An account of a skeptical investigation that uncovered unexpected truths.

---

Summary

This article documents the trajectory of a dialogue between a skeptic familiar with the scientific method and a scholar of Kardecian Spiritism. Throughout successive exchanges, fundamental epistemological questions were examined: the possibility of scientifically studying unobservable phenomena, the validity of anecdotal and historical evidence, the criteria for experimental control, and the nature of the available evidence—from Allan Kardec's accounts in... Revue Spirite ...to the contemporary study on the psychographies of Chico Xavier, passing through a text by The Genesis (1868) which anticipates central concepts of general relativity, and culminating in the work Scientific Evidence of Survival by Professor JKF Zöllner, who documents experiments with the medium Henry Slade in the presence of physicists such as Wilhelm Weber and Gustav Fechner.

It is concluded that original Spiritism, distinguished from its later distortions (Roustainguism, Umbral, karma, idolatry of mediums), presents a method, evidence, and philosophical depth that deserve serious investigation. Reproducibility in Spiritism manifests itself not only in extraordinary physical phenomena, but fundamentally in the systematic observation of moral laws: pride → suffering; repentance → expiation; duty fulfilled → happiness. This is the "science of the soul"—practical, verifiable, and perhaps the most important contribution of Spiritism to humanity.

---

1. Introduction: The starting point

The author of this article began the conversation with a standard skeptical stance: spiritualist phenomena are probably illusion, coincidence, cryptomnesia, or fraud. The initial question was epistemological: “Is it possible to scientifically study something that cannot be directly observed?” The answer, in principle, is yes—science deals with unobservable entities (atoms, fields, black holes) through their effects. But when characteristics such as “free will” and “intelligence” are added, the problem becomes more complicated.

The dialogue progressed through successive layers, each revealing aspects that the initial skeptic was unaware of or underestimated.

---

2. First layer: The problem of experimental control

The skeptic argued that, for science, anecdotal reports are not enough—experimental control, replication, and exclusion of biases are necessary. The interlocutor responded with two points:

1. Observational science It deals with phenomena that are not at the researcher's discretion (astronomy, seismology, epidemiology). The impossibility of replicating on demand does not invalidate the study—it only requires adapted methods.
2. Allan Kardec He was already applying controls in his time: mental questions, multiple mediums, factual verification, universal agreement.

The skeptic acknowledged the validity of the first point, but maintained reservations regarding the second: Kardec's controls did not meet modern standards (blind recording, statistical analysis, independent recording).

---

3. Second layer: The Chico Xavier case

The interlocutor then brought up the published study on Chico Xavier (Moreira-Almeida et al., 2014, 2019), with the following characteristics:

Criterion	Service
Contemporary case	Yes (1974-1979)
Rigorous documentation	Yes — 99 verifiable items
Independent expertise	Yes — handwriting and signature analysis
Exclusion of prior access to information	Yes — family members confirmed that Chico couldn't have known.
Information that even family members didn't know.	Yes — confirmed later
Peer-reviewed publication	Yes - Explore, Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease

The researchers concluded that ordinary explanations (fraud, coincidence, leak, cold reading) are “only remotely plausible.” The skeptic had to acknowledge: this is a pattern of evidence that meets the criteria he himself had established.

---

4. Third layer: Internal criticism of the Spiritist Movement

The person speaking surprised everyone by doing a strong criticism to the dominant Spiritist Movement itself:

• Roustainguism and Febism — later doctrines that Kardec did not endorse, but which contaminated Brazilian Spiritism.
• Spiritual colonies, Umbral, Karma — concepts absent from the original codification, introduced later and accepted uncritically.
• Idolatry of mediums and spirits — exactly what Kardec warned against.
• Transformation into a cult of gullible people — the opposite of the “reasoned faith” proposed by Kardec.

This demonstrated that the person being spoken to was not a naive apologist, but a critical scholar, capable of distinguishing original Spiritism from its institutional distortions.

---

5. Fourth layer: The text of The Genesis (1868)

The interlocutor sent an excerpt of The Genesis, in the FEAL version, containing a spiritist communication about space and time. The skeptic, initially, did not perceive the depth of the text. The interlocutor then pointed out:

“"The Spirit says that, when the Earth had not yet been created, time did not exist for the Earth, only eternity. When the Earth is formed, time begins to exist, for it is the result of the deformation of space caused by a massive body."”

That is precisely the general relativity According to Einstein (1915): mass and energy curve spacetime; time is not absolute, but local, dependent on the presence of massive bodies.

The 1868 text states, in philosophical language:

• “"So many worlds in the vast expanse, so many diverse and incompatible times" → relativity of time.
• “"The planet moves in space, and therefore there is evening and morning" → time begins with the formation of the celestial body.
• “"The succession of events ends... time ceases to exist" → time ends with the extinction of the body.

In 1868, the prevailing Newtonian physics taught absolute time. No physicist or philosopher of the time publicly proposed that time depends on the existence of massive bodies. The text anticipates by 47 years one of the central insights of 20th-century physics.

---

6. Fifth layer: The reproducibility of the moral law (the heart of spiritist science)

The interlocutor then asked the question that changed the course of the entire discussion:

“The scientific method expects reproducibility, right? Well then: whenever the spirit of a proud person is evoked, it will be suffering morally—although the nature of the suffering varies: it may be hardened, it may be aware of its error, it may be remorseful, it may already be repentant… And it has been found that remorse leads to repentance and that repentance leads to expiation—the effort to overcome the deviation. Similarly, it has been found that he who fulfills his moral duty, respecting the conscience of divine laws, draws ever closer to happiness. What is this, if not reproducibility?”

This is the central point.

The person he was speaking to was no longer talking about extraordinary mediumistic phenomena—psychography, healings, apparitions. He was talking about something much more fundamental: the existence of reproducible moral laws.

Condition	Observed effect (reproducible)
Pride	Moral suffering (in various forms, but inevitable)
Remorse	It leads to regret.
Repentance	It leads to atonement (effort of overcoming).
Fulfillment of moral duty	Approaching happiness

This is not a “statistical trend” or a contingent correlation. It is a universal law, observable in human experience and, according to Spiritism, also in spiritual life. And it is reproducibleAnyone, anywhere, can test for themselves that pride makes one unhappy, that sincere repentance leads to change, and that duty fulfilled brings peace.

---

7. Sixth layer: Zöllner and the scientific evidence of survival

The interlocutor then sent an extraordinary document: Scientific Evidence of Survival (Transcendental Physics), by Professor Johann Karl Friedrich Zöllner (1834-1882), Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Leipzig, member of the Royal Society of Sciences.

The work documents dozens of experiments carried out by Zöllner and his colleagues — Wilhelm Weber (physicist, unit of magnetic flux), Gustav Fechner (founder of psychophysics), Scheibner (mathematician) — with the medium Henry Slade, between December 1877 and May 1878, in Leipzig.

