biased, both from a doctrine perspective, which appealed to women specifically, and a historical perspective, since there were many women in Early Christianity who played important roles.
In modern times, many people react to the versions of Christianity that posit themselves as anti-intellectual, anti-science and dogmatic. At these times, it is easy to forget that Santa Claus is a character who in many ways represents Christianity finding new ways to appeal to younger generations and respect a diverse set of beliefs.
I expect that Christianity in the future will also develop new forms and traditions with Seshatic influence. This way of playing with ideas and messing around with Platonism, as seen with Santa Claus, is typical for Seshatic language bias.