Timeline for How to let my kids believe in Santa Claus without lying to them?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2019 at 18:00 | comment | added | OldPadawan | @sphennings: sure it also fits parenting, because interactions between adults and kids are the core of this stack, but it fits here too I believe, as IPS is involved, no matter how old folks are ;) | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 17:56 | history | edited | OldPadawan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
corrected some typos
|
| Sep 13, 2019 at 17:32 | comment | added | sphennings | This looks like more of a parenting question than an interpersonal skills question. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 16:52 | history | edited | OldPadawan | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title and question to (hopefully) make it on topic without betraying the main idea of the question.
|
| Sep 13, 2019 at 16:13 | comment | added | Upper_Case | I've also added a vote to close, after discussion on meta, but I think that the question could easily be preserved: given that an answer was accepted, and that answer makes the OP's effective rank order of priorities clear, the part about being unwilling to be at all untruthful can be softened or otherwise changed. I'm hesitant to make the change myself (it's still the OP's description of their own situation), but that's what would get me to revoke my VTC. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 14:52 | vote | accept | Dan Anderson | ||
| Sep 13, 2019 at 12:25 | comment | added | Juliana Karasawa Souza | After conversation in meta, I'm seconding @Ælis's vote on closing the question. If this is a frame challenge, it doesn't look like it and if it is a "what should I do" question, it doesn't belong here. The way it is written, it looks more like an intrapersonal question on how to reconcile two mutually exclusive personal opinions. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 9:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Sep 14, 2019 at 7:50 | |||||
| Sep 13, 2019 at 8:56 | comment | added | Ael | I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's more of a "what should I do" as discussed in here. | |
| Sep 12, 2019 at 11:58 | history | edited | A J♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Sep 12, 2019 at 11:57 | answer | added | Allerleirauh | timeline score: 6 | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 17:03 | comment | added | Upper_Case | @DanAnderson To each their own, but frame challenges here are generally expected to state upfront that that is what they are, explicitly indicate the part of the premise in the question that they feel is problematic, and explain both how the premise obstructs the goal and how the new frame promotes it. The answers here read to me as "abandon your moral position", without much explanation of why that's better, or "violate your moral position in a low-key way" as, essentially, a sophistry. I'm not flagging anything, Q or A, but think that this is messier than it needs to be. | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:57 | comment | added | Dan Anderson | @Upper_Case . I disagree I feel like the answers were effective frame challenges. For me at least. | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:36 | comment | added | Upper_Case | @DanAnderson I'm certainly glad that you've found something useful here, but the answers to this question (as of this writing) all violate the constraints in the question by advocating behavior which you classify as deceitful. That may be just fine (I'm not judging your positions or choices), but it's neither an answer to the question as asked nor is it a frame challenge. That's problematic for SE, especially IPS, whether answers are valuable or not. I sympathize with your situation, but I feel that this question can't be answered as written while conforming to SE guidelines. Edits may help. | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:20 | comment | added | Dan Anderson | @Upper_Case you make a good point. I think I'm trying to work through some cognitive dissonance caused by conflicting values that I hold. Perhaps not the purpose of this Stack However, the answer given have been helpful to me. | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:14 | comment | added | Upper_Case | In addition to the suggestions from @Tinkeringbell, I think we need more information on what you're willing and unwilling to do to achieve your goal. You've already been flexible with what seems to be a hard moral condition for yourself, would you rather continue that than correct your children about Santa? Would you rather strictly adhere to your moral attitudes than allow your children to believe in Santa? Are you interested in a sophistry that seems to address your wants, or an elaborate argument that "Santa" is an abstraction of real things done by real people in the spirit of Christmas? | |
| Sep 11, 2019 at 16:09 | comment | added | Upper_Case | The goal in this question seems impossible to achieve under the constraints listed. There's a fundamental issue because Santa Claus is not real, you are aware of this, and you don't want to contribute in any way to your children believing the opposite (including by omission). But the children have already been "allowed" to believe, so deceit (by these standards) has already occurred and is ongoing. As written the question may as well be "how can I have my cake, and eat it too?". Extant questions are about continuing the existing pattern or stopping, and I don't see IPS components to those. | |
| Sep 10, 2019 at 20:44 | answer | added | Bill Martin | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 10, 2019 at 19:45 | history | edited | Dan Anderson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 22 characters in body
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 19:15 | history | edited | Tinkeringbell♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Emphasized the no lying part, list markup instead of ABC, and corrected some spelling in the title.
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 18:52 | history | edited | Em C | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
punctuation / typos, added some relevant tags
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 15:52 | comment | added | scohe001 | I'd strongly suggest reading through this incredible answer on Parenting. It does a better job than probably any of us here will be able to do of explaining the pro's and con's of "lying" (though I know it's not what you asked, it may answer what you're looking for). | |
| Sep 10, 2019 at 15:28 | history | edited | Dan Anderson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 108 characters in body
|
| Sep 10, 2019 at 15:09 | history | asked | Dan Anderson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |