Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Discussing Santa Claus with Fiancee

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Mod's note: There's

an earlier thread on on telling/not telling kids about Santa. This thread has been kept separate in case there in interest in discussing the relationship aspects that were raised by the first reply.

My fiancee and I have been having a few arguments lately, about pretty important issues. Typically, we don't argue, because it's not worth getting angry about silly nuances. I do, however, get upset at things like stupidity and illogicality, which generally means I get upset about religion.

Last night, she and I got into an argument about religion. I'm an atheist, she's a Christian (though not practicing). I've kinda always been pretty tolerant of it, and she's hardly a "practicing" christian, only that she believes that Jesus is the son of God. Naturally, I poked and prodded at it, and she ended up getting pissed at me (as most do when you poke holes in their belief), and kept saying "Why are you saying this? It's not going to change my opinion." Eventually, I apologized for being a dick about things.

Later today, I called her to apologize again (I DO feel bad about being an asshole, but I can't just ignore my logically founded conclusions), and mentioned that when we have Children I don't want to tell the child that Santa Clause is real, on the basis that telling the child a blatent lie is wrong. It ignited into a debate about it, and her only arguments being "it's different," "it's fun," and "we'd be those crazy parents no one likes." I attacked the "different" and the "crazy parents" arguments from the position that just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean it's right. And I address the "It's fun" argument with the response that withholding the "Santa Clause" fairy tale doesn't detract from the fun of giving gifts on Christmas. At the same time, I also conjecture that including a blatant lie into the child's upbringing, can only cause problems in the long term, and that even if it's a "fun" lie, it's still a lie nonetheless, and helps to give the child a sense that Magic is somehow real, which is clearly is not. (unfortunately, Christmas is some we'll pretty much have to do because both of our families are very religious).

She mentioned that this is just like last night (with our religious argument), but it's not. Last night I was arguing against something that no one really "knows" per se, but today, I was arguing about blatantly lying to our Child.

In any case, that's the argument I've presented, and now my Fiancee is pissed at me for the second time in as many days. Unfortunately, I don't have many, if any, objectivist friends in real life (I live in Wisconsin, so it's all Catholic Germans and Polish here).

So was I wrong, am I missing something? Is it "ok" under any circumstances to tell your children that "magic is real"?

As a note: We don't actually have children yet, and probably won't for around 4 to 5 years, yet, but we're just thinking about the future.

Edited by softwareNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[Moderators: I'd like to request that the previous post (#17), as well as this one, be reinstated as its own thread.]

Last night, [my fiancee] and I got into an argument about religion. . . . Naturally, I poked and prodded at it, and she ended up getting pissed at me (as most do when you poke holes in their belief), and kept saying "Why are you saying this? It's not going to change my opinion."

I absolutely sympathize with your fiancee. You had no right to "poke holes" in something which is important to her. Is this your idea of romantic love?

I've kinda always been pretty tolerant of [her religious beliefs] . . .

I'm underwhelmed by your conviction.

Eventually, I apologized for being a dick about things. Later today, I called her to apologize again (I DO feel bad about being an asshole, but I can't just ignore my logically founded conclusions).

What are you apologizing for? After all, wasn't she the one exhibiting "stupidity and illogicality" (to use your words)?

It ignited into a debate about it, and her only arguments being "it's different," "it's fun," and "we'd be those crazy parents no one likes." I attacked the "different" and the "crazy parents" arguments . . .

Wow — you go, guy! Get in there and attack those arguments! Ignite the debate! (Sheesh . . . and you two aren't even married yet.)

She mentioned that this is just like last night (with our religious argument), but it's not.

She is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. BINGO. RIGHT ON THE MONEY. JUST like last night. Carbon copy, right down to the last detail. A+ in perceptiveness and locution on her part.

Last night I was arguing against something that no one really "knows" per se, but today, I was arguing about blatantly lying to our Child.

Your "Child"? Please. At the rate you're going, you'll be lucky if she pencils you in for a dinner date in two weeks.

In any case, that's the argument I've presented, and now my Fiancee is pissed at me for the second time in as many days.

