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.

From the very beginnings of the Spiritist movement, certain terminological errors have created distortions that still hinder a precise understanding of the Doctrine. Words borrowed from other fields—laden with established meanings, disputed by divergent currents, or marked by traditions foreign to Spiritism—have been incorporated into Spiritist discourse with particular meanings, different from the predominant meanings in common usage. This practice, although often well-intentioned, has produced profound ambiguities, bringing Spiritism closer either to religious structures it does not possess or to political currents that have never been part of its doctrinal body. The result has been fertile ground for confusion, misappropriation, and interpretations that deviate from the clear, simple, and rational method established by Kardec.

1. The genesis of the terminological problem

From early on, part of the Spiritist movement insisted on classifying Spiritism as a "religion," even if only "in a philosophical sense." However, the choice of term contradicted the very doctrinal structure: in common usage, religion implies worship, ritual, spiritual authority, dogma, and institutional hierarchy—elements foreign to the Spiritist science organized by Allan Kardec. The result of this insistence was the consolidation of a permanent misunderstanding. A single word, taken from another semantic field, brought Spiritism closer to structures alien to its rational method, creating an ambiguity that has persisted.

2. The question of “socialism” in Denis and Herculano

The same process is repeated in the use of the term "socialism" by Léon Denis and, later, by Herculano Pires. Denis uses the word to express an ideal of fraternity, moral cooperation, and solidarity among men—a spiritualist, ethical use, based on the perfectibility of the individual. However, the intellectual landscape of the 19th century was already marked by multiple socialist currents coexisting and competing with each other. Among them, one stood out with increasing force: scientific, materialist socialism, constructed by Marx and Engels from the 1840s onwards, possessing a robust theoretical body, its own vocabulary, and concrete influence on the European workers' movement.

The term "socialism," therefore, was already deeply saturated with divergent, if not openly antagonistic, meanings. It lacked semantic neutrality. There was not one "socialism," but "socialisms," of which only a portion shared an affinity with spiritualist values. Thus, when Denis and Herculano chose to preserve the word by attempting to differentiate it from Marxist materialism, they ended up facing an unavoidable obstacle: the term did not belong to them. It carried with it the force of dominant usage, and this force prevailed over the author's particular intention.

3. Capturing terms by their predominant meaning

The phenomenon is identical to what occurred with the expression "religion in a philosophical sense." Words laden with broad and consolidated uses do not submit to artificial redefinition. Upon entering Spiritist discourse, these words immediately trigger the connotations predominant in the social imaginary. Thus, Denis's "socialism"—moral, spiritual, humanitarian—is easily taken for Marxist "socialism"—materialistic, collectivist, partisan, centered on class struggle. The same applies to "religion": the attempt to limit the term to a philosophical sense does not prevent its traditional meanings from being evoked.

This semantic capture produces concrete doctrinal effects:

1. Denis and Herculano came to be used as legitimizers of modern political currents.
2. Moral criticism of inequality is often confused with adherence to ideological programs.
3. Spiritism is being dragged into political disputes that don't concern it.
4. Materialistic currents find a loophole to infiltrate Spiritist discourse.

The confusion does not stem from the doctrinal content, but from a poorly calibrated terminological choice for the semantic environment in which it circulates.

4. The rational self-sufficiency of Spiritism

The Spiritism organized by Kardec does not need these external categories. It is a clear, simple, logical doctrine, founded on the observation of facts and the rational analysis of phenomena. Its vision of life rests on moral laws and the spiritual evolution of the individual—not on theological structures, nor on political projects.

And it is precisely this rational structure, when preserved in its original form, that naturally leads to social transformation. It is not a matter of state intervention, collectivist planning, or reform programs imposed from the outside in. The social change derived from Spiritism occurs through the progressive modification of consciousness: moral enlightenment, responsibility, free adherence to good, perception of the spiritual consequences of actions. It is an autonomous, spontaneous, and non-coercive change. This point is... fundamental, Because Spiritism clearly contradicts and refutes materialistic and coercive doctrines of social change, demonstrating them to be merely artificial and unsustainable, such as scientific socialism, communism, and Marxism (using this term only for clarity).

