I generally agree. I do think there is value in letting children discover truth iteratively over time and at more depth as their ability to comprehend complex topics grows.

We do this all the time in science. Classical mechanics, for example, is functionality enough for the vast vast majority of people despite the fact that we know it to be factually incorrect. We know that it isn’t the truth, but the approximations it affords is sufficient for many things.

We live with these abstractions of truth everyday that make our lives livable. Small falsehoods about the nature of reality. “The switch turns the light on.” Is a falsehood, but a reasonable abstraction.

I, too, like to believe as many true things as possible. I also would like to know what abstractions are used and how they are used.

Teaching children incremental abstractions isn’t all bad… And in many cases they can teach them significantly better than starting at the end result.

I’m not saying that we should teach children to believe in falsehoods intentionally. But letting a 3 year old believe in Santa isn’t going to ruin them. Participating in the mythos of Disney for a child’s sake won’t undermine their ability to critically think later in life.