Let me give you a piece of advice: Your fiancee doesn't give a whit about any of your brilliant "arguments," or the most logically-founded of your conclusions — so long as you're acting in a manner which is anything less than 100% accepting, supportive and caring toward her. The moment you start talking down to her, like a pupil or a child, telling her in effect that she's wrong and that she needs to be rehabilitated in some way by you — that's the moment she loses all interest in whatever you have to say, and her romantic feelings for you start heading straight toward the toilet.

There is no "right" or "wrong" in a romantic relationship. Either both of you are right, and each of you ACCEPTS the other fully, or the whole relationship is wrong, and you're both in for a bucketful of pain. This is why you must never, never, NEVER pick a fight with the one you love — and this is triply true if you are a man, and the person you love happens to be a woman. Fighting, bickering, arguing, debating — all of these are entirely counter-productive, and are anti-romance to the core. If you find that you simply cannot discuss your differences in a mature and non-combative way; if reaching mutually agreeable solutions on important issues is just not possible with a given person, then perhaps you shouldn't be with him or her, or maybe even with anyone at this particular point in your life.

All I can say for sure is that the two of you had better get your issues straightened out well BEFORE you walk down the aisle — and for god's sake, don't even DREAM of having children together if you're not both seriously on the same page about how you should raise them.

As for what you should do now — hopefully this post has made you feel pretty bad and stupid, and that's exactly what it's intended to do. Use your self-loathing to propel you out to the grocery store to buy a nice bouquet of flowers for her, then high-tail it over to where she lives, at which time you will sit with her and ask her to explain at length all of the ways in which she feels that you have let her down. (Plan on this taking a while.) DO NOT under any circumstances allow the conversation to erupt into another argument; steadfastly refuse to "get into it" with her in any way, no matter how angry or abusive she becomes toward you. Lend her your most sympathetic ear, DO NOT interrupt, just let her talk on and on, and on and on . . . and on. When she stops or says she's finished, ask her to keep talking and tell you more. Listen with your entire body — your whole being. SEE her as she speaks to you; look especially at her eyes. Try to FEEL everything she says to you on the deepest level that you can. She is telling you things of the most profound importance; things which relate to your entire future together. Treat this experience as the most solemn and significant of your life.

When she's all done — and I mean ALL DONE — telling you how revoltingly horrible a human being you are, and how terribly disappointed she is in you, an amazing thing might happen: she may actually start to feel better toward you. Then and ONLY THEN should you tell her that you're sorry for what you've done, and how badly you feel about it. (If you apologize too quickly, you'll sound like you're trying to get it over with, which will likely only upset her more.)

Here's the real lesson I suspect you need to learn, along with countless other men who may be reading this: Women don't care about you, until they feel seen, heard, accepted and understood by you. Try what I suggest; you just might be surprised at the results.

Edited by Kevin Delaney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm... The above post by Kevin Delaney was so horrible and so irrational I am wondering if it was satire. Please DO NOT take his advice at all in your relationship. there are so many things wrong with what he said, and if you are at all rational you will know what they are. Relationships are not about appeasing your partner's irrationalities, or compromising your principles. This holds true for ALL relationships, romantic or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relationships are not about appeasing your partner's irrationalities, or compromising your principles.
I didn't read Kevin's post as recommending appeasement. He's just speaking about the process of discussion, not the subject or the final result. He's speaking about how one discusses issues like these with a romantic partner. I think he's saying "listen" not "agree".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your fiancee doesn't give a whit about any of your brilliant "arguments," or the most logically-founded of your conclusions — so long as you're acting in a manner which is anything less than 100% accepting, supportive and caring toward her....

There is no "right" or "wrong" in a romantic relationship. Either both of you are right, and each of you ACCEPTS the other fully, or the whole relationship is wrong, and you're both in for a bucketful of pain...

Fighting, bickering, arguing, debating — all of these are entirely counter-productive, and are anti-romance to the core. If you find that you simply cannot discuss your differences in a mature and non-combative way; if reaching mutually agreeable solutions on important issues is just not possible with a given person, then perhaps you shouldn't be with him or her, or maybe even with anyone at this particular point in your life.

Use your self-loathing to propel you out to the grocery store to buy a nice bouquet of flowers for her....