When the doctrine is kept intact—faithful to the Kardecian methodology—the moral transformation of the individual inevitably radiates to social structures. There is no need to clothe Spiritism in terms from other fields, nor to artificially link it to political currents. When this occurs, the effect is the opposite: the nature of the Doctrine is distorted, loses clarity, and opens space for improper interpretations.

5. The inevitable consequence of terminological ambiguity

To graft loaded terms like "religion" or "socialism" onto Spiritism is always counterproductive. Each word carries with it a universe of meanings that obscures, confuses, and gives rise to erroneous interpretations. Dominant semantics dominate thought. The doctrine, then, ends up embroiled in disputes that do not belong to its field of action.

Restoring conceptual precision means recovering the language proper to Spiritism—that constructed by Kardec, rigorous, rational, devoid of ambiguities. It means preventing external concepts from distorting its structure. It means preserving the conditions for its social action to occur in the only way compatible with its nature: through freedom of conscience, through understanding spiritual laws, through inner maturity, without impositions, without ideological alignments, and without terminological borrowings that divert the focus of the Doctrine.

This question was developed in response to a message attributed to Allan Kardec in the introduction to the book "Spiritism is the Work of Jesus," by Paulo Henrique de Figueiredo and other authors:

Follow the path I have walked. Yes, there was pain, fear, setbacks, and obstacles. But nothing stopped me; moreover, they encouraged me and strengthened my determination. Each of us, at a certain point in our journey, will experience the ultimate test, the true fulfillment, where we find our worth in serving our Creator with dedication and humility. Yesterday it was me, tomorrow it will be each of you. The worlds wait in eternity for the light to show the way. The light of the world was Jesus; I only repeated his words. Together we serve at God's command. Come and be part of this resplendent celebration. The times have come. Just keep moving forward.

Allan Kardec

Psychographed page written on September 12, 2025.

Mateus mediumistic group.

“"If we were to summon Kardec and a Spirit, claiming to be Kardec, were to deliver an elevated, moral message, without delving any deeper into it, would it be important to ascertain the identity of that Spirit? What did Kardec demonstrate regarding this type of situation?"”

This is a question that touches on the core of Allan Kardec's method for discerning spiritual communications, especially when it comes to elevated moral teachings.

According to Allan Kardec, in the scenario you describe — where a Spirit presents itself with a respectable name (like his) and brings a elevated message, of a moral nature. — a absolute identity of that Spirit would be a secondary issue and of no real importance..

Below is what Kardec demonstrated and taught about this situation, prioritizing the value of the content over the name.

1. The Priority of Moral Content

Kardec established a fundamental rule for judging communications, applicable when instruction is the main focus:

• What matters is the nature of the teaching.Whether it is good or bad, worthy or unworthy of the person who signs it. This is the crucial issue.

• The name It's never a guarantee.. The only true guarantee of superiority is thought and the way in which it is expressed.

• If the teaching is good and rational, It matters little what name the Spirit takes.

• For general instructions, if the Spirit only says useful things, The name by which it reveals itself is irrelevant. Often, a Spirit takes a known name (such as that of an apostle or a respected person) to fix the ideas of the evoker.

• If a Spirit who only preaches good were capable of consciously lying without any use, we would have to assume that it is an evil Spirit, which is not logical. The essential and exclusive objective of Spiritism is the moral improvement of humankind. A high moral message serves this purpose.

In short, judgment on a Spirit that communicates under a respectable name, but provides a A pure message, without contradictions and living up to expectations. (like Kardec), it must be done primarily by moral appreciation of language and maxims.

2. Betrayal Through Language

Kardec warned that spirits who appropriate respectable names as a form of mystification are quickly unmasked when their language is analyzed.

• The impostor spirits They betray themselves immediately through the language they use and the maxims they formulate.. If, for example, the Spirit offends common sense or morality, it will demonstrate, by that simple fact, the deception.

• Deceiving spirits can imitate anything, except true knowledge and true feeling..

• The language of truly good and superior Spirits is always dignified, noble, logical, and free from contradictions., and in it one breathes the wisdom, benevolence, and the purest morality.

• If a teaching is good, rational, and does not provoke serious objections, the conclusion is that the source is superior, even if the name is apocryphal.

3. When Identity is Crucial

Although identity is secondary for the general instruction, It is considered important or easier to verify in other contexts:

1. Intimate Evocations: If the goal is to communicate with a relative or friend, the same person It is of interest, and reasonable, to try to ascertain the identity, which is more easily proven when dealing with contemporary Spirits, whose characters and habits are known.