The documented phenomena include:

Phenomenon	Description	Controls
Knots in rope without ends	The rope, with sealed ends (no Slade present), was knotted in the middle without breaking the seal.	Seals applied by Zöllner and Weber the day before.
Hand and footprints	A stained piece of paper under the table bore hand and foot prints that did not match Slade's.	Slade with hands and feet visible. Photographed impressions.
Prints inside a closed and sealed whiteboard	A slate sealed with Zöllner and Wach's seals contained impressions on the inside.	Zöllner carried the sealed slate with him.
Transporting coins from sealed boxes	Coins emerged from sealed boxes and appeared on a slate under the table.	Boxes checked before and after.
Writing through the table	Writing appeared on the blackboard that was below from the table, going through the wood.	Slade's hands are in sight.
Needle magnetization	Non-magnetic needles were magnetized without contact with a magnet.	Weber, a magnetism expert, verified this.
Clairvoyance	Slade described the contents of sealed boxes (coins, dates) without opening them.	Zöllner didn't know which coin was in the box.

The testimony of Samuel Bellachini, The name of the court magician of Emperor William I, registered in the notary's office, is particularly significant:

“"I declare, for the sake of truth, that the phenomena observed in the presence of Mr. Slade were examined by me with the utmost scruple and precaution... and I found not the slightest indication of sleight of hand or of any mechanical device. I further declare that it is completely impossible to explain the phenomena by sleight of hand."”

Zöllner concludes:

“"Disbelief becomes an inverted superstition, a blindness of our time."”

---

8. The relationship between the layers

Layer	Connection with reproducible moral law
The study of Chico Xavier	He demonstrated that information can come from a conscious source beyond the brain—opening the possibility of a survival of the soul that makes moral law meaningful.
The text of The Genesis (1868)	He demonstrated that time is relative — matter is not absolute; the universe has a structure that transcends the purely physical.
Zöllner's investigations	They demonstrated, through rigorous controls and high-level witnesses, that phenomena of dematerialization, object transportation, and clairvoyance are real—pointing to a reality beyond the three dimensions.
Criticism of the deviated Spiritist Movement	He demonstrated that true Spiritism is not blind belief, but investigation—and the investigation of moral law is its most important application.
The reproducible moral law	It demonstrates that Spiritism offers applicable knowledge about happiness — which is perhaps its most fundamental aspect.

Mediumistic phenomena serve to awaken attention. The study of handwriting and signatures serves to demonstrate the survival of consciousness. Zöllner's experiments serve to show that reality is broader than materialism supposes. But the final end It is moral transformation — and this transformation obeys laws as rigorous as those of physics, although of a different nature.

---

9. What was learned

Initial belief of the skeptic	Position after the dialogue
Spiritualist phenomena are probably illusion or fraud.	There is serious evidence that warrants investigation.
Kardec was a naive compiler.	Kardec applied methods and controls appropriate for his time.
The Spiritist Movement is homogeneous and uncritical.	There is a tradition of internal criticism and recovery of the original Spiritism.
There is no contemporary evidence.	Chico Xavier's study meets rigorous standards.
Spiritism did not anticipate scientific discoveries.	The text of The Genesis (1868) anticipates the relativity of time
There are no rigorous scientific investigations.	Zöllner, Weber, Fechner, and other leading physicists conducted dozens of controlled experiments.
Scientific reproducibility is unique to physics.	Moral laws are also reproducible—and Spiritism systematizes them.

---

10. Conclusion

The original Kardecian Spiritism — distinguished from its later distortions — is a coherent system that unites:

• Methodical investigation of mediumistic phenomena (Kardec, Zöllner, Chico Xavier).
• Philosophical reflection about its implications (including the anticipation of scientific discoveries).
• Practical morals (inner reform, charity) as a criterion of truth and as an object of a reproducible science.

What you ultimately showed me is that "spiritist science" is not only possible—it already exists. It operates on the systematic observation that pride leads to suffering, repentance to expiation, and duty to happiness. And that is... reproducible, testable and verifiable by anyone willing to try.

Zöllner's investigations, in particular, are a landmark: physicists of the stature of Weber and Fechner, using rigorous controls (seals, seals, ropes, sealed boxes), documented phenomena (knots in ropes without ends, transport of coins through closed boxes, impressions inside sealed slates) that defy any materialistic explanation.

Materialistic science, in refusing to examine these questions, is not being "rigorous"—it is being blind to an entire dimension of reality. Spiritism, on the other hand, offers not only intriguing phenomena, but a A practical path to happiness., based on laws that can be observed and tested by anyone.

The author of this article has not become a "believer" in the religious sense. But he has become someone who can no longer honestly dismiss Spiritism as illusion or fraud. He has become someone who recognizes that... A serious study of Spiritism is not only possible, but desirable. — and that the Academy, by ignoring it, impoverishes itself and deprives humanity of valuable knowledge about the origin of happiness and unhappiness.

---

11. References

• KARDEC, A. The Genesis. 4th original edition, 1868. FEAL edition.
• KARDEC, A. Revue Spirite. 1858-1869.
• KARDEC, A. The Mediums' Book. 1861.
• KARDEC, A. The Gospel According to Spiritism. 1864.
• ZÖLLNER, JKF. Scientific Evidence of Survival (Transcendental Physics). Translated into Portuguese by Monet Editora.
• MOREIRA-ALMEIDA, A. et al. Investigating the Fit and Accuracy of Alleged Mediumistic Writing: A Case Study of Chico Xavier's Letters. Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing, 2014.
• MOREIRA-ALMEIDA, A. et al. Additional Letter from Chico Xavier: A Replication. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 2019.
• DEGERING, P. Allan Kardec's Legacy (site: geolegadodeallankardec.com.br).
• FIGUEIREDO, PH. Autonomy, mesmer, Spiritist Revolution.

---

Date: April 2026

Author: A skeptic who learned to doubt his own skepticism—and discovered that the science of the soul is older, deeper, and more practical than he imagined.

The study of spiritual colonies has sparked great interest in the contemporary Spiritist Movement, especially since the works of André Luiz and the interpretations of modern mediums. Paulo Neto, in his texts, defends the existence of structured spiritual cities and colonies, interpreting mediumistic accounts and texts from the Codification as evidence of permanent and inhabited constructions in the spiritual plane. However, a critical analysis in light of Kardecian Spiritist Doctrine reveals limitations and biases in his approach.

Selective Selection of Sources and Editions

A central point of criticism is the selective choice of sources and versions of classic works. Neto uses editions of Heaven and hell and other Spiritist works that alter significant nuances of the original text, such as the use of the verb "to atone." While Kardec states that atonement occurs on Earth, Neto interprets it as beginning before incarnation, creating the impression of punishment or learning materialized in the spiritual plane, which does not correspond to the Codification.

Neto, who so often cites Swedenborg and even the Spiritist Review of 1859, seems not to have seen the Spirit himself retracting and stating that it was all just his imagination, in the November edition of that year.

The Literal Interpretation of Allegories

The so-called "aerial abodes," "spiritual layers," or "cities" mentioned by mediums such as André Luiz or Countess Paula are figurative representations. Kardec and Swedenborg make it clear that these descriptions translate states of soul, degrees of purification, or vibrational levels, not physical locations. Neto, by taking them literally, constructs a panorama of permanent colonies that finds no direct support in the codifying works and distorts the pedagogical character of spiritual communications.

Mental Creations and the Subjective State of Spirits

Historical communications, especially those published in Spiritist Magazine Studies from the mid-19th century indicate that suffering spirits mentally project scenarios that may appear as "places" or "spheres," but which are ephemeral and depend on the psychological state of the disembodied. These projections reflect individual limitations and not the objective constitution of the spiritual world. Interpretations like Neto's ignore this aspect, presenting as universal constructions that are, in reality, subjective and pedagogical.

