WHAT IF WE DIDN'T POISON CHILDREN'S MINDS WITH FANTASY?

by Terry 213 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  xenawarrior

  When a Jehovah's Witness comes peddling a "better" fantasy that avoids Hell and provides a Paradise Solution to all life's problems---well, who wouldn't buy such a tale?"

  Me. Imagine that. Brought up with Christmas and Santa and the whole shebang !! In fact, I was raised on a quest for the magical around us in books and movies and nature etc., with my own mother in the lead. We were encouraged to be creative and silly !! And she was a teacher. And with all of that she was teaching us to stretch our minds, not to prepare them for being vulnerable to that which isn't real. My brother and sister and I all seem to have grown up with a very good discernment between fiction and fact, reality and fantasy, in spite of what you would consider abusive rearing on her part.

  We pour fiction into a child's mind and they develop the sweet taste of it.

  Yes they do. But that doesn't mean that in order for that to be true that they discard the opposite. To believe so, IMO is truly black and white thinking at work.

  Is it surprising that children are not only ignorant of HOW THINGS REALLY WORK-but, they don't have patience and an appetite for fact when they get to the schoolroom. This certainly affects how they will react when they meet a religious salesman out to land a convert!

  Terry, do you have anything factual to base this bs on or is it just your opinion? Yes, it is surprising to me that children are ignorant of HOW THINGS REALLY WORK. Because in my experience this simply isn't true. Which children are you speaking of? Which ones "don't have patience and an appetite for fact when they get to the classroom"? What a bunch of malarky. I'm sure that if the only thing children were exposed to is fantasy and cartoons and Santa and they had no reality or facts in their lives, they'd be in the position you state here but otherwise you are totally off base.

  XW
• 

  itsallgoodnow

  in spite of what you would consider abusive rearing on her part.

  I wouldn't consider it abusive to have christmas for your kids, it probably would be worse to not have it for some consciensious (sp?) reason and make them stand out as different. Although I would be careful about what I teach them about it and keep it as secular as possible.

  Here's where I first read about this, and I tend to agree with it, though I'll admit I'm no expert and I don't have kids yet. (skeptical inquirer - Development of Beliefs in Paranormal and Supernatural Phenomena March 2004):

  We are taught about angels, witches, devils, spirits, monsters, gods, etc. virtually in the cradle. Some of these paranormal beliefs are secular, some are religious, and the most pernicious are crossover beliefs, beliefs that are at times secular and at other times religious. Santa Claus, angels and vampires, ghosts and souls, and the Easter Bunny are examples of cross-over beliefs. Crossover beliefs are attractive to children (free candy and presents), and on that basis they are readily accepted. The devils, ghosts, and monsters are reinforced through Halloween rituals and the mass media. As the child matures, some crossover beliefs, called "teaser" paranormal beliefs, are exposed as false. Traditional religious concepts are reinforced as "true and real." They give us Santa Claus and we believe in an omniscient, beneficent old elf and then they replace Santa with God, who is typically not as generous as Santa Claus and whose disapproval has more serious consequences than a lump of coal. We learn about God and Santa Claus simultaneously; only later are we told that Santa Claus is just a fairy tale and God is real.

  Ok, this kind of thing may not work on everyone the same way, but it seems to make sense to me.
• 

  Xena

  Conversely you have the school of thought that says if kids think you lied about Santa then you are probably lying about God and Jesus and are less apt to believe in them either.

  Belief in Santa Claus is dangerous: The Rev. John Eich suggests that teaching a child about Santa can backfire. "When a parent says 'Yes, there really is a Santa Claus and his reindeer can fly,' he is no longer playing a game. The parent is lending his personal authority as a parent to the myth, giving it the ring of truth." When the child later finds out that there is no Santa Claus, then she/he might also doubt other parental teachings. In particular, the child might believe that that another man is also a fake: Jesus Christ who also is said to have miraculous powers, knows when everyone is sleeping and awake, knows when each person is bad or good, and who brings the gift of salvation. Moral, ethical, behavioral and other parental teachings may be similarly suspect.

  http://www.religioustolerance.org/santa3.htm

  It is but a short step from dropping the belief in Santa Claus to dropping the belief in a God in the sky or the saving power of a religious man who lived 2000 years ago

  http://www.worldworks.org/myths/fantasy.htm

  Christians should be especially concerned as they are susceptible to their children suddenly doubting the existence of God. Why should He be viewed any differently than Santa Claus? Just another mythical character portrayed as the truth by their parents.

  http://dkhunt.tripod.com/id47.html

  What does all that mean? Basically that you can find anything you like on the internet to support your viewpoint

  I prefer to base my decision to continue to have Santa visit us on my own interaction with my daughter, my own life experince as someone who believed themselves and the experiences of my friends and co-workers who believed.

