"Why not raise a child as an experiment…in an environment where nothing is mention regarding the word “God”.
It’s already been done, by B F Skinner, a pioneer in behaviourist psychology. From memory; he tried that approach on his son. The result was one very messed up human being .IE The son. Skinner was messed up before he decided to experiment on his own child, imo.
What did he prove? Apart from the fact that he was a callous arsehole, nothing.
The experiment you suggest is perhaps of minor academic interest. The results of a single experiment are of no value unless repeatable.
I’d be willing to bet that if repeated among say 500 subjects, the results would vary enormously. I’m unconvinced that all meaningful variables could be accurately identified and controlled.
Overall, I have ethical objections about subjecting children to the kind of thing you suggest. Of course, dogmatic believers do pretty much the same thing all the time the; teach their children to be dogmatic, anti science and anti intellectual. At the very least, they tend to produce some truly obnoxious human beings.
Perhaps I misunderstand, your question . Your sentence “Believe in science, as it would give u logical explanations regarding everything.” suggests an ignorance about the nature of science with perhaps an anti science bias. IE I do not know, nor have ever read of any scientist who claims science can explain everything. I think it can be said that science explains a great deal less than it explains, and even then only partially.–Nor is their any rational reason why science should even aspire to such a situation.
I’m an atheist, and tend to accept scientific explanations, on the basis of “as a far as we can tell at the moment”. I do not have a nervous breakdown, nor does the world ,end when I admit “I don’t know”. As I’ve gotten older, the more I learn, the more ignorant I become.
I am unable to accept what I see as the fatuous claims of superior/ absolute revealed truths, about anything.