I would suggest that the core problem here is in integrity,. A parent who discusses what he genuinely sees with a child does no harm, in my book. A parent who thinks some things are probably valid but doesn't know for sure, and says so, does no harm. A parent who insists that certain imperceivable entities must be seen and given traditional attributes whether one can perceive those things for himself or not is essentially not being truthful, but doctrinaire. '

The problem with doctrinaire teaching is that it disables the judgement of the recipient, who takes things on board "because he has to", and if those things are not true for them, lives a lie thereafter until he or she can come to terms withwhat happened in those transactions. Such an event is not a learning experience, but an implanting experience. An implanted idea is useful in some limited way because you can use it to fend off confusions you would rathe rnot think about. But because such ideas tend to be arbitrary, they are going to fall short of explaining things when the going gets tough. I would much prefer to teach a child the ability to think for herself, an ability on which she will always be able to rely.

A