4 ms·

>"Even the truth as one "believes" it comes with bias, which one might consider a lie." When it comes to lying vs. "telling the truth" concerning ones beliefs,

>"Even the truth as one "believes" it comes with bias, which one might consider a lie." When it comes to lying vs. "telling the truth" concerning ones beliefs, the [in]accuracy of the belief itself is moot. Regardless of the justification, the sole purpose of a lie is deception. In PG's essay he points out reasons that we choose to deceive children, and the merits of those reasons are debatable. The author, and her parents, have taken the opposite tactic in child raising, which is admirable (imho). Whether or not God exists, (which I believe undoubtedly that He does. Downmod if you'd like), when a parent answers a child's question concerning God in a fashion as described above...they are telling the truth. It does not matter one whit if they are right or not. As long as they believe what their answer is, they are not lying. In this particular case, the parents even go out of their way to point out that others believe otherwise, which is profitable for the child as well. As a side note, I don't believe "What's a prostitute?" is a great example of a difficult question, and hardly worth lying to a child about.

jdanieli 18y ago
From the article: > As to religion, my parents said that they believed that God really does exist and that the Bible is a historical record of man's interactions with a real God... Just by saying the fact that they themselves believe in god, they are giving the child a reason to bias towards that answer, aren't they? In the mind of the child, the foremost authority on all things occurring in the world around them is their parents, are they not? The best way to answer this question is simply, "Noone knows", and leave it at that. Any further explanation will only lead the child one or another. Actually, not its not, because even by saying "Noone knows" you suggest a direction of thought, pushing them towards agnosticism rather than Catholicism, or Judaism, or Muslimism, or Whatever-ism. There is no right answer to this question. No matter what, by answering this question you are effecting the way they think about it. So just don't answer the question.
- reidman 18y ago
  "So just don't answer the question." Are you seriously suggesting this? It seems clear to me (and presumably to anyone else who has ever interacted with curious children) that this is a completely impractical and unrealistic solution. Have you ever tried _not answering_ a question from a kid? ;) This dramatic influence-avoidance thing seems pretty ridiculous.
  - jdanieli 18y ago
    I'm saying that if you do not want to influence them in any way the only option is to not answer the question. Otherwise, you ARE influencing them. I'm not saying whether or not it is possible to not answer the question when a child asks you one. I'm not saying you SHOULDN'T answer the question. But if you do not want to influence a child's thought patters in any given situation you have to not say anything (though likely silence will also influence them in some way as well). Hence why I said, "There is no right answer to this question". "This dramatic influence-avoidance thing seems pretty ridiculous." yes, it is ridiculous, which is why we lie to kids, because we have to give them some answer they will be satisfied with. There is no way to NOT lie to kids and not be pretty ridiculous.
    - mark-t 18y ago
      The best situation is probably for the parents to disagree, actually.
      - jdanieli 18y ago
        I'm not sure disagreeing makes much sense if the question is "Is there a God?" What are you disagreeing to? That there isn't a god? Then you will be lying to your child and this is what the thread is about NOT doing. If instead you mean, you must always disagree with whatever your child's opinion is, I don't disagree. You have to argue both sides of any philosophical question though, less you accidentally push your own beliefs on them, and this is extremely difficult to do correctly. Orson Scott Card's character Han Fei-Tzu is an excellent example of the type of teaching discipline I hold sacred. When someone makes an opinion about anything, you have to argue the other-side as well as you possibly can, and if your charge changes their mind, you have to switch sides and argue for that side. This requires an incredible amount of knowledge and intelligence which most parents are not going to be able to replicate. Teaching in this matter will force the child to learn how to look at any problem from different viewpoints.
    - euccastro 18y ago
      You made the topic slip from lying to influencing. Influencing their children is a big part of what parents do. It's called "education." It's unavoidable, and there's nothing wrong with it if you do it with honesty and respect.
- axod 18y ago
  "Scientific evidence to date suggests there is no God" IMHO That's the truth, and the facts.
  - axod 18y ago
    Luckily the question doesn't really come up in a community of non religious types.
    - noonespecial 18y ago
      I think the community here just knows that science is not really the right tool to use to decide if God exists or not. We probably also know that the argument degrades rather quickly once started.
      - axod 18y ago
        Oh I was meaning in my real life community. In the UK I think religion is quite a bit rarer these days, so it doesn't really come up as a topic of conversation here.
  - jdanieli 18y ago
    The truth is also that scientific evidence to date does not suggest there isn't a god. Unless, of course, you know of something I don't. Ideas such a creationism have long since been dissolved, but the existence of God? Not so much. Additionally, I believe there was a very good essay somewhere that argued there was a heaven and a hell. Saying that if we know there are an infinite number of other dimensions with an infinite number of possibilities, whose to say there isn't one where ONLY good things happen and one where ONLY bad things happen. These places would be heaven and hell, respectively. Of course, if someone is actually sent to one of these places, they will immediately change it if they do something contrary to what is expected in that specific realm, no longer making it heaven or hell, and a new heaven or hell takes its place where that even didn't happen. So, if heaven and hell exist, who is to say god does not?
    - 18y ago