2. Systemic Mystifications: Attention should be focused on distinction between good and evil spirits, ...whose quality is never indifferent, even if individuality is. The spirit of a lower order that adorns itself with a respectable name so that its words may be believed requires great caution.

What Kardec demonstrated about the situation:

Allan Kardec demonstrated that continuous discernment, based on logic and common sense, It is the safest tool. He and the Parisian Society for Spiritualist Studies did not accept everything that came from the Spirits as irrefutable truth, knowing that they can be mistaken or mislead.

Experience (the continuous observation of facts and language) provides the means to unmask mystifications.

In summary, If the message from the spirit claiming to be Kardec is elevated and moral, then it is, by definition, useful for their moral advancement, which is the essential goal of Spiritism. In these cases, the quality of teaching This is sufficient proof that the Spirit is elevated (whether it be Kardec or a Spirit of equal elevation presenting themselves under that name). To prove the identity materially would be childish or unnecessary, since the value of the exchange would already be established by its moral content.

For better understanding, we can use an analogy: in Spiritist Doctrine, receiving a high moral message is like receiving a check signed by a highly reputable figure. If the check is genuinely endorsed by a solid financial institution (morality and reason), the validity of the message (the teaching) is guaranteed, even if you are not sure if the person who personally delivered it was the signatory, because the charitable intention and the source of value are undeniable. The focus is on... The undeniable value of the currency (its morality), and not the authenticity of the signature, is what determines its value.. The spirit of a lower order, in turn, would be like someone trying to pass a counterfeit bill, but the material (morality) does not withstand close inspection.

Today we bring you another analysis of mediumistic communication. The focus is always on highlighting the logical characteristics of the messages through the body of the message, point-by-point analysis, and conclusions.

In November 2025, during one of our mediumistic meetings, one of the mediums received the following spontaneous psychographic communication from a Spirit:

There was a time when proof was necessary. Today, according to the evolution of the world's inhabitants, it is even more necessary, since humanity is increasingly imbued with bad intentions, aiming for selfishness and personal gain above the collective good. Studies are being conducted on mediums and mediumship. However, researchers, focused on comforting letters, forget the basics of the doctrine. Either they forget them or they are unaware of them.

When people search for comforting letters seeking proof, the spiritual world often remains silent. The research lacks an essential element: faith. It also lacks an understanding of the spiritual world.

If we were to list all these points here, we would have to dictate the codification from the very beginning.

Even back in Kardec's time, they tried the same experiments. Since then, nothing has changed in God's Laws, nor in the conduct of the Spirits.

But don't worry. The time for concrete proof is near, and even the unbelievers will tremble.

We've already said it: if necessary, we'll bang on the tables again.

Mediums are flawed. God's Laws are not.

These scientists should conduct their studies within a mediumistic group. Only then could they understand the basic workings of the phenomena. Isolating mediums to evoke spirits is not a proper study. However, analyzing mediums in trance within groups could provide them with material to expand their research.

But we are merely messengers. Our words are not always well understood.

We hope, and will do our part, to ensure they reach their best conclusions, without taking away humanity's faith in tomorrow; on the contrary, we will inform the unbelievers about the certainty they will gain from our world. (We understand that this part of the message is best understood in this way:)“We wish to inform the unbelievers of the certainty they will obtain from our world. And we will do our part to ensure they reach their best conclusions, without taking away humanity's faith in tomorrow.”))

A Spirit November 2025

This communication has the characteristic of doctrinal firmness, rigorous logic, and a focus on moral utility.. We will assess whether the Spirit's assertions are consistent with general teaching, as well as whether it promotes progress and good, rather than sensationalism or speculation.

The message can be classified as profoundly instructive and in complete accordance with the morals of the Higher Spirits. It serves as a practical guide and a stark warning to researchers and mediums.

Here is the point-by-point analysis:

1. On the Condition of Mankind and the Necessity of Proofs

The assessment of Humanity — which is “increasingly imbued with bad intentions, aiming for selfishness and personal gain above the collective good."” — it is a finding that reflects the reality of our planet atonements and trials. O selfishness it's the pride These are the real ones. wounds of Humanity. Spiritism has as its essential goal precisely moral improvement of the human being.