When she's all done — and I mean ALL DONE — telling you how revoltingly horrible a human being you are, and how terribly disappointed she is in you, an amazing thing might happen: she may actually start to feel better toward you.

Women don't care about you, until they feel seen, heard, accepted and understood by you. (even if they hold irrational religious beliefs apparently)

Bold mine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My fiancee and I have been having a few arguments lately, about pretty important issues. Typically, we don't argue, because it's not worth getting angry about silly nuances. I do, however, get upset at things like stupidity and illogicality, which generally means I get upset about religion.
I don't know what you mean by "argue" here. Many people think that "discussing" something means talking about the topic without having any opinion that you're trying strongly to advance, and if you strongly oppose another person's opinion and sepak against their side, then you are "arguing". If that's what you mean, then it looks to me as though there is a more significant problem, namely that you have been evading the conflict in your religious beliefs. Arguing does not entail anger (unless you mean specifically that you are, in addition, getting angry). So my question is, why would you talk about this in the first place?

Answer 1: because you hope to rationally persuade her to become an atheist. Although I don't know either of you, I find that quite implausible. Maybe some ex-Christers out there can say whether you can be talked out of Christology, but everybody that I know of who got free did so on their own, without "logical persuasion". The reason, I think, is that logical arguments require you to accept logic, in the first place. Answer 2: because her belief really bugs you and you have to blow off some steam. Taking up boxing might be as effective; at any rate, I think you should give up on the relationship if you really need to express anger at her because of her beliefs.

Answer 3: because you think that in principle you ought to be able to talk calmly about anything, but things just get out of hand. Then what you really need is some more discipline. I don't know what you need to be more disciplined at doing, since I don't know who gets most pissed first, and what exactly it is that pushes you to anger. Maybe pay attention, and 2 minutes before you call her an irrational religious freak (slap!) you might say "Okay, I don't see any point in discussing this further. Let's talk about Japanese Haiku instead". This is the a nice middle of the road solution, almost guaranteed to leave nobody happy in the long run.

Answer 4: you now realize that you just don't care that much, and will never raise the issue of religion again. You don't have to become a believer and you should probably pre-negotiate certain points such as that you won't engage in prayers or ever pretend to believe in Dog, but you won't get in her face. The basic question you must think about is whether your strongly-held anti-Christian view is compatible with sleeping with the enemy. So decide which is the greater value, and act to keep that value. Why do you want to be with this woman in the first place?

I don't propose that you explain this to us, but you should have a very clear answer for yourself -- why is it that you are willing to suppress your contempt for religion? Or do you really think that a marriage is possible when you despise your wife? I think that dealing with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are pretty simple, compared to this. You don't have to say that magic is real in order to say that Santa brought those toys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn. Kev, if I ever have a boyfriend that did that I think I'd be at a loss. Do you know that I've never gotten flowers? Not even once? But I have to say that if someone didn't stand up to me they'd be in for a hell of a time. I can tell you that I'M certainly not going to be 'accepting' if I think my significant other is being a dumbass, so I can't really expect anything extra from him.

But seriously, I don't see how you can avoid arguing in a relationship. Clearly you disagree with her religious affiliation, which I think is going to lead to grief. You can't be expected to be accepting of it all the time. Similarly, she can't be expected to be accepting of your anti-dogmatic ideas either. Inevitably, you're going to fight. Inevitably, religion will be brought up. And, inevitably, you're going to argue about it.

Now, I like to argue. Hell, I love to argue. So when I yell and get in a nasty little spat with a loved one I generally get over it on my own, or make them suffer to hear my reasons WHY I was mad and WHY I'm sorry whether they like it or not. This doesn't seem to be the case for you or your fiancee, so you're going to have to do something. Compromise is the only thing that comes to mind. I personally don't recommend it. I don't know why you'd date someone who was religious if you have that little respect for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin, your post was really weird from the point of view of Objectivism.

It was confusing as the beginning of it seemed to follow reason, but then in the middle the direction was switched. I had to re-read a portion of it, when it switched, because I missed the turning point there, and it got really weird.

