Gramps Talks About Spirits

A few years ago a couple of my grandkids were busy drawing pictures when a disagreement broke out. “No, that’s not real,” declared one of the children, critiquing the other’s sketch of a Tyrannosaurus rex, which happened to be wearing “tighty-whitey” underwear and purple shoes, as it snacked on a slice of pizza while dancing under a disco ball. [Author’s note: Do not try to “diagram” the previous sentence.] The young artist calmly replied that, yes, the picture was indeed real. “You can see it right here, can’t you?” We are all faced with the struggle to decide what is “real” and what is “fake.” What a complex struggle it turns out to be. In the scenario that I just described, the drawing on the paper really existed as a drawing, but the content of the sketch was entirely “make-believe.” It’s the same dilemma faced by a growing child as she or he must adapt to evolving stories of Santa Claus. The concept of Santa is certainly a real concept. Many people “know” all about that story. However, there are three different ways of knowing about Santa. We know some things by “faith”—we were given information and we believe it with all our hearts, even if we cannot quite understand it. Our beliefs are strong. We make real decisions based on these beliefs, and we are usually able to shake off any discussion that threatens to change what we believe. Other things we know by “evidence”—our senses are able to collect data and verify the “truth” of the story. This “way of knowing” is flexible and constantly changing direction as new evidence is discovered. Some people might say that this way of knowing leads to the ultimate truth, yet time and again, in courts of law and in scientific debates, agreement over evidence cannot be reached. Interpretation of the evidence is completed through the filter of one’s beliefs. Not to mention what happens when new evidence is presented. And then there is a third “way of knowing”—we know about these things, yet all the while we recognize that we are dealing with “fiction.” Make-believe. Outright fantasy. These things do not belong on the witness stand in a murder trial, nor are they allowed in scientific journals. So where do we stand with Santa Claus? Is he real? Yes. Is he fictional? Yes. Do gifts really arrive? Yes. If your father bought your mother an expensive necklace and put it under the tree, what would he do if a thief broke into the house on Christmas Eve and stole the necklace? Would he say a prayer that the necklace might be returned? Probably. Would he call the police and ask them to use evidence to solve the crime? Probably. Would he try to contact Santa (or Harry Potter) by email, or phone, or Facebook to help him get the necklace back? I don’t know. The book you are about to read is fiction. The conversation described within these pages never happened. You will never be able to use this book as evidence in order to win an argument. You should never attempt to use this book as a reference when you write a school paper for history or science. Rather, the make-believe conversation in this story is presented for your entertainment. And maybe it will stimulate your curiosity enough to lead you to do your own evidence-based study of actual events in history. Many great novels make references to factual places and dates and people involved in historical events. As a reader, it is on your shoulders to see how any story affects your beliefs, as well as how it relates to the evidence in history. Just remember: the conversation in this book never happened. It’s fiction.