Welcome to Gaia! ::

It's an interesting thing to discuss, yet there's no simple answer. I like scenarios, so I'll throw out one of those, but I hate to play the race card. Oh well. A Caucasian child walks into his first-grade class and sits beside his best friend who just happens to be African-American. The night before, the white child and his father had a "talk." The father explained that "those negroes are different from us white people." He is extremely racist, and the mother does nothing to tell him otherwise. The child, believing his father due to his position of authority and a trustworthy figure, walks into the classroom and tells his friend, "my dad says you're different and I can't be your friend anymore." This child may grow up to be just as racist as his father, because he was taught to be so at an early age. He didn't care about the color of his friend's skin until his father taught him to recognize it as a negative aspect.
So we see both positive and negative sides of a child's innocence and open-mindedness, if you want to call it that. While they cannot make important and educated decisions as experienced adults might, they can be morally innocent.
But, as for your final question, it would really depend on if one believed in those things. A skeptic would say they're wishfully delusional, while a believer would say they're more pure and clear to see things adults may miss. Personally, I think some of the those things are real, but there is a lot I don't believe in. So I suppose I could say that with some things, I believe children don't put science above feeling, because they don't know much about science yet. If they see a door open without someone visibly opening it or a breeze flowing through, they might assume that someone opened it, and they might just not be able to see them.
So there's my views. But you never stated yours, at least not obviously.

Young minds are easily deluded. Which is why it is the adults responsiblity to be very careful what they hear.

This is an exellent post, and it is a personal failure on my part I did not check this subforum more often. I do believe young children are more easily influenced, true, but I believe if a child is educated in aspects such as the paranormal, and is not taught it to the point of not questioning it, at extremeism, I think they will evaluate things based on personal and what they may see as good evidence either way. True, there will always be some children deluded, just as there will be deluded adults, believing what they do not because it's true, but because they want it to be that way. If you also have studied a little of the scientific community and the limitations of science, as well as the scorn for research such as parapsychology, you may find, as I have, the unspoken belief that "Science should only prove scientific things. Logic should only prove logical things." This is of course not true, but perhaps you willl find more minds closed by it than there should be.

Well, then... you should take up the million dollar challenge put forth by Randi. Somehow I doubt that your claim is true, given that...

Question... what if these seven-year-old Wiccans have Wiccan parents? There are some, for the first time, second-generation Witches and Wiccans out there. Not all of us are just converts from another religion anymore. Also, perhaps they claim that age because they felt they have always in some respects held to the ideals of the Craft even though they were not diligently practicing? Perhaps using the term for that reason isn't appropriate...

The people who the child likes and loves can easily delude their thoughts and beliefs, whereas with people that the child knows less of can only suggest ideas, as the child will keep an open mind for what strangers think about something.

There was actually a study along these lines (woot!) that I remember reading about in grad school. And, as usual, no I do not have access to the copy anymore, nor do I remember where it was published. The study ran like this:

Scientists rigged up a table with a bowl on it so that, when they activated it, the bowl would hover an inch or two off of the table. Adults and children from various backgrounds were asked to sit at the table and note any unusual occurrences; after the end of a set period of time, each person was interviewed by the sicentists. Across the board, children were more likely to report that the bowl had floated above the table. Many of the adults refused to believe it had happened even after being taken back into the room and showed by the scientists how the bowl could be made to levitate (I suspect magnetics, but the article didn't say). Some of those even became angry at the suggestion.

What this study shows is that children are more likely to notice and report the "impossible", for whatever reason - presumably it can be generalized as having a more flexible attitude toward reality. However, that also means that children can be more easily manipulated. Since they *aren't* as likely to be married to the concept of "reality", they are open to interpretations, which can be given by the unscrupulous as well as the scrupulous. If the scientists had told the children they were part of a study on psychokinetics, and that the bowl had risen because the child was unconsciously doing it themselves, and that they were going to be held for further training...well, the kids probably would have been okay with that explanation too.

As Laren said, it's a fine balance between open-mindedness and experience. A few more years honing their bullshit detector, and most kids would never buy the bullshit explanation. A few more years after that, they're just as likely to be adults who never even admit the bowl behaved strangely.

Personally, I feel that the staggering credulity I see so much of in the younger generation is a direct response to the excessively hostile attitude of the world at large toward conventionally unexplainable phenomena. It's a defense of room for possibilities, which in older generations at least had some outlet in folk customs and religion (all curse the new fuzzy "friendly" face of modern religion). So it gets a bit ridiculous at times - meh. At some point, everyone has to nail down their own relationship with so-called "reality". If we were all at the same place, even as grown-ups, it would be bloody boring.