Am I correct that portion of your post (last portion) was satire? :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you everyone for your comments. Truthfully, the religious difference isn't all that huge in our relationship. It really was just something that kinda "came up" in conversation, and ended up turning into a debate. She's not outspokenly religious, doesn't attend church, doesn't pray (nor does she expect me to pray), doesn't expect me to be religious, and doesn't follow any religious dogma. Part of my nudging is largely in the fact that I do strongly feel that she appears to be on the edge of abandoning religion (in the same self-realization process I had). It wasn't yelling, cursing, just more of a "semi-heated" debate. So my prodding is more of an attempt to nudge her in the direction I thought she was already go. She's well aware of my anti-religious views, and accepting of them, and she is actually the person who introduced me to Rand and Objectivism, and she tends to agree with Rand's points. The religion thing for her is a personal thing (as in she keeps it to herself), and I know she wouldn't attempt to raise our children "in the way of Christ" or any such nonsense. She's even told her parents she doesn't have intentions on baptizing our children (her mother was pretty devastated by that).

And to lightly address Kevin's arguments, no one is expected to just 100% accept anything. That's "unconditional love" and by definition, unconditional Love is "Love without Conditions" and therefore "Love without values." I value my fiancee very much, I've never met another person who shares the same general degree of rationality that I do, we simply disagree about slightly about religion (and I feel we disagree about religion less than it appears in my original post).

In answer to a few points from David's post, I don't intend on bringing it up more than in passing anymore, and I now know her limits on the Religion thing. She rarely talks about religion in more than a passing reference to the bad histories and twisted lies of Christianity. I think internally, she might be torn between rationality and an honest desire to believe. She was raised Catholic by a strong catholic family, attended Catholic school her whole life, and since dating me, she's slow waned from Religion. I noticed this pattern, but didn't really comment on it much until recently, where I kinda thought she might be at a pivot in her life. I misjudged it, and I admit that I might have been more aggressive than I intended to be. I do strongly feel that she's honestly rational at heart, and just hasn't realized it's full implications yet.

As an aside, we're naturally planning our wedding, and she wanted to get married in a church because in a church it "Feels more legimate." Not in the sense that it's a "religious bonding," but that every non-church wedding she's ever attended has pretty much sucked. Her reasons for wanting to marry in a church are completely non-religious, but I've openly refused, promising her that we can plan a completely effective, "legitimate feeling" wedding in a 100% secular manner. Hell, we're even putting a Rand quote on the programs.

Finally, I do love my fiancee, otherwise I wouldn't be doing this anymore. Comparing the severity of these debates with other couples, we've clearly got the strongest relationship if this is the worst of our arguments. We've never screamed and swore at each other in anger, we've never let an argument of any caliber last overnight, a we're both generally very rational in our decisions.

I guess I'm rambling, but I hope that this rambling provides a bit of context (because clearly every relationship has a context).

Thank you again for your comments :)

Edited by Chops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how you can avoid arguing in a relationship.

It can be done. Granted, it requires an extremely high degree of maturity and psychological development — to say nothing of intensely passionate regard for one's partner.

That the average person living in our culture today could not even imagine this state, let alone attain it, should not in any way affect your view of what is possible between conscientious human beings in the realm of love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be done. Granted, it requires an extremely high degree of maturity and psychological development — to say nothing of intensely passionate regard for one's partner.

I agree with this sentiment. An argument free relationship is possible, and for the longest time we were the a materialization of this. Still, for the most part, we don't really argue. I believe only once have we ever raised our voiced at each other in anger, which while imperfect, is still a pretty good track record. We may have debates, but only very recently have they escalated to the point that I would consider them "arguments." And I only consider them "arguments" for the reason that she gets angry or feels hurt (I can't remember the last time I actually got angry in a debate). Indeed, my opening post should really read "debates after which she was upset" as opposed to "arguments," as there was never any yelling or belligerences during our exchanges, merely the expressing of opinions.

What percentage of your "anti-religious views" therefore do you expect your fiancee to accept in you? 96%? 73%? Do please enlighten.

My phrasing is perhaps misleading in the statements to which this was your answer. Perhaps, more accurately, I should have said, "she is aware of my anti-religious view, and is accepting of me despite them." I do not expect her to "accept my views", but to "accept" and love me to the extent that she derives pleasure from my companionship, just as I love and accept her because I derive a great deal of value from her companionship, with the religion point being one of very few impediments. The values I receive from her vastly overshadows the detriments. Just as I have friends whom I value, even if they have flaws, I receive a great deal of selfish pleasure from their company in that we all tend to share the same values. The same can be said of my partner.