The statement that the The need for evidence is even greater. It is logical, since spirit manifestations have a providential end: to convince them unbelievers of the survival of the soul.

The warning that the “"The time for concrete evidence is near."” and that “"If necessary, we will bang on the tables again."”. ...is in harmony with the law of progress. The Spirits began their manifestations with the... physical effects (the blows — typology), which served as the vestibule of Science to awaken attention. Kardec observed that the Spirits conduct the teaching in a way gradual and prudent. The resumption of physical phenomena would be a powerful means for the universal implementation of the doctrine in the new phase. This would shock those who still need material evidence. ((https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/889/viagem-espirita-em-1862/1983/discursos-pronunciados-nas-reunioes-gerais-dos-espiritas-de-lyon-e-bordeaux ))

The statement that “"Nothing has changed in God's Laws, nor in the conduct of the Spirits."” It is perfectly accurate, for divine laws are immutable. (Heaven and Hell – Part One: Doctrine – Chapter VIII. Future Punishments According to Spiritism – 14th. The objection raised from divine foreknowledge also falls before this law. God, in creating a soul, effectively knows whether, by virtue of its free will, it will take the good or the bad path; He knows that it will be punished if it acts badly; but He also knows that this temporary punishment is a means of making it understand its error and of leading it onto the good path, which it will reach sooner or later. According to the doctrine of eternal punishments, God knows that the soul will fail and is condemned beforehand to endless torture. Reason also tells us on which side true God's justice lies.)

2. On Research Methodology, Faith, and Spiritual Silence

Criticism of researchers who “"Focused on comforting letters, they forget the basics of doctrine"” and act with the “"curiosity"” This is a key point reiterated in Spiritist works.

• The Need for Faith and Study: The teaching correctly states that research lacks faith and of understanding the spiritual world. Kardec always emphasized that the unshakable faith it is the one that can face reason head-on. Serious and persistent study is the first condition to learn about Spiritism. (( https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/2/o-livro-dos-espiritos/47/introducao-ao-estudo-da-doutrina-espirita/xvii ))

• Spiritual Silence: The fact that “"The spiritual world often remains silent."” When the search is for proof (out of interest or curiosity), it is a constant truth. The Higher Spirits They don't like curious people.. They are not suited to frivolous, idle experiences or those meant for show., and refuse to assist any kind of cupidity or selfishness.

The message is correct in suggesting “"to dictate the codification from the outset"” To clarify these points, this would demonstrate that, without the philosophical basis (God, soul, immortality), the study of manifestation is... useless. ((The Mediums' Book, Chapter III – On the Method https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/884/o-livro-dos-mediuns-ou-guia-dos-mediuns-e-dos-evocadores/1009/primeira-parte-nocoes-preliminares/capitulo-iii-do-metodo/18)))

3. On the Fallibility of the Medium and the Importance of the Group

The communication provides vital practical instructions on mediumistic practice:

• Fallibility: The distinction “"Mediums are flawed. God's Laws are not."” It is fundamental. The mediumistic faculty is organic and regardless of morale of the medium. However, the application and quality of the communications depend on the qualities of the medium.

• The Obstacle of Isolation: The criticism that “"Isolating mediums to evoke spirits is not a correct study."” It's a safety maxim. isolation of the medium is one of biggest obstacles of mediumship. He who works alone easily becomes prey to Lying and hypocritical spirits that dominate. (The Book of Mediums – Part Two – Chapter XXIII – On Obsession – Causes of Obsession – 248. It very often happens that a medium can only communicate with a single Spirit, who is linked to him and answers for those who are called through him. This is not always an obsession, as the fact may derive from the medium's lack of malleability, or from a special affinity with a particular Spirit. Obsession properly speaking only occurs when the Spirit imposes itself and intentionally drives away others, which is never the work of a good Spirit. Generally, the Spirit that takes possession of the medium, with a view to dominating him, cannot bear the critical examination of his communications; when he sees that they are not accepted, that they are discussed, he does not withdraw, but inspires the medium with the thought of isolating himself, even, not infrequently, ordering him to do so. Every medium who is offended by criticism of the communications he obtains echoes the Spirit that dominates him, a Spirit that does not It can be good, provided it inspires an illogical thought, such as refusing examination. The isolation of the medium is always a deplorable thing for him, because he is left without verification of the communications he receives. Not only should he seek the opinion of others to clarify things, but it is also necessary for him to study all kinds of communications in order to compare them. By restricting himself to those transmitted to him, he risks being deceived about their value, without considering that he is not given to know everything and that they almost always revolve within the same circle.