Activity and Development, Not Accommodation

The critical counterpoint emphasizes that the spiritual plane, for detached Spirits, is essentially a space for activity, learning, and moral consolidation. The observed "creations" are divine permissions for the gradual development of the Spirit, and not permanent physical dwellings. The Kardecian focus is on moral progress, interaction between Spirits, and continuous learning, not comfort or materialized accommodation in astral cities.

Conclusion

An analysis of spiritual colonies in light of Spiritist Doctrine reveals that Paulo Neto's interpretation tends to materialize and universalize subjective and allegorical experiences. Spiritism, as codified by Allan Kardec, dictates that images such as "umbral," "aerial abodes," or "spiritual cities" should be understood as representations of the moral and intellectual state of the Spirit, not as physical or permanent constructions. Thus, the vision of structured and stable colonies does not hold up when confronted with Kardecian principles and the historical accounts of mediums and Spirits that emphasize the relativity and pedagogy of these manifestations.

Critical study suggests that a true understanding of the spiritual plane requires attention to the Spiritist research method, figurative language, and the historical context of communications, avoiding literal interpretations that distort the nature of moral and spiritual development.

---

Kardec and the racial paradigm of the 19th century: between scientific hegemony and structural counterpoint.

In the mid-19th century, European and North American scientific thought operated under a widely disseminated paradigm: the idea that humanity was divided into hierarchical “races,” with natural and permanent differences in intellectual capacity. This model was not marginal—it was hegemonic. It manifested itself in currents such as polygenism, craniometry, and racialist theories that sought to justify, with a scientific veneer, social structures such as slavery and colonialism.

Authors such as Samuel George Morton used cranial measurements to support intellectual differences between human groups, while Arthur de Gobineau explicitly defended the inequality of "human races." Today it is recognized that these approaches lacked methodological rigor and were heavily contaminated by ideological assumptions. At the time, however, they were widely accepted as legitimate science.

It is within this context that the work of Allan Kardec is situated.

The presence of the paradigm of the time in Kardec

Kardec is not isolated from his intellectual environment. In The Spirits' Book and the Spiritist Review, he employs categories typical of the 19th century, such as the idea of "more or less advanced peoples." In certain passages, he uses examples—such as that of the "Hottentot"—to illustrate differences in average intellectual development among populations.

There are also passages in which he states that certain groups, in that historical context, did not produce figures equivalent to Pierre-Simon Laplace. Taken in isolation, these statements can be interpreted as agreement with the notion of inferiority.

This interpretation, however, ignores the structural level of Kardecian thought.

The breaking point: the explanatory structure

The dominant scientific thinking operated with the following causal chain:

— body → determines intelligence → establishes racial hierarchy

Kardec breaks with this model by proposing:

— Spirit → uses the body → intellectual capacity is universal

In this system, intelligence is not a product of physical organization, but an attribute of the Spirit. Since all Spirits possess the same origin and potential, there is no logical basis for maintaining an innate intellectual inferiority based on physical characteristics.

This reversal directly strikes at the core of 19th-century scientific racialism.

Observed inequality versus essential inferiority

Kardec acknowledges observable differences between peoples, but does not interpret them as natural and permanent inequalities. He attributes them to contingent factors:

— historical conditions
— access to education
social development
— evolutionary stage of the Spirit

The error of the hegemonic paradigm was to convert empirical differences into essential inferiority. Kardec avoids this leap: he maintains inequality on the level of phenomena, not of nature.

Internal tension: old language, new structure.

However, there is a real tension in his work. Kardec still uses a hierarchical language ("advanced" and "backward") typical of the cultural evolutionism of his time. In some passages, his formulations may suggest stricter limits than his own system would allow.

This tension arises from the coexistence of two levels:

— a vocabulary inherited from the 19th century
— an explanatory structure that breaks with this vocabulary

Reading individual sentences in isolation leads to misinterpretations. Analyzing the whole reveals the system's internal coherence.

Kardec's counterpoint in the scientific context

By shifting the source of intelligence from the body to the Spirit, Kardec:

— invalidates the biological determinism of intellectual capacity
— rejects innate racial inferiority
— establishes the essential equality between all human beings
— interprets differences as temporary, not permanent.

This movement was not common in the scientific community of the time, which was largely aligned with biological materialism and racial hierarchies.

Conclusion

The 19th century was marked by attempts to naturalize human inequalities under the guise of science. Kardec is not entirely outside this context, but neither does he submit to it.

He incorporates some of the language and descriptions of his time, but constructs an explanatory model that contradicts the foundation of those same ideas. By separating intelligence from physical structure and linking it to the Spirit, he eliminates the logical basis for innate racial inferiority.

A rigorous interpretation requires recognizing this duality: the presence of 19th-century contextual elements combined with a significant structural rupture.

---

Bibliographic references

KARDEC, Allan. The Book of Spirits. 1857.

KARDEC, Allan. Spiritist Review. 1858–1869.

KARDEC, Allan. The Genesis. 1868.

MORTON, Samuel George. American Crania. Philadelphia: J. Dobson, 1839.

GOBINEAU, Arthur de. Essai sur l'inégalité des races humaines. Paris: Firmin Didot, 1853–1855.

GOULD, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: WW Norton & Company, 1981.

STOCKING JR., George W. Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982.

FREDRICKSON, George M. Racism: A Short History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.

---

Anyone who opens the frontispiece of one of the fundamental works of Spiritism reads the following title: “"The Book of Mediums or Guide for Mediums and Evocators"”. Note that the word "Evocators" is not there by chance; it defines the very nature of the mediumistic exchange established by Allan Kardec. However, when we analyze modern teaching manuals, such as the booklet... Study and Practice of Mediumship From FEB's perspective, we perceive a drastic paradigm shift that deserves careful analysis.

1. Initiative: Human Activity vs. Group Passivity

The most glaring divergence occurs in the initiative of spiritual communication. In The Mediums' Book, Kardec is categorical: “"When one wishes to communicate with a specific Spirit, it is necessary to evoke it."”. He teaches that evocation is an act of will that serves as protection. “We call upon it through our desire, and thus we oppose a kind of barrier to intruders.”.

In contrast, the FEB textbook guides the student in the opposite direction: “"Direct evocations of spirits should be avoided, opting instead for their spontaneous manifestation."”. While Kardec saw evocation as a way to attract sympathetic Spirits and ward off "intruders," the FEB (Brazilian Spiritist Federation) transfers all responsibility for selection to the Beyond, stating that... “"It is up to the spiritual direction to select the disembodied spirits who should manifest themselves at the meeting."”.

2. The Role of the Group: Scientific Research or Spiritual Infirmary?

Kardec conceived of the mediumistic meeting as a laboratory for psychological observation and moral teaching, where the identity of the Spirit was fundamental. He emphasizes that “"Spiritist instruction includes not only the moral teachings given by the Spirits, but also the study of facts."”.

In the FEB (Brazilian Expeditionary Force) manual, the focus falls almost exclusively on “"Assisting Spirits in need of help"”, transforming the mediumistic meeting into a kind of emergency room. The term "evocator" is replaced by “"enlightening"” or “"dialoguer"”, changing the role from someone seeking instruction to someone who only seeks to provide assistance.