Edit: tweaked some wording

Edited by Chops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[F]or the most part, we don't really argue. I believe only once have we ever raised our voiced at each other in anger, which while imperfect, is still a pretty good track record. We may have debates, but only very recently have they escalated to the point that I would consider them "arguments." And I only consider them "arguments" for the reason that she gets angry or feels hurt (I can't remember the last time I actually got angry in a debate). Indeed, my opening post should really read "debates after which she was upset" as opposed to "arguments," as there was never any yelling or belligerences during our exchanges, merely the expressing of opinions.

It's inspiring to see you backpedaling all over the place. Still, I can't help but wonder what your lovely fiancee would have to say about all of this.

I do not expect her to "accept my views", but to "accept" and love me to the extent that she derives pleasure from my companionship, just as I love and accept her because I derive a great deal of value from her companionship, with the religion point being one of very few impediments.

Dear God — I couldn't have said it better myself! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truthfully, the religious difference isn't all that huge in our relationship.

You seem to measure the "religious differences" by the amount of habits/ religious practices each of you does. But that is a very superficial way to measure things.

Instead, you should look at the underlying principle: You use reason as your means to knowledge and decision making: What does she use as her guide?

Do you think religion is the only area in her life where she concedes reason in favor of enslavement to faith? Think again. Something like that is fundamental, it is just a matter of time before something else (like Santa thing) comes up.

And the worst thing is that there is no way to argue with someone who does not accept reason as their guide for knowledge. You might be as nice and thoughtful as you can, and bring the most persuading arguments, but those really worth nothing to someone who does not rely on reason.

But: Since you are going to marry this woman, and seeing how you are an Objectivist (or thereabouts), she has to be logical to some degree. Perhaps you can point to her those areas in her life where she does use logic, and refuses to accept things without proof, and ask her why she does not apply it consistently.

It really was just something that kinda "came up" in conversation, and ended up turning into a debate. She's not outspokenly religious, doesn't attend church, doesn't pray (nor does she expect me to pray), doesn't expect me to be religious, and doesn't follow any religious dogma.

I would consider the fact that she believes something but does not follow it even worse.

And like I said: measuring incompatibility on the basis of amount of practiced religious habits is a shallow measurement.

Kevin: I have a single question for you: What do you mean by "Accept"?

Obviously, if I think that relying on faith instead of reason is bad, I cannot convince myself otherwise, I do not have a choice about thinking "this is bad" when I see it. So does "accept" means to repress the disapproving thoughts, to not act on them, or what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would consider the fact that she believes something but does not follow it even worse.

In this case, the reason she doesn't follow it closely is because she explicitly rejects those particular aspects of Christianity, because she disagrees with them. I look at her and I see myself 8 or so years ago, just about at that point where I was beginning to reject it. So, my belief that she will ultimately abandon religion is based on the fact that I've done it myself, and she's doing it almost exactly the same way I did, only at an older age.

Ya know, the funny thing about all this, is that, to me, the religion thing wasn't a big deal simply because I feel she's transitioning away from it, which is why the topic of this thread is about Santa Claus. Yet everyone is focusing on the religion aspect of the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello!!! SAINT Nick! :worry:

Seriously though, I am glad that your fiancee is one her way to becoming an integrated rational person, and I appluad your patience. It pays off in the end. My gf and I have been together for almost two years now and we have seriously only been mad at each other once, early on in our relationship, due to out past irrationalities. We DO NOT EVER (except that one time) argue about anything! The key is not that we are clones, but that we are rational and remember "there are no conflicts of interest among rational men." This means that since we don't expect and won't give sacrifices, there is nothing to eveer argue about. When we go out to dinner or to a movie, if I volunteer to pay, she has the choice to accept or not, if she volunteers, I have the same choice. We don't expect anything for free from each other, nor do we expect the other to live for our own sakes. THis means that if I want to go golfing, I am free to do so, and she will not (and does not want to) nag me about it. If she wants to go out and have dinner with friends, and I had wanted to be with her, it is her choice, and if she chooses her friends, I do not get mad, if we had had prior engagement then we work out a deal. For example, if we had planned to go out tuesday, and a friend of hers from out of town comes into town at the last moment, it is understandable and if I were rational (which I am) I would understand (and do). THis is getting long so let me get to my point.

