INTRODUCTION – VII

For many people, opposition from the institutions of higher learning represents, if not actual evidence, at least a strong argument challenging the Doctrine. We are not among those who would clamor against these scholars, lest we be regarded as disrespectful of their erudition. On the contrary, we hold them in great esteem and would be greatly honored to be numbered among them.¹⁶ Their opinion, however, does not represent an irrefutable judgment in every circumstance.
When science goes beyond the material observation of phenomena and attempts to appraise and explain them, the field opens wide for scientists to make speculations. They build their own little theories, hope to see them prevail and fiercely defend their veracity. Don’t we see every day the most contradictory opinions being proposed, rejected and repealed as absurd errors, only to be proclaimed later as incontestable truths? The facts are the sole criteria for judgment, the incontestable line of reasoning.
In the absence of facts, skepticism is the position taken by the wise.
Scholars’ opinions on topics they have researched fully are justifiably believable because their knowledge about them is broader and better than that of common folk. However, when it comes to new principles and unknown matters, their way of looking at them is nothing more than hypothetical and they always observe them in the light of their own prejudices. One could perhaps safely state that scholars are possessed of even more prejudices than other persons due to their natural propensity for subjecting everything to the point of view of their own particular area of knowledge: mathematicians accept no proof beyond algebraic formulas;
chemists relate everything to the interaction of the elements, and so on. Those who dedicate themselves to a particular specialty try to fit all their ideas into it. However, draw them away from their area of expertise and they almost always talk nonsense because they submit everything to their own point of view – a very common human weakness. I will gladly and confidently consult a chemist concerning a question of elemental analysis, a physicist concerning the power of electricity and an engineer concerning motive power.
However, they must allow me – without affecting the esteem I owe them for their particular expertise – not to take their negative opinion about Spiritism into consideration any more than I would take an architect’s judgment on a question about music.
The physical sciences are based on the properties of matter, which can be subjected to experimentation and manipulated at will. Spirit phenomena, on the other hand, rest on the action of intelligences who have wills of their own, and who show us at every turn that they are not subject to our whims. Spirit manifestations consequently cannot be dealt with in the same way as physical matter.
They require special conditions and a different approach, and trying to subject them to ordinary investigative procedures would be trying to establish analogies that do not exist. Science per se is incompetent to make any declaration of its own on the issue of Spiritism. It is not science’s place to concern itself with the subject, and its favorable or unfavorable verdict regarding it carries no weight. Spiritism results from a personal conviction that scholars may hold as individuals regardless of their status as scholars. Submitting the issue to science would be like handing the solution of the problem of the existence of the soul to a group of physicists and astronomers. In fact, Spiritism rests entirely on the existence of the soul and its state after death. It would be highly illogical to think that a particular person must be a great psychologist simply because he or she is a great mathematician or anatomist. For example, an anatomist dissects a human body in search of the soul but does not find it under his scalpel as he would find a nerve, nor does he see it rise like a mist. Based exclusively on the material examination of the issue, he thus concludes that the soul does not exist. Does it follow then that he is correct although his view is contrary to universal opinion regarding the immortality of the soul? No. You can therefore see why Spiritism does not fall under the jurisdiction of science. When Spiritist beliefs become known and accepted by the masses – and judging by the speed at which they are spreading, that time is not far off – the same thing will happen regarding Spiritism as has happened regarding all other new ideas that have encountered opposition: scholars will yield to the evidence. One by one, they will accept Spiritist beliefs by necessity, but until then it would be premature to distract them from their specialized endeavors in order to compel them to occupy themselves with a foreign matter that is neither within their prerogatives nor contained in their theories. Meanwhile, those who take a negative stance without a prior, in-depth study of the issue, and who ridicule those who do not agree with their opinion, forget that the same has happened regarding the majority of the great discoveries that have honored humankind. They risk seeing their names added to the list of illustrious deniers of new ideas and inscribed alongside the names of the erudite assembly, which in 1752 laughed uproariously at Franklin’s paper on lightning rods, considering it unworthy of mention among the subjects to be discussed; or the names of that other group that caused France to lose its advantage in steam powered navigation by declaring Fulton’s theory an impracticable dream. Nevertheless, both issues were within the scope of science.
If those assemblies, comprised of the greatest scholars in the world, had only contempt and sarcasm for ideas which they did not yet understand, but which would revolutionize science, customs and industry a few years later, what hope is there that an issue completely foreign to their endeavors might be received any better?
The regrettable errors of a few scholars regarding Spiritism should not lessen our respect for them regarding other subjects, but is an official diploma necessary for common sense? Are there only fools and simpletons outside academic halls? Let us take a survey of the followers of the Spiritist Doctrine to determine if among them there are only uneducated persons, and if the huge number of individuals of merit who have embraced it would justify relegating it to the realm of simple superstition. The character and learning of such individuals authorizes us to state that if they affirm it, there must at least be something to it.
We repeat once more that if the phenomena with which we are concerning ourselves had been restricted to the mechanical movement of objects, research into their physical cause would indeed be within the realm of science. However, since they involve manifestations outside the sphere of human laws and cannot be explained either by numbers or by mechanical forces, they are therefore outside the competence of physical science. When a new phenomenon arises that does not fit within the scope of any known science, then in order to study it scholars must set their science aside and say to themselves that they are dealing with a new area of study that cannot be delved into according to preconceived ideas.
Those who consider their reason to be infallible are very close to error; even those whose ideas are highly erroneous are supported by their reasoning, and that is why they reject everything that appears impossible to them. Those who yesterday rejected the admirable discoveries that humanity is proud of today also followed their own judgment in doing so. What we call reason is almost always masked pride, and those who believe they are infallible place themselves on a par with God. Therefore, we will focus on those who are reasonable enough to suspend judgment regarding matters that they have not witnessed first hand, and judging the future in the light of the past, do not believe that humankind has yet reached its apogee or that nature has revealed the last page of her book to them.
¹⁶ Prof. Hippolyte Léon Dénizard Rivail (Allan Kardec was his nom de plume for his Spiritist work), an author of several pedagogical books, fluent in many languages, was a member of several learned societies. Please refer to his bio in Anna Blackwell’s Preface to this book for more details – Tr.

Contents
Home