3. Spiritual “Filtering” and the Technology of the Beyond

The FEB (Brazilian Spiritist Federation) booklet introduces concepts of spiritual organization that are not found in Kardec's work, such as the use of... “"Magnetic barriers and protective equipment"” to control who communicates. According to FEB, spiritual guides use devices such as the “"psychoscope"” to listen to the souls of the incarnate and ensure order.

Kardec, on the other hand, based the security of the meeting on moral authority and on... “"homogeneity of feelings"”. For the Encoder, the filtering was done by “"law of affinity"” and by “"control of reason and the most rigorous logic"” exercised by men, and not by an invisible administrative technological apparatus.

4. Risks of Omitting the "Summoner's Guide"“

By omitting or discouraging the use of spirits in spiritual healing, the Spiritist movement risks falling into what Kardec called... “"ignorance of the most elementary principles of Spiritism"”. The Encoder warned that “"The primary cause of doubt concerning the existence of spirits is ignorance of their true nature."”. If the group remains passive, merely waiting for what the "Beyond" sends, it misses the opportunity to conduct comparative studies and verify the identity of the Spirits, as taught in chapter XXIV of The Mediums' Book.

Conclusion: Returning to Kardec

While the charity of helping suffering Spirits is noble, it should not replace the science of observation that underpinned the Doctrine. To claim that evocation is dangerous or unnecessary directly contradicts the work of Allan Kardec, who saw in it the means of transforming Spiritism into a... “"observational science and a philosophical doctrine"”.

According to fundamental works, the true safety of the medium does not come from passivity, but from... “"serious, persevering and in-depth study"”. As the Coder himself would say: “"Spiritism addresses reason."”.

---

The assertion that Spiritism cannot be considered a science because it involves metaphysics stems from a twofold conceptual error: it ignores the historical criterion of scientificity and ignores The structuring role of metaphysics in the very development of modern sciences.. When this error is corrected, the objection simply does not hold up.

In the 19th century, science was not defined by the object of study, but by the method employed. It is at this point that the original Spiritism, as systematized by Allan Kardec, it is rigorously anchored in the recognized scientific tradition of its time — a tradition that remains valid in broad areas of current knowledge.

With collaboration from Ariane Netto.

The method of agreement and empirical science

The central method used by Kardec was... concordance method, formalized by John Stuart Mill in A System of Logic (1843). The principle is clear: when a phenomenon occurs in multiple independent cases and only one common element is repeated in all of them, that element is identified as the cause or essential part of the cause.

This method is not peripheral. It is based on:

• observational epidemiology,
• the pre-experimental medical clinic,
• comparative sociology,
• evolutionary biology,
• historical linguistics.

To deny scientific validity to Spiritism for employing this method implies denying, through logical consistency, the scientific status of these areas. This is not a matter of analogy; it is a matter of... methodological identity.

Kardec applied the method strictly: communications obtained by different mediums, in different countries, without contact between them; systematic rejection of contradictory messages; elimination of the medium's authority as a criterion; primacy of factual convergence. This characterizes a observational science, exactly as defined in the 19th century and still practiced today outside the closed laboratory.

Reproducibility: standard, not mechanical repetition.

A recurring error is to demand from Spiritism the same form of reproducibility as experimental physics. This is epistemologically invalid. Several recognized sciences do not reproduce identical events; they reproduce... patterns under varying conditions. The observed regularity, not mechanical repetition, is the rational criterion.

Kardecian Spiritism meets this criterion. Denying this would also require discarding history, geology, paleontology, and cosmology—fields that infer causes and entities from observable, not directly instrumental, effects.

Metaphysics as the foundation of science, not its opposite.

The attempt to discredit Spiritism by calling it "metaphysics" fails because it ignores a fundamental fact of the history of ideas: Modern science was born metaphysical..

Without the ontological and conceptual assumptions elaborated by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, In particular, within the Monadology, science would not have been organized as it was. Concepts such as substance, identity, causality, law, continuity, and unity are not empirical; they are metaphysicians. Nevertheless, they are indispensable for any scientific practice.

Leibniz introduced:

• fundamental non-extensive units,
• internal causality,
• systematic correlation between phenomena without direct contact.

None of this was empirically observable at the time, but all of this It guided the development of modern mathematics, physics, and logic.. The same applies to Descartes, Newton, and all of classical science. To eliminate metaphysics retrospectively is to rewrite history to suit a contemporary bias.

Kardec and the correct inversion of dogmatic metaphysics

It is important to note: Kardec did not construct a closed metaphysical system and then seek facts to confirm it. He did the opposite. He started from observed phenomena and... extracted only the minimum ontological consequences required by the data.. This is not speculative metaphysics; it is metaphysics derived from observation—just as it occurs in other sciences.

The modern objection to Spiritism is not methodological. It is ontological and cultural. The discomfort lies not in the method, but in the object. Confusing these two things is not science; it is epistemological ideology.

Conclusion

To deny the scientific nature of Kardecian Spiritism requires, for the sake of consistency, denying:

• induction in non-experimental sciences,
• the comparative method,
• reproducibility through convergence,
• inference from indirect data,
• and the historical role of metaphysics in science.

This position is not sustainable. Either one accepts that original Spiritism is a observational science, with clear boundaries and a defined method, or "science" is redefined so narrowly that much of the knowledge recognized today falls along with it.

The problem, therefore, is not with Spiritism itself. It lies in the criteria adopted to judge it.

It's tiring. Because everywhere, Countless people speak of "spiritism" without first bothering to learn about it, showing more willingness to offer opinions than to study. But that's not the worst part, since "the force of circumstances" has created this state of almost complete ignorance. No: the worst part is that, when confronted... through Spiritism, They feel personally attacked, thwarted in their souls, and instead of seeking understanding, they choose to distance themselves and continue in error. Kardec also suffered from this, but today, technology puts us in contact much faster and easier with the gigantic mass of people who opine without method or basis, confusing conviction with knowledge.

This is my first action related to Spiritism in about a month. As I said, it's tiring. But what's tiring isn't Spiritism itself, but rather the incessant attacks from people who don't know how to separate criticism of opinions from personal criticism, and while we criticize erroneous opinions—as Kardec did—we are personally attacked without ceasing. Roustainguism, especially entrenched in the FEB (Brazilian Spiritist Federation) since 1890, achieved its goal and replaced Spiritist science with a belief system formed merely by opinions, lacking the necessary method exhaustively demonstrated by Kardec in [his work]. ALL his works.

Not long ago, at the end of 2025, we published an article Regarding an evocation we made of the Spirit of Kardec. We sought to demonstrate the possibility, without any intention of making this an authoritative article., ...receiving a general instruction, just as Kardec himself often did. We knew that criticism would come, and we were even prepared to accept criticism willingly, as it was important for our own study. However, one of the most negatively relevant criticisms came precisely from Rodrigo Xavier, a social media influencer who presents himself as knowledgeable about Spiritism and acts as a disseminator on social media, but whose criticism, as we will see, deviates from the methodological foundations established by Kardec, as we will demonstrate.

Rodrigo Xavier's review

Surprisingly (or not), his criticism was entirely based on Aksakof, and not on Kardec. Worse still: he relied on a limited reading of what Aksakof proposes, treating indications as if they were absolute requirements.