A relationship that doesn't involve arguments is possible, but not by following Kevin Delaney's advice. One does not simply surpress one's grievences, one gets rid of them, by realizing that your own life belongs to you, and your partner's to them, and that any dispute between you will be the result of either one or both of your irrationality. Once you realize that, then "fights" are easily resolved an DON"T EVER COME UP AGAIN.

SO I would recommend to the OP, that he do engage his fiancee in discussion, but not to raise his voice or appeal to his emotions, or anything of that sort. Don't talk about how it "makes you feel" or what you want, or whatever. Appeal to her selfishness, to her interest (which doesn't include sacrificing yours), but most of all appeal to her RATIONALITY. Depend on reason, and argument, evidence, the senses, and REALITY. Reality is on your side, and hers. When she realizes that, then you're both in for a great existence.

Oh, and BTW. I think that teaching your kids about Santa is fine as long as you tell them that he doesn't really exist. TElling your kids that he does is horrible. Lying to your kids, FOR ANY REASON other than to protect their lives, is wrong and will send them the wrong message about you, about reality, and about their own sense of existence. What do you think goes through a child's mind when they find out that their parents ( a beacon of truth since they can remember) are liars?

Edited by IAmMetaphysical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every non-church wedding she's ever attended has pretty much sucked... I've openly refused.
You really like playing with fire, don't you?

I'm not married myself (disclaimer), but I'd think you're better off not opposing such trivialities. If for some reason the wedding sucks, who's she going to blame? I think the question here is: does it matter to you where the wedding is held? If this is just part of a continuing attempt to lead your fiancee away from the last vestiges of religious connections, be careful it doesn't blow up in your face. You say she's transitioning away from religion, so don't attempt to force her hand by "openly refusing" things you don't really care about one way or another. Like where weddings are held and Santa, unless this is really, really critical stuff.

What do you think goes through a child's mind when they find out that their parents (a beacon of truth since they can remember) are liars?
Not much. Has anyone ever really lost respect for their parents because of perpetrating the Santa Claus mythos?

I think you're blowing this a bit out of proportion, but more importantly, if he is going to tell the kids the TRUTH about Santa, he should go ahead and have that argument out with his wife-to-be right now. If telling your kids lies about Santa is horrible, then doing something you know will piss your wife off is suicidal. It'd be asking for the mother lode of fights to act like he accepts his wife-to-be's views on Santafication, and then blatantly disregard them years later.

Plus, he wouldn't have to lie. He could tell the kids to ask their mom, and she could tell the stories if she so chose. You may still consider that horrible, I dunno.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really like playing with fire, don't you?

hehe...only recently :worry:

If for some reason the wedding sucks, who's she going to blame? I think the question here is: does it matter to you where the wedding is held?

The "married in church" thing is a very big thing for me, because I refuse to be married "in the name of the father, the son, and the holy spirit." I state that "we're not getting married to glorify god, we're getting married because we love each other. This is the celebration of our love for each other and no one else's." She reluctantly agreed to do our own wedding ceremony, but she's beginning to see the possibility for how beautiful it can be without the dogmatic ritual of the church. Really, the only concern now is merely the cost of renting a classy hall for the ceremony, but beyond that, we're going to choose all the readings we want, all the music we want, how we want our vows delivered...everything. The failure of the wedding would be entirely at our hands. If the wedding sucks, its our fault, and no one else's. Yes, it's more work, but in the long run, it can be so much better, and will stand as a shining beacon for others seeking a classy and "legitimate feeling" secular wedding.

Oh, and BTW. I think that teaching your kids about Santa is fine as long as you tell them that he doesn't really exist.