• The Strength of the Group: The advice that the study “"It should be done in a mediumistic group."” It's the only way to avoid obsession. The serious group provides the control, a analysis it's the critical examination Communications by disinterested and benevolent people unmask deceiving Spirits. (The Book of Mediums or Guide for Mediums and Evocators. Part Two — Of Spirit Manifestations. Chapter XXIX — Of Spiritist Meetings and Societies. Of Meetings in General. 329. Study meetings are, moreover, of immense use to mediums of intelligent manifestations, especially to those who seriously wish to improve themselves and who do not attend them dominated by a foolish presumption of infallibility. Obsession and fascination constitute one of the great stumbling blocks of mediumship, as we have already had occasion to say. They can, therefore, deceive themselves in good faith regarding the merit of what they achieve, and it is easily conceived that deceiving Spirits have an open path when they are only dealing with a blind person. For this reason, they distance their medium from all supervision; they even go so far as to make him averse to anyone who might enlighten him. Thanks to isolation and fascination, they achieve their goals without difficulty.) to lead him to accept everything they want. It can never be repeated too often: therein lies not only a stumbling block, but a danger; yes, a real danger, we say. The only way for the medium to escape it is through analysis performed by disinterested and benevolent people who, coldly and impartially assessing the communications, open his eyes and make him perceive what he cannot see on his own. Now, any medium who fears this judgment is already on the path to obsession; he who believes that the light was made exclusively for his benefit is completely subjugated. If one takes offense at observations, rejects them, or becomes irritated upon hearing them, there is no doubt about the evil nature of the Spirit assisting them. We have said that a medium may lack the necessary knowledge to perceive errors; that they may be deceived by resounding words and pretentious language, seduced by sophisms, all in the best of faith. Therefore, lacking their own understanding, they should modestly resort to that of others, according to these two adages: four eyes see more than two, and no one is a good judge in their own case. From this point of view, meetings are of great use to the medium, provided they show themselves sensible enough to listen to the opinions offered, because there they will find people more enlightened than themselves who will grasp the nuances, often delicate, by which the Spirit betrays its inferiority. Every medium who sincerely wishes not to be a plaything of falsehood should, therefore, seek to produce results in serious meetings, bringing to them what they obtain in private, gratefully accepting, and even requesting, a critical examination of the communications they receive. If they are dealing with deceiving Spirits, this is the surest way to rid themselves of them, proving to them that they cannot deceive them. Moreover, the medium who is irritated by criticism has even less reason for such irritation, since their self-esteem has nothing to do with the matter, for what comes out of their mouth or from their pen is not theirs, and they are no more responsible for it than they would be if they were reading the verses of a bad poet. We insist on this point because, just as this is a pitfall for mediums, it is also for meetings, in which it is important not to lightly trust all interpreters of Spirits. The participation of any obsessed or fascinated medium would be more harmful than useful to them; They should not, therefore, accept it. We believe we have already made sufficient observations to make it impossible for them to be mistaken about the characteristics of obsession, if the medium cannot recognize it for himself. One of the most evident is, on the part of the medium, the claim to always be right against everyone. Obsessed mediums who refuse to acknowledge that they are obsessed resemble those patients who are deluded about their own illness and are lost because they do not submit to a healthy regimen.

• Analysis in Trance: The suggestion of “"to analyze, however, mediums in trance within groups"” It is a valid methodology. The state of sleepwalking or ecstasy It allows the medium's spirit to manifest more freely, revealing higher manifestations and deep.