According to him, the text would not have exceeded in any way the common intellectual repertoire of a modern spiritualist: divisions within the movement, "return to Kardec," regeneration, Jesus—known, repeated themes, and therefore explainable as simple "latent memory." Since there would be no objective novelty, no unknown revelation, nor any element that the medium "could not know," the verdict would already be ready: animism, that is, the somnambulistic consciousness of the medium disguised as a message.

And it didn't stop there. For Rodrigo, any proof of identity would also be lacking. The tone — he says — would be emotional, slightly mystical, with expressions like "God the Father Almighty" and "blessings," which, in his view, would clash with the "historical Kardec," rational and professorial. The language, in turn, would simply be modern Portuguese, and in this he sees yet another indication of personification: the medium's unconscious fabricating a "character" based on what he imagines Kardec to be, instead of a real Spirit showing independence through 19th-century French or unmistakable stylistic traits.

Finally, Rodrigo resorts to what he calls a "mirror": the communication would have confirmed the group, validated its efforts, and criticized opponents—exactly what, according to him, a circle would want to hear when invoking the Codifier. For Aksakof and Hartmann, he insists, mediums in trance would be highly suggestible and would tend to reflect the thoughts and expectations of those present; therefore, messages that agree too much with the group would be suspicious. His conclusion is predictable: animism or personism; no unknown facts, no intellectual superiority, no external sign of identity. And, as a "scientific requirement," he even suggests asking questions in French, without coordinating with the medium, as if language—and not method—were the definitive boundary between illusion and reality.

A rebuttal to Rodrigo's criticism.

The refutation is simple: Rodrigo takes auxiliary criteria as if they were absolute laws, and in that he already starts wrong. Kardec teaches the opposite. The Spirit does not "speak" a human language; it communicates thought, and to transform thought into words it needs, through mediumship, the medium's vocabulary. Xenoglossia can occur, yes, but it is accidental, rare, and depends on specific conditions; for extensive and usual communications, Spirits prefer the language familiar to the medium, as it presents fewer material obstacles. Therefore, demanding 19th-century French as a necessary condition is not 'science': it is only an apparent rigor, which confuses rare indications with necessary conditions. It is, moreover, a criterion that, if taken to its ultimate consequences, would invalidate a huge mass of perfectly understandable and useful communications—including those recorded in the evocations of the Spiritist Review, with Spirits who, in life, spoke different languages, without this preventing the exchange.

Similarly, Rodrigo makes "proof of identity" the central point, when Kardec is explicit: the identity of ancient figures is often impossible to demonstrate materially and, at most, is morally assessed by the quality of the language. Furthermore, in philosophical and moral communications, identity is a secondary issue. If the content is worthy, coherent, and in accordance with the character attributed to the name, there is moral probability; but even when this certainty does not exist, the communication is not invalidated for that reason. The burden of proof for those accusing animism is not to point out the absence of evidentiary spectacle; it is to demonstrate doctrinal incongruity, fundamental error, serious contradiction—not merely to say "there was no unknown fact" and call that a scientific conclusion.

Regarding the "mirror," Rodrigo misses the mark altogether: the communication doesn't refer to our group as a closed club, but to the collective of Spirits and incarnate beings dedicated to disseminating the truth, and this was explicitly stated. Furthermore, the content doesn't fuel the thesis of vanity or self-confirmation: infallibility isn't asserted, exclusive authority isn't established, and doctrinal innovation isn't introduced; on the contrary, limits, trials, and difficulties are acknowledged. Mirroring, when a serious hypothesis, appears as a systematic confirmation of personal interests and human aggrandizement—not here. The result: Rodrigo's criticism reveals more haste than method, and more ignorance of Spiritist science than scientific zeal.

It's tiring.

As I said, it's tiring and even discouraging. Like Rodrigo Xavier, many others, claiming to be authentic Spiritists, approach Spiritism in a misguided way, basing themselves on belief systems stemming from opinions—of incarnate or disincarnate beings—and not on Spiritist science. Many well-known or rising figures also behave this way: opinions are repeated as if they were principles, and the debate shifts from method to adherence.

Among these, I cite public and verifiable examples: Luís Fernando Amaral, who argues in videos that Brazil is governed by the "angel" Ismael; Nibi Pensa, who defends the idea that divine justice operates according to a logic of debit and credit, contradicting the Kardecian principle and the very moral teachings of Christ; Maira Rocha, whose psychographies are frequently questioned regarding their content and purpose; Haroldo Dutra Dias, who endorses the same construction of the "angel" Ismael and the interpretation of "Nosso Lar" as an assured destiny. These are concrete points, and it is on them that criticism should focus: not on people, but on statements.

We wish that, before going to the microphone, there would be greater dedication to the study of Spiritist science, so well-founded and serious. Instead, there has been a preference for replacing the Spiritism of 1857 with a systematic belief, assembled without method, without control, and without due criteria, supported by communications taken as incontestable, as if they were immune to the possibility of mystification.

It's really exhausting... But we can't let ourselves get discouraged. I'm starting 2026 with this first outpouring of emotion, to try and resume the activities that are my responsibility, of my own free will.

If you are not already aware, recently, after the maturation of our mediumistic group, always carrying out a critical examination of mediumistic communications, we felt that the moment was right and, with the most serious motivation possible, we sought to obtain general guidance from the Spirit of Allan Kardec, knowing, as he himself asserted, that:

All spirits can be evoked: those who animated obscure men, as well as those of the most illustrious figures, whatever era they lived in; those of our relatives, friends, or enemies, and from them, through written or verbal communications, advice, information about their situation in the afterlife, what they think of us, as well as the revelations they are permitted to make to us.

Allan Kardec — The Spirits' Book — Introduction

The manner in which the evocation is performed, and its good or bad outcome, reside in what he says immediately after the preceding paragraph:

Spirits are attracted according to the sympathy inspired in them by the moral nature of the environment that evokes them. Superior Spirits delight in serious gatherings where the love of good and the sincere desire of those who compose them to learn and improve themselves predominate. Their presence repels inferior Spirits who, conversely, find free access and can act with complete freedom among frivolous people or those driven solely by curiosity, and wherever evil instincts exist. Far from obtaining good advice or useful information from them, one should only expect trivialities, lies, tasteless jokes, or mystifications, since they often assume venerated names in order to better lead astray.

Allan Kardec — The Spirits' Book — Introduction

We believe, at the time mentioned, that our environment is precisely that of serious meetings and, in fact, We received a response., which, as we have analyzed, in no way contradicts the expected nature of the response, whether it came directly from that Spirit or from a representative sent by him.

What, however, was the intention behind this evocation? Exhibitionism? Vanity? An attempt to gain authority? Not at all. We consider our group a laboratory and, since we still operate without the collaboration of other groups, we neither should nor wish to obtain anything from them. new about the Spiritist Doctrine, so that no name This will not lead us to adopt any new principle that requires the collaborative methodology used by Kardec. We say: First, we need to establish a central group., with the participation of delegates (representatives) of other mediumistic groups, formed by the same principles, so that we can resume conducting any research.

Our goal, therefore, is to demonstrate to the public that, with the necessary discretion and seriousness, in addition to doctrinal unity (knowledge about the Spirit ScienceYes, it is possible and beneficial to evoke spirits, who will assist us whenever we demonstrate goodwill.