  Merry Christmas to all and to all a Good Night...Ho Ho Ho
• 

  Terry

  When I began this thread I had not considered that it would be viewed as an accusation of poor parenting if one participated in allowing their children to believe that a fictitious character was an actual person.

  In fact, I was quite taken about by the strong emotional backlash that ensued. Where was this coming from? Somebody privately wrote me and told me the following that clarified things for me:

  "You should have know better Terry. Actually, I once got a silly book on the art of arguing (eristics?). It described different fallacies you can use in discussions. Anyway, there was one thing in this book which I find very true. There was a shortlist of topics which are 100% certain to casue the most hellish arguments, no matter how carefully you make your rational arguments.
  
  One of the very hottest topics, which scored equal with religion, economics, and politics in terms of the potential of causing trouble was what?
  
  Yes, bringing up children.
  
  It's interesting, because everybody knows it's easy to end up having to deal with the emotional backlash when you bring up a religious issue (not really on JWD, becaus the opinions are similar) or politics. But the demons you summon when asserting: "I believe this is how children should be brought up..." are very well hidden. Not a bit less vicious though."

  I have been thinking about those words to me and I consider it to be quite illuminating.

  Anybody else agree?
• 

  Xena

  You needed someone to tell you that if you crititized people on how they raise their kids they are going to get pissy????
• 

  Terry

  XENA (warrior princess) says: You needed someone to tell you that if you crititized people on how they raise their kids they are going to get pissy????

  Indeed, my point is that I was ___interpreted__as intending to criticise parenting. That was not my intention at all. It is more a corollary conclusion that is feasible IF my premise is correct. So, logically, the chain of events would be:

  1.I assert with opinion.

  2.Others counter with facts and opinions

  3.I agree or disagree

  At that point it is only discussion. I'm powerless to MAKE somebody a bad parent. I can only be accused of holding such an opinion and who cares what I think anyway?

  Back to my point....

  The fact so many people took offense to my topic subject indicates to me that there is a sensitivity among Ex-JW's about anybody calling in to question "belief", especially about children.

  Truthfully, we all were once identical in our beliefs among ourselves, were we not? If the Society told us Christmas was bad to celebrate--it was followed by us out of obedience and we would state the principle as avoiding "false religious contamination".

  But, on the JWD we are all now individuals, are we not? We don't have to agree on anything. Indeed, we do not agree! This is a good thing. No lock-step marching required here.

  But, there is a residual resentment against anyone who strongly states an opinion because it FEELS LIKE AUTHORITY pressing down and removing autonomy.

  I am no such authority. I have no magical source of wisdom about anything. I'm just a 57 year old shmuck. I can be dead wrong about anything at any time. I pose no threat to parents. I cannot pronounce anybody unfit. I can only utter my pathetic opinions and watch them twist slowly in the wind.

  It is a healthy discussion we are having about this topic. Why? Because:

  1.If I am dead wrong--everybody will demonstrate with the force of reasoned argument that I am full of crap.

  2.If I am right--everybody will have a chance to rethink their use of fantasy with their children and look for any symptoms of harm.

  As a parent of 7--I think there is no greater responsibility than to at least consider possible ill effects and filter them through my own knowledge base and experience.

  Why would anybody disagree with that?
• 

  Dansk

  What is real? Is not this life but one enormous fantasy? Everything is impermanent. What one calls truth is usually the substituting of one fantasy for another. The wise will understand.

  Ian
• 

  xenawarrior

  When I began this thread I had not considered that it would be viewed as an accusation of poor parenting if one participated in allowing their children to believe that a fictitious character was an actual person.

  Oh please... You really didn't believe these words of yours "would be viewed as an accusation of poor parenting if one participated in allowing their children to believe that a fictitious character was an actual person? " Give me a break.

  I'm sorry. This sort of treatment of children seems abusive to me. Teach children how to experience wonder in life WITHOUT hiding facts and without misleading them and without creating false hopes. That is a parenting skill with integrity to it.