jdanieli 18y ago

From the article: > As to religion, my parents said that they believed that God really does exist and that the Bible is a historical record of man's interactions with a real God... Just by saying the fact that they themselves believe in god, they are giving the child a reason to bias towards that answer, aren't they? In the mind of the child, the foremost authority on all things occurring in the world around them is their parents, are they not? The best way to answer this question is simply, "Noone knows", and leave it at that. Any further explanation will only lead the child one or another. Actually, not its not, because even by saying "Noone knows" you suggest a direction of thought, pushing them towards agnosticism rather than Catholicism, or Judaism, or Muslimism, or Whatever-ism. There is no right answer to this question. No matter what, by answering this question you are effecting the way they think about it. So just don't answer the question.

reidman 18y ago
"So just don't answer the question." Are you seriously suggesting this? It seems clear to me (and presumably to anyone else who has ever interacted with curious children) that this is a completely impractical and unrealistic solution. Have you ever tried _not answering_ a question from a kid? ;) This dramatic influence-avoidance thing seems pretty ridiculous.
- jdanieli 18y ago
  I'm saying that if you do not want to influence them in any way the only option is to not answer the question. Otherwise, you ARE influencing them. I'm not saying whether or not it is possible to not answer the question when a child asks you one. I'm not saying you SHOULDN'T answer the question. But if you do not want to influence a child's thought patters in any given situation you have to not say anything (though likely silence will also influence them in some way as well). Hence why I said, "There is no right answer to this question". "This dramatic influence-avoidance thing seems pretty ridiculous." yes, it is ridiculous, which is why we lie to kids, because we have to give them some answer they will be satisfied with. There is no way to NOT lie to kids and not be pretty ridiculous.
  - mark-t 18y ago
    The best situation is probably for the parents to disagree, actually.
    - jdanieli 18y ago
      I'm not sure disagreeing makes much sense if the question is "Is there a God?" What are you disagreeing to? That there isn't a god? Then you will be lying to your child and this is what the thread is about NOT doing. If instead you mean, you must always disagree with whatever your child's opinion is, I don't disagree. You have to argue both sides of any philosophical question though, less you accidentally push your own beliefs on them, and this is extremely difficult to do correctly. Orson Scott Card's character Han Fei-Tzu is an excellent example of the type of teaching discipline I hold sacred. When someone makes an opinion about anything, you have to argue the other-side as well as you possibly can, and if your charge changes their mind, you have to switch sides and argue for that side. This requires an incredible amount of knowledge and intelligence which most parents are not going to be able to replicate. Teaching in this matter will force the child to learn how to look at any problem from different viewpoints.
  - euccastro 18y ago
    You made the topic slip from lying to influencing. Influencing their children is a big part of what parents do. It's called "education." It's unavoidable, and there's nothing wrong with it if you do it with honesty and respect.
axod 18y ago
"Scientific evidence to date suggests there is no God" IMHO That's the truth, and the facts.
- axod 18y ago
  Luckily the question doesn't really come up in a community of non religious types.
  - noonespecial 18y ago
    I think the community here just knows that science is not really the right tool to use to decide if God exists or not. We probably also know that the argument degrades rather quickly once started.
    - axod 18y ago
      Oh I was meaning in my real life community. In the UK I think religion is quite a bit rarer these days, so it doesn't really come up as a topic of conversation here.
- jdanieli 18y ago
  The truth is also that scientific evidence to date does not suggest there isn't a god. Unless, of course, you know of something I don't. Ideas such a creationism have long since been dissolved, but the existence of God? Not so much. Additionally, I believe there was a very good essay somewhere that argued there was a heaven and a hell. Saying that if we know there are an infinite number of other dimensions with an infinite number of possibilities, whose to say there isn't one where ONLY good things happen and one where ONLY bad things happen. These places would be heaven and hell, respectively. Of course, if someone is actually sent to one of these places, they will immediately change it if they do something contrary to what is expected in that specific realm, no longer making it heaven or hell, and a new heaven or hell takes its place where that even didn't happen. So, if heaven and hell exist, who is to say god does not?
  - 18y ago