4. Regarding Identity and Mission

The absence of a specific name for the Spirit, presenting itself only as “"We are merely messengers."”, it would be seen as a sign of seriousness and humility, typical of Spirits who care about idea and not with the man. Based on the analysis, we can affirm that it is the same spirit that communicated previously in... in this message here

• Focus on the Message: The priority of “"to inform the unbelievers of the certainty they will obtain from our world"” This is the ultimate and essential purpose of Spiritist Doctrine. ((https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/885/o-que-eo-espiritismo/1320/capitulo-ii-nocoes-elementares-de-espiritismo/fim-providencial-das-manifestacoes-espiritas))

Final verdict of our analysis:

We concluded that the content of the communication is fully compliant to the teachings given to him by the Superior Spirits. The message serves as a warning to followers and scientists on Earth: The methodology of observation must be combined with morality and logic, and Spiritism does not lend itself to vain curiosity.

“"The usefulness of this communication lies not in revealing new scientific truths, but rather in reinforcing the..." pillars of spiritist conducta seriousness of the study, The rigor of reasoning and the safety during group practice. The promise of future proofs is an encouragement for good men to remain firm in rational faith, for the truth, which is calm, will prevail over violence and disbelief.” ((https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/894/revista-espirita-jornal-de-estudos-psicologicos-1860))

Under the title "INSTRUCTIONS FROM ALLAN KARDEC TO THE SPIRITISTS OF BRAZIL," in the book "Prayer According to the Gospel," we find a communication from a Spirit who presents himself, within the Sayão group—a Roustainguist group that took over the FEB (Brazilian Spiritist Federation) and diverted the Brazilian Spiritist Movement—under the name of Allan Kardec. Let us analyze this communication, making observations and proposing questions that could have put this mystifying Spirit in his place:

Instructions from Allan Kardec to the Spiritists of Brazil

I — EXHORTATION TO STUDY, CHARITY, AND UNIFICATION

Peace and love be with you.
May we once again, united by the bonds of brotherhood, study this doctrine of peace and love, of justice and hope, thanks to which we will find the narrow gate of future salvation—the indefinite and immortal joy for our humble souls.

Before addressing the points that constitute the objective of my statement, I must ask all of you who are listening to me—all of you spiritualists to whom I speak at this moment—to forgive me if, by chance, in the expression of my thoughts, you find something that offends you, some thorn that might wound the sensitivity of your heart.

The fulfillment of duty compels us to use frank, even blunt, language. That is why each of us has an individual and collective responsibility, and to uphold it, we resort to all means available to us, often without considering the limitations of our intelligence, which prevent us from expressing what we feel without frequently hurting the hearts of friends, for whom we only wish peace, love, and the sweetness of charity.

Certain that you will hear my plea; certain that, in speaking to spiritualists, I am speaking to a group of men full of benevolence, I have begun my small work, whose sole purpose is to release myself from serious commitments I have made to our Creator and Father!

Always compassionate and good, turning his merciful eyes to humanity enslaved by the errors and passions of the world, God makes the words of Christ a truth, and sends the Comforter—the Spirit of Truth—to speak openly of messianic revelation to that same forgotten Humanity, He who was led through the streets of bitterness, under the weight of the iniquities and ingratitude of men!

The way Jesus is spoken of is entirely devotional, emotional, without any trace of Kardec's careful terminology. Kardec constantly distinguishes the historical Christ-man from the function of "model and guide," analyzes moral teachings, and avoids this type of dramatic and sentimental portrayal as an argument. Here, Jesus is used as an affective trigger to legitimize the discourse that follows.

Spiritism was NEVER messianic, as it is a science, built using the methodology always explained by Kardec, with the collaboration of thousands of people spread throughout the world. The term "messianic" was how the task was viewed. mystic by Jean-Baptiste Roustaing. Kardec says, in "Spiritism in its Simplest Expression":

“"The first revelation was personified in Moses, the second in Christ, The third one does not have it in any individual.. The first two were individual., the third press conference; There you go. essential character of great importance. It is collective in the sense that it is not made or given as a privilege to any one person: consequently, no one can claim to be its exclusive prophet.; It was spread simultaneously across the Earth to millions of people of all ages and conditions, from the lowest to the highest on the scale, according to this prediction recorded by the author of the Acts of the Apostles: “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.” (Acts 2:17-18). It did not originate from any special cult, in order to one day serve as a connecting point for all.

As the centuries passed and the human spirit developed intellectually, God, in his wisdom, deemed that the time had come to invite mankind to meditate on the Gospel—a precious book of divine truths—which until then had been obscured by its literal meaning, due to the deficiency of human perception in understanding it spiritually.