  How else did you think these words would be viewed? It's difficult for you to try to stand on both sides of those words.

  or maybe it was this?

  Don't cheat children by hiding true facts; it isn't kind, it isn't honest and it smacks of hubris.

  In fact, I was quite taken about by the strong emotional backlash that ensued. Where was this coming from?

  see your above quotes for the answer to that. In just the above you said that these parents are
  
  * Abusive
  * lacking in integrity in their parenting skills
  * cheating their children
  * hiding true facts from their children
  * being unkind to their children
  * being dishonest

  And that doesn't even cover where you alluded to something about whether children will believe parents really love them if you tell them about Santa or that they'll end up in school without any patience and without an appetite for fact. or that as parents we feel that our "vulnerable" children are "expendable" when it comes to true/false learning.

  These are your words and you were really "taken aback" by the strong emotional backlash you received?

  Sorry if these words sound harsh but if you are truly taken aback by this, I would suggest that instead of wondering so much about what others are teaching their children and how it affects their children out in the world and as they become adults, you might want to concentrate on your own method of communication and how it affects others you interact with.

  When I began this thread I had not considered

  Indeed, my point is that I was ___interpreted__as intending to criticise parenting. That was not my intention at all. It is more a corollary conclusion that is feasible IF my premise is correct.

  Well, I'd suggest that in the future you refrain from insulting others based on an "IF my premise is correct" situation then and you consider how your words will be interpreted by others. And then, if you hear from others so quickly- that your words are being interpreted a certain way - you might want to consider discontinuing that vein instead of trudging along with the same insulting message.

  The fact so many people took offense to my topic subject indicates to me that there is a sensitivity among Ex-JW's about anybody calling in to question "belief", especially about children.

  Bullshit. If you said the things you said to any parents who have taught their kids about Santa, etc. you'd get much of the same response you got here. Please don't try to create some extra sensitivity to hang the responsibility onto for the responses you got. They responded that way based on your means of communication, not because they happen to be "ExJw's" and thus (in your mind) have some sensitivity about beliefs and children that other people don't. I've never been a JW and I was offended by your writings here.

  XW (the other Xena in this thread- so if my words are harsh they aren't attributed to her)
• 

  Terry

  xenawarrior says:Oh please... You really didn't believe these words of yours "would be viewed as an accusation of poor parenting if one participated in allowing their children to believe that a fictitious character was an actual person? " Give me a break.

  Well, are there more than two possibilities here?

  1.I was trying to offend deliberately

  2.I was not trying to offend

  I suppose you can believe what you want to. But, why wouldn't I just sit back and wring my hands in glee as one angry poster after another flew into a tizzy since my "sinister" intention would have been realized?

  Instead, I've tried to express my non offensive intention in post after post. If I don't care about other people's being offended why bother? I've actually got other things to do just as you have. Why waste time on people I don't respect? You see? It doesn't make sense.

  I am not going to convince you if your mind is made up that my DESIRE is not to offend. But, I have to say that all the statements I made accurately reflect my personal opinion.

  I do think not telling kids the truth is abusive. I'm sorry if my opinion is offensive. But, I can't think of any other way to say it.

  In the end, what I think shouldn't matter to anybody. I'm nobody special.

  I am sorry if I offended anybody with what I said. All I meant to do is raise an issue for discussion.

  In my first post I ended the lead in by saying the following:

  I assert that by filling little children full of fantasy and fiction from their very start we are poisoning their capacity to tolerate REALITY. Fantasy tastes better. It is a sugar-coated world.
  

  Make your best arguments pro and con.

  What do YOU think?

  I invited rebuttal.
• 

  Country_Woman

  probably my opinion has been given by others as well (this tread is much to long to read everything before I give my reaction)

  I think the world would be a boring place without fantasies, fairytailes, Santa Claus a.s.o.

  Its wonderful to make believe children these things (only the nice ones ofcourse) this belongs in the same class as "the story before going to sleep"

  The (Japanese) cartoons on television and lots of the computergames, are in my opinion poison as well.

  You can hardly speak of fantasy by these "mistakes"

  edit to say: I am glad that I grow up with these fantasies.

  I pity the children who where told that these figures aren't real: this knowledge should be for the bigger ones (older then 6 years) in my opinion they are to wise for their age and robbed from a lot of fun. Once they are in school and learn to read the masquerade is over. The commerce (sp) round X-mas does'nt leave much to guess.