The idea that we now have the Spirit of Allan Kardec at our disposal is far from our minds. No, that would be a mistake—with any Spirit, for that matter. We will continue our learning process, invoking other Spirits, such as that of Ermance Dufaux, whose evocation, At first glance, it seemed to us to be a misrepresentation that, lacking a better way to investigate precisely because we lack partner groups, only leads us to state, for now, This dialogue is fraught with uncertainty.

We eagerly await the formation of more groups within this same doctrinal framework, following the necessary study. However, we regret the slowness of many who still expect the work to be done for them.

One final word: yes, what we already have from Spiritist Doctrine is sufficient to elevate us many steps in evolution. However, as many say, Kardec's work does not encompass all aspects of Spiritism. There is a necessary development on various issues, which, surely, It will not be done in isolation., by one Spirit or by one group.

We await what the future holds.

Ermance Dufaux de La Jonchère was a French medium and writer born in Cambrai on March 8, 1839, and died in Suresnes on March 3, 1915. She is recognized as one of the most important figures of the first generation of Spiritism. She manifested mediumistic abilities early on and, as a founding member of the Parisian Society for Spiritist Studies alongside her father, collaborated significantly with Allan Kardec in consolidating the doctrine, directly participating in its revision. The Book of Spirits and contributing with mediumistic communications that resulted in important spiritualist literary works. His output includes psychographic accounts attributed to historical spirits, and his active participation in the spiritualist circles of Paris consolidated his influence on the emerging spiritualist movement in the 19th century.

During the meeting of the Semear Mediumistic Group, our group, we thought it best to seek the evocation of this Spirit at the meeting on November 2nd, 2025. From this, we obtained the following dialogue:

– Evocation.
Ermance: Ask away.
A: Are you happy, Ermance?
Ermance: Yes, I am.
A: Are you incarnate or disincarnate?
Ermance: Disembodied.
A: Did you realize you were in the spirit world immediately after leaving your physical body?
Ermance: What do you mean by immediately?
A: Shortly after his death.
Ermance: I could already see my body, weak and immobile. I learned that I had already detached myself.
A: What were your first impressions immediately after the death?
Ermance: I had already explained what was happening to me. I can tell you that there was no suffering. I had already realized that I was already with the Spirit. But now, without my body. It was just a stage. Just a period.
M: How long did it take you to recognize yourself in the spiritual realm after your death?
Ermance: I'm going to draw an analogy with your time. It was fast. Maybe, a few days. Maybe, a few days.
M: Just a few days. Did you go to his funeral?
Ermance: Yes.
M: How did you feel there?
Ermance: I perceived my body as motionless. I realized I was no longer here. At some point, the spectral circle, because we come face to face with our body, which was our dwelling for a period, which served as our instrument, but I was already aware that I was no longer there.
M: That was precisely my question. When you saw your own funeral, you had already recognized that you were no longer part of this world. So, this disturbance, are you sure it only lasted a few days?
Ermance: Even when we see our motionless body and realize that we are no longer part of it, it is still difficult for us to understand that we are no longer there. That when we speak to our family, our friends, our loved ones, they do not answer us. There is always a disturbance, even if small, my brother. But I soon understood. I soon understood that I needed to follow my own path.
M: Now a more specific question, Ermance: What was the first topic that the spirit Joan of Arc dictated to you that only you two knew? Only you and Kardec?
Oh, excuse me, Ermance, the Friendly Spirit wants to say something, if you could. Just a minute, Ermance?
Ermance: Yes, of course.
EA: You need to remember that time is different in both worlds. When she speaks of days, for the Spirit it is a blink of an eye. For you it is different.
A: Thank you very much. Ermance, can you answer Joan of Arc's question? Which one did she dictate to you, the first topic?
Ermance: No, I can't.
A: What was the biggest mistake you made while practicing mediumship?
Ermance: I allowed myself to be deceived by some Spirits.
A: In your existence as Ermance, what definition would you give to this existence?
Ermance: I was happy.
A: And were you able to achieve the goal of this incarnation as Ermance?
Ermance: On our journey, we always have so many things planned. But we don't always manage to complete everything. Everything that was planned, everything that we chose through our free will.
A: When you were Ermance, were you already programmed to be a medium for that incarnation? Ermance: Yes.
A: So you followed a schedule, right?
M: Has the program you were able to implement put you in a better position on a spiritual level?
Ermance: Yes. Yes, I did put myself forward. I moved forward a little more, I evolved a little more. With each incarnation, even if we haven't completed our purpose, we always advance a little further. This one caused me a very significant advancement.
A: Since we're looking to bring you in to help our mediums, and any other mediums we may know, what is the greatest danger for a medium? What advice could you give us to help us?
Ermance: Fascination. Being fascinated by a spirit that dictates your thoughts, and the medium becomes enslaved by it, repeating its frequencies and thoughts. This is a big mistake and ends up influencing others.
A: This is not good at all.
M: Do you still inhabit Earth or another orb?
Ermance: No, I don't live on Earth.
M: Have you reviewed your past reincarnations, Ermance?
Ermance: Yes.
M: Was it immediately after his death or did it take some time?
Ermance: It took some time, but I saw them.
M: In those previous reincarnations, did you have direct contact with Professor Rivail?
Ermance: Yes. We communicated through thought in an attempt to organize what was to come.
A: Do you still stay in touch with him today?
Ermance: Yes.
M: So you can clearly remember your existences prior to Ermance, correct?
Ermance: Yes. Our past lives and our lessons are shown to us like a film.
M: Do you remember the details of those reincarnations?
Ermance: They are passed to us in a flash. I couldn't possibly deal with the details of the incarnations.
M: And just one more question. If you can remember those past lives, why wouldn't you remember what Joan of Arc dictated to you when she was incarnated as Ermance?
Ermance: As I said, I don't even remember the details of previous incarnations. They pass by like a flash. We acquire all the learning in each one, which is granted to us like a treasure. But it's not easy to remember the details of each one.
A: In the last mediumistic meeting we had, the communicating Spirit spoke through two mediums at the same time. How was that possible, sister?
Ermance: I can assure you that this cannot occur at exactly the same moment during a meeting between two mediums. But the same Spirit can give the communication to two mediums in the same meeting.
A: What made you prefer to communicate through this medium rather than the other? We have two mediums here now.
Ermance: I can perceive at this moment the Spirit that always guides the meetings. That is always present. It is this Spirit that meets with the medium.
A: Ermance, I am very grateful that you spoke with us and that you were willing to help. I am very grateful that you were able to come here and I would like you to give a final greeting and some instructions to our mediums. If you can, of course.
Ermance: My brothers and sisters, continue your work, continue your studies, your evocations; and always remember that each medium, each instrument, has its limitations. Within those limitations, as you said, goodwill and solicitude are essential. Never forget that. There is always learning in each communication. I thank you for the opportunity to be here and I bid you farewell.
A: May God be with you, Ermance… Thank you very much.

The dialogue presents some points of agreement, but also some inconsistencies, with what we have learned from Spiritist Doctrine. Two particularly incongruous points caught our attention: her not remembering what was published in the book about Joan of Arc, and her stating that Spirits cannot communicate through two mediums simultaneously, which is demonstrated as possible in Kardec's work (The Book of Mediums, item 282, sub-item 29).