I agree completely. It's always good to be taught about something, but being telling someone that an acknowledged falsehood as actually true is where I take issue. Granted, like hunter said, however, no kid is ever really scarred by it. From a different angle, it could potentially serve as a lesson on accepting things on blind faith, but still, kids are usually pretty devastated to find out Santa's fake, and I see that as unnecessary pain. I like the idea of letting the child figure it out on his own. Rather than telling him it's real, I'd rather like to see how a child's intuition and reason play out in determining his beliefs. To be honest, while it wouldn't be for several years yet, I'm utterly fascinated to watch a young mind develop, unhindered by inconsistencies and irrationality (even as a child, growing up in a religious family, I saw the incompatibilities between Genesis and the Dinosaurs and age of the universe, and I spent more time than any child should trying to rationalize both together).

Edited by Chops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus, he wouldn't have to lie. He could tell the kids to ask their mom, and she could tell the stories if she so chose. You may still consider that horrible, I dunno.
Yes I do still find that horrible, to allow someone else to perpetuate lies in the mind of your child is just as bad as doing it yourself.

If telling your kids lies about Santa is horrible, then doing something you know will piss your wife off is suicidal.

Living a life where you constantly appease your wife's irrationality would be living on the premise of suicide.

Not much. Has anyone ever really lost respect for their parents because of perpetrating the Santa Claus mythos?
I believe that I did, and I am also very dissapointed in the other ways my parent's lied to me as well. Protecting your child from reality, means not preparing them for reality, which eventually, they WILL have to face on their own, and when they can't, who's fault is it? A good parent will be there as a guide for their child, to help them with dealing with reality they only their nature will let them. Convincing them of obvious mistruths, which they will eventually find out to be untrue, is a practice in sabotage.

To be honest, while it wouldn't be for several years yet, I'm utterly fascinated to watch a young mind develop, unhindered by inconsistencies and irrationality

Yes, me too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living a life where you constantly appease your wife's irrationality would be living on the premise of suicide.

Protecting your child from reality, means not preparing them for reality, which eventually, they WILL have to face on their own.

Okay, so you're saying that a parent Santafying children will
  • harm the child (which I don't understand at all)
  • harm the parent (which I could understand to a very slight extent)

How is telling a child about Santa's workshop any different from teaching a child to say "bless you" when someone sneezes? Are they all horrible and suicidal?

And given that

  • one is marrying a person who holds some amount of irrationality
  • appeasing (accepting?) a wife's irrationality is suicidal

Suppose your wife irrationally believes that blue is a lucky color for a newborn child and insists that the baby's room thus be painted blue. You, being rational, don't particularly care one way or another... but since appeasing a wife's irrationality is suicidal, are you thus morally obligated to have a protracted (and if necessary, bitter) argument about which can of paint is to be bought???

I think some irrational acts aren't so horrible that appeasing them is suicidal. After all, if all irrationalities are suicidal in a marriage, what do you do if your mate refuses to budge on blue rooms, divorce her???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some irrational acts aren't so horrible that appeasing them is suicidal. After all, if all irrationalities are suicidal in a marriage, what do you do if your mate refuses to budge on blue rooms, divorce her???

Absolutely, but I wouldn't have married her in the first place.

Irrationality is always anti-mind, which is always (for man) anti-life, and when ones acts toward one's own death, one is acting on the premise of suicide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that there are some irrationalities that must be definitively confronted. But there are other irrationalities (e.g. superstitiously refusing to put shoes on the table) that it would be idiotic to divorce a spouse over.

If intentionally telling a child a falsehood (Santa Claus) harmed a child's capacity to deal with reality, doesn't unintentionally telling a child a falsehood (that a tomato is a vegetable) also harm a child's capacity to deal with reality :worry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree that there are some irrationalities that must be definitively confronted. But there are other irrationalities (e.g. superstitiously refusing to put shoes on the table) that it would be idiotic to divorce a spouse over.

I don't want to speak for anyone else here, but I don't think it's the irrationality of the act that is at issue here. It is the irrationality of the mind that would permit such an act. And that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly Inspector.

Mislabeling the family of food that a Tomato is in is fundamentally different than convincing a child to believe that an elf can travel the entire world in one night and can "see you when you're sleeping and knows when you're awake, knows when you are bad and good so be good for goodness' sake"

EDIT: for Dan Quaylish spelling.

Edited by IAmMetaphysical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...