Santa Claus may be 'intellectually' useful starting from the instant the kid learns that is is a myth, because this may teach him that seeing everybody apparently believe in something doesn't preclude that, in fact, nearly nobody does.
This may be of paramount importance when it comes to forming a critical mind.
Critical thinking is a lot harder than just saying, "Don't believe other people." You have to teach that people may be trustworthy in one area, but not in another. You have to teach when you can take a statement on face value. You have to teach how to be skeptical of your own judgments and defer to others sometimes. You may also teach them how to spot liars. These things require time to understand and I don't see that happening if you sabotage the process by openly betraying them in a huge way early on.
> Critical thinking is a lot harder than just saying, "Don't believe other people."
Indeed, and I didn't write that the Santa Claus myth is sufficient on this behalf, but that it may help.
Are you rejecting anything but a perfect (simple and exhaustive) way to teach critical thinking? I never crossed one, and doubt it exists for any complex philosophical asset. Refusing any other way exposes to the 'perfect solution fallacy'.
> if you sabotage the process by openly betraying them in a huge way early on.
I doubt kids learning that Santa Claus is a myth feel betrayed, and never perceived it (I was born in 1967 and have a daughter).
The SC myth is well-built because when discovering its nature a kid understands that the lie is innocuous and even pleasant (gifts, gatherings...), and therefore not really a 'betraying'. He can then proceed to other conclusions about intents, the way he forms his own beliefs...
I'm not fond of the SC myth nor do I practice it, however I try to be objective (this is part of critical thinking!).
This may be of paramount importance when it comes to forming a critical mind.
Moreover any human group is built upon myths.