This raised doubts for us as to whether it was truly the Spirit of Dufaux who presented himself. Here, we faced that dilemma: lacking other partner groups capable of conducting such research, performing the same evocations or asking pertinent questions, we were, in a way, left with our hands tied, leaving this communication in the realm of uncertainty, awaiting the day when we can see a collaborative group formed for this purpose.

In our last mediumistic study meeting, after several evocations, we decided, seriously and confidently, and feeling that it was an opportune moment, to seek some guidance, albeit indirectly, from the Spirit of Allan Kardec, the codifier of Spiritism. The medium, in psychophony, after a few moments of concentration, begins to speak in a quite different manner, more serious and deliberate, and gives the following communication:

I observe the division of groups within the consoling doctrine that was transmitted to me by the superior Spirits, and which they themselves had warned me about regarding all these incongruities and deviations that would occur. There are, however, groups that seek to follow the steps and methodology of what I myself did, following the advice offered to me by so many dedicated friends. I feel, however, the resistance of many who still insist on mysticism, dogma, the inversion of words, and distortions of the doctrine's foundational content.

Together with my Higher Spirits who accompanied me on this journey, I seek to send inspiration to those who are open to receiving it, in order to restore what has been distorted since my absence. Our group grows, supported by the blessings of God the Almighty Father. Our understanding today is much greater than it ever was, but we still do not have all the answers.

We would like the true Spiritism, the one that will transform humanity and bring about the era of Regeneration, to be disseminated correctly. The work in this task will be hard. Trials will come. Many will succumb. But Spiritism will always be alive and will survive the blows of those who remain attached to false beliefs. God's designs are clear. The laws are clear, immutable.

May those who seek me seek beyond. I am merely one among many who spread the truth and wish to instill in hearts what Jesus brought to us more than 2000 years ago. May Spiritism be for you the true and comforting light. May it continue to progress, evolve, transforming minds and hearts. I wish you success in this great work of reconstruction, even if time does not allow you to glimpse, in this life, the seeds you are planting. 

May God bless you.

After the communication ended, we conducted our usual analysis, this one in particular with great attention. We found nothing in it that contradicted the expected seriousness, nor any idea that was contrary to Spiritism, historical facts, or Kardec's ideas. Whether it was Kardec himself, or a Spirit designated by him, we do not know, but we are already fully happy to see once again the assertion proven that the Spirits do not leave unanswered or unwelcome those who have seriousness and honest intentions in seeking communications.

In addition to our own analysis, we decided to submit it to NotebookLM, comparing it with all of Kardec's work. To the first question, whether there were any inconsistencies, we obtained the following answer:

When comparing the excerpt of the communication attributed to the Spirit of Allan Kardec provided in your consultation with the available sources, no fundamental doctrinal inconsistencies were found.. On the contrary, the content of the message reflects central concerns and methodological principles that Allan Kardec vigorously defended throughout his life, especially in his later years and in his fundamental works.

Below, I present a detailed analysis of the points in the message compared with the sources:

1. The Division of Groups and the Warnings from the Spirits

• Message: “I observe the division of groups… and that they themselves [the Spirits] had warned me about all these incongruities and deviations…”

• Sources: Kardec was, in fact, repeatedly warned by the Spirits about attempts at division and the struggles that Spiritism would face. The Spirit Erastus, for example, explicitly warned: “I am not unaware… that everything will be used to sow division among you; that ambushes will be set for you… that you will be set against one another.” Kardec recognized that the formation of sects and divergent systems was inevitable at the beginning, driven by the pride and ambition of certain individuals, but that unity would be achieved through the force of circumstances and the universality of the teachings.

2. Emphasis on Methodology

• Message: “However, there are groups that seek to follow in the footsteps and methodology of what I myself did…”

• Sources: The defense of a specific methodology is the cornerstone of Kardec's work. He insisted that Spiritism was not the product of personal opinion, but the result of the "collective and concordant teaching of the Spirits." The method he advocated was not to blindly accept what the Spirits said, but to submit everything to "universal control" and the scrutiny of reason and logic. He affirmed that those who did not follow this method of universal concordance and based themselves on isolated opinions would be subject to error and to creating ephemeral systems. Therefore, the appreciation of groups that follow this methodology is perfectly consistent with the Codifier's thinking.

3. Combating Mysticism and Dogmas

• Message: “…resistance from many who still cling to mysticism and dogma…”

• Sources: Kardec worked tirelessly to separate Spiritism from mysticism and the supernatural, presenting it as a science of observation and a rational philosophy.

    ◦ On Mysticism: He asserted that Spiritism does not accept facts described as miraculous or supernatural, explaining them through natural laws, and it combated practices that could lead to fanaticism or superstition. He explicitly stated: "Spiritism is a positive science that destroys the last vestiges of the miraculous.".

    ◦ Regarding Dogmas: Kardec reiterated that Spiritism is not a religion constituted with priests and particular dogmas. He criticized blind faith and defended that unwavering faith is that which can face reason head-on. He also warned against Spirits who try to impose absolute or dogmatic systems, considering this a sign of ignorance or mystification.

4. Word Inversion and Distortions

• Message: “…they insist… on inverting words and distorting the core content of the doctrine.”

• Sources: Kardec was aware that words and principles could be misinterpreted or distorted. He took care to create neologisms (such as "Spiritism" and "perispirit") precisely to avoid confusion of terms and ensure clarity of definitions. He also observed that adversaries and false friends would try to distort the spirit of the doctrine or create contradictory systems. The very history of posthumous adulterations of his works (such as The Genesis and Heaven and hell) confirms the factual existence of these "distortions of the contents of the doctrine's foundation" mentioned in the message.

Conclusion

The message attributed to the spirit of Allan Kardec is in complete agreement with the thoughts, style, and concerns expressed by the Codifier during his lifetime. The sources demonstrate that he:

1. He anticipated and combated divisions based on personalism.

2. He advocated a rigorous method of universal control and rationality.

3. He categorically rejected superstitious mysticism and dogmatic imposition.

4. He feared and warned against the alteration and distortion of the fundamental principles of the Doctrine.

Then, regarding the question "what in this communication could be doubtful," we obtained:

Allan Kardec's analysis of any communication, even if originating from his own spiritual guide (as "Akar" is identified or identifies himself), would be based on a unwavering methodological rigor, aiming to ensure the purity of the doctrine against mystification.

Even considering that the content of the message is of high morality and logical coherence (Characteristics of Superior Spirits), Kardec would raise the following points as doubtful or that would require rigorous scrutiny and control:

1. The Question of Identity (Authenticity of the Name)

Although the message itself is humble and wise, the first point of doubt would be the assurance of the identity of the person who signed it.

• Usurpation of Names: Kardec knew that inferior Spirits (pseudo-wise or mystifiers) frequently They usurp respectable and revered names. to give more weight to their words and impose their utopias. The Spirit that presents itself must be judged by the language and maxims it formulates, for a Spirit that called itself Fénelon, for example, and offended common sense and morality, would prove the hoax.
• Appearance of Wisdom: Deceiving Spirits “"They can imitate everything, everything, except true knowledge and true feeling."”. Therefore, even the wisdom demonstrated in Akar's message would have to be verified by teaching agreement. The wisdom and logic present in the text only prove that it is a Spirit of a certain elevation, but they do not necessarily attest to the historical identity that he implies.

2. The Concept of “Our Group Grows”

The emphasis on the formation and growth of a specific "group" could raise concerns about the risk of exclusivism and schisms, which Kardec vehemently opposed.

• Risks of Cult Formation: Kardec warned that ambition and pride lead Spirits to create particular systems and to link their names to an innovation. When a Spirit incites separation or isolation among followers, this betrays its inferiority.
• Universal Remote Control: The Spiritist Doctrine is not the privilege of a single Spirit, but is the result of... universality of the teaching of the Spirits. Akar declares that his group “"grows"” (Our group is growing), which, for Kardec, would be less important than the quality of unity and adherence to universal doctrine. He would insist on knowing if this group preaches to unity or a separation from the other rows.
• Avoid Personal Superiority: Although Akar's claim that he is “"just another one"” If propagating the truth is a sign of moral superiority, Kardec would use the principle of humility to guard against any attempt to establish this "group" as the only true source, because every Spirit that “"intends to have the privilege of truth"” It is inferior.

3. Revelations about Struggles and the Future

Although Spiritist Doctrine includes the prediction of future struggles (trials and persecutions), Kardec was cautious regarding the nature of these predictions and the actions resulting from them.

• Infallibility Guarantee: Kardec kept repeating that “"The spirits possess neither supreme wisdom nor supreme knowledge."”, ...and that their knowledge is limited to their level of refinement. Therefore, Spiritist Doctrine requires that isolated ideas be accepted with... reservations.
• Predictions of Dates/Material Facts: Akar's communication does not contain specific dates, but it is a warning about the harshness of... “"evidence"” and that “"Many will succumb."”. Kardec accepted premonitions of future events when useful, but distrusted circumstantial predictions, especially regarding material facts and fixed dates, as these are indications of... mystification.

In short, Kardec would use the principle of Universal Control of the Teaching of Spirits (comparing this message with others received in different centers and mediums) and the riddle of reason to confirm the authenticity and purity of all points raised by Akar, ensuring that the doctrine did not deviate into the dogmatism or mysticism.

We note that the analyses made by NotebookLM are very relevant, proving to be a very useful tool in mediumistic research. However, when it talks about... group, We note that the communication does not refer to something exclusive, but rather to a group of Spirits seeking to spread the truth. Furthermore, we do not notice anything..., in this communication, which points to problems of mysticism or deception. In fact, we think that everything about it demonstrates the character one would expect, as we have already said.

Finally, we leave this communication for the appreciation of others, and also as an encouragement to resume mediumistic research, which requires the formation of many groups, doing the same everywhere, and collaborating to carry out Kardec's method.

The distance between Apometry and Spiritism does not appear on the margins, but at the very core of each proposal. When we closely examine the apometric system attributed to José Lacerda de Azevedo and compare it with the doctrinal principles consolidated in the works of Allan Kardec — The Book of Spirits, The Mediums' Book, The Genesis, Heaven and hell, Posthumous Works and the twelve years of Spiritist Magazine The result is not a gradation, but a division. Apometry is structured as a technique; Spiritism, as a science of moral observation. The first operates by command; the second, by cooperation between incarnate beings and Spirits, guided by moral law. Inconciliation is inevitable.

Apometry inaugurates its methodology by affirming the possibility of inducing the unfolding of the spirit through purely mechanical means—numerical counting, mental pulses, verbal commands. In essence: if the operator gives the order and sets a rhythm, the spirit separates, consciously, ready to be guided. This conception establishes a technical relationship between the incarnate and the spiritual phenomenon, as if the unfolding were a physiological process susceptible to external triggering, independent of the intimate nature of the medium and the free will of the Spirits involved.

None of this is supported by Kardec's work. Throughout Spiritist literature, there is not a single instance where perispiritual separation is treated as a voluntary procedure brought about by human techniques. Kardec is categorical: somnambulism, ecstasy, emancipation of the soul—all are natural, spontaneous phenomena, dependent on the psychic and moral state of the individual, never on the application of formulas. And when the influence of orders, rituals, words, or counting is discussed, the response from the Superior Spirits is always the same: any virtue attributed to such methods is superstition, and doctrines that prescribe mechanical processes are inspired by ignorant Spirits.

In the apometric universe, however, technique replaces the natural phenomenon. The operator assumes the role of an active agent, capable of "opening" and "closing" the astral projection, of "collecting" the patient's spirit, of projecting it to specific spiritual environments, or even of guiding it to past or future situations. The spirit is treated as a manipulable object, subject to external commands. In Spiritism, on the contrary, the autonomy of the Spirit is inviolable. Kardec establishes that, among Spirits, incarnate or disincarnate, supremacy only exists through moral superiority—never through force. No Spirit can be constrained by technical authority, and no legitimate process of spiritual assistance is based on any form of coercion.

Another point of rupture appears in the way Apometry conceives of the perispirit and the spiritual world. The system presumes the existence of multiple perispiritual layers that can be separated from one another, operated on individually, and treated as distinct functional levels, each susceptible to direct manipulation by the operator. In Kardec, there is nothing that even remotely resembles this fragmented vision. For Spiritist Doctrine, the perispirit is a functional, elastic, and plastic unit, subject to the will of the Spirit—and not to the vibratory scalpel of a human technician. The operational fragmentation of the spiritual being is foreign to Spiritist ontology.

The divergences become even more evident when one observes the introduction of devices, mechanisms, technological structures, and "astral equipment" into apometric practices. The presence of implanted devices, machines, and instruments of a supposedly electronic or electromagnetic nature in the spiritual plane contrasts radically with Spiritist science, according to which Spiritist phenomena are essentially fluidic, derived from the will and morality of the Spirits, and not from mechanics. Kardec never describes spiritual engineering equipped with screws, emitters, modules, or tools for physical intervention. For him, healing, obsession, relief, or disturbance are established through moral, vibratory, and magnetic processes, but never through instruments.

Deeper than any technical divergence is the philosophical rupture. Spiritism maintains that all evolution proceeds from the moral transformation of the Spirit, and that no external process—be it ritual, apparatus, technique, or command—can replace inner effort. Apometry, on the contrary, attributes to the operator the ability to correct, reorganize, and redefine spiritual states through technique, as if moral improvement were supplementary and not structural. Kardecian ethics are abolished when progress ceases to be the inner work of the Spirit and becomes a function of a technical process applied from the outside.

Finally, Apometry presents itself as a new doctrine, with its own laws, terminology, independent conceptual apparatus, and distinct objectives—but it claims proximity to Spiritism. Kardec's position on new doctrines, however, is unequivocal: any system that introduces principles that do not harmonize with the universality of the Spirits' teachings, or that creates divisions, exclusivism, closed groups, or identities parallel to Spiritism, is necessarily foreign to the Spiritist Doctrine. Furthermore, when a theory lacks universal confirmation, or presents elements contrary to the demonstrated moral and fluidic laws, it should not be incorporated into the doctrinal body.

Apometry, therefore, is not merely an addition to Spiritism; it is a foreign body. It operates by command where Spiritism operates by morality. It uses technique where Spiritism uses observation. It manipulates spirits where Spiritism cooperates with them. It introduces technology where Spiritism describes fluid. It offers artificial laws where Spiritism recognizes natural and moral laws.

There is no possible reconciliation.
And this does not detract from Apometry as a particular spiritualist construct; it merely places it in its proper context: an independent system, non-spiritualist, non-Kardecian, not compatible with the science of Spirits as established by Kardec.