Everywhere light has been shed; the promised Comforter has been revealed to Humanity, and peoples—according to their moral and intellectual preparedness—have received important missions aimed at accelerating the triumphant march of the Good News!

All were called: the Comforter did not fail to appear in any corner of the Earth in the name of that God of mercy, who does not desire the death of the sinner—nor the extermination of the ungrateful—but rather wishes to see them redeemed from the excesses of the flesh, from the obsession of instincts.

Therefore, this piece of land, which you call Brazil, was also given the Revelation of the Revelation, ...by establishing, before incarnating, commitments to your Spirits from which you have not yet been released. And forgive me for saying so: you have indeed delayed the fulfillment of these commitments and of serious duties, driven by feelings that are not appropriate to scrutinize now.

Here there is a direct and unequivocal reference to Roustaing's Gospels, and not to spiritist science:“The Spirits of the Lord come to bring to mankind the new revelation, which you may call, as we have already told you, "revelation of the revelation," and, through it, to enlighten and develop intelligences, to purify hearts in the crucible of science, charity, and love.”(Roustaing, OQE)

There is another doctrinal deviation here: the idea of a privileged national mission (“this piece of land… was also given the Revelation of the Revelation,” embodying special “commitments”). Kardec admits that peoples can have historical missions, but always with great prudence, without investing any country with a sacred role. The use of “Revelation of the Revelation” + Brazil is the ideological matrix of the entire myth subsequently reinforced in Brazil, Heart of the World, Homeland of the Gospel. It is a nationalist spiritualism that is not based on Kardecian methodology, but is functional in building a center of religious power in Brazil.

Ismael, your Guide, taking on the responsibility of leading you to the great temple of love and human fraternity, raised his banner, inscribed upon it — God, Christ, and Charity. Strong in dedication, animated by the mercy of God, which never fails the workers, his holy and evangelical voice echoed in all hearts, seeking to draw them into a single group where, united, they would have the strength of lions and the gentleness of doves; where, united, they could confront the full weight of human iniquities; where, bound by a single sentiment — that of love — they could worship the Father in Spirit and Truth; where the great wall of faith would rise, against which all the weapons of the enemies of Light would break; where, finally, a great dike could be formed against the tempestuous wave of passions, crimes, and vices that overwhelm all of Humanity!

In Kardec's philosophy, unity is... doctrinal and methodological, never organic and institutional under a single center. He explicitly rejects the idea of a "spiritualist pope" and centralized leadership. The discourse here is different: everyone should converge towards... a unique grouping, under the banner of Ishmael. It is the proposal for unification through submission to a “sacred” pole, precisely the path that Kardec rejects:

“"It is therefore better to have in a city one hundred groups of ten to twenty followers, in which none claims supremacy over the others, than a single society that unites them all. This fragmentation can in no way harm the unity of principles, provided that the banner is one and all are directed towards the same end" – Kardec, VE

This group was formed; Ishmael's voice was felt in hearts. But, like seeds sown on rocky ground, they did not find good soil for their roots, and when that good angel—that Messenger of God—thought he had within him friends and brothers capable of helping him in his great, holy, and good task, the seeds withered in the fire of passions, becoming embedded in the rock, despite the dew of divine mercy constantly bathing them for their revitalization.

There, where humility should have pitched its tent, pride erected its stronghold; there, where love should have risen, sublime and splendid, right up to Christ, indifference dug furrows, justice was called injustice, and brotherhood—dissension!

But should the gratitude and goodwill of others be sacrificed because of the ingratitude of some?

Should the humility of the disciple, perfectly aware of his duties, be sacrificed because of the pride of those who have already proclaimed themselves masters in their ignorance? No!

Thus, when the enemies of Light — when the spirit of darkness I considered the flag of Ishmael, symbol of, to be shattered. divine trinity; when the wicked voice already resounded in Space, glorifying the kingdom of darkness And cursing the name of the Martyr of Calvary, he took up his banner and had a small tent erected bearing the name — Fraternity!

A strongly mystical and even esoteric language, crowned with ideas contrary to Spiritism, with strong religious conceptions, contrary to what is shown in Heaven and Hell (Editora Mundo Maior – unadulterated edition).

Here, a narrative typical of a sectarian group is constructed:

1. There is a divine plan (Ishmael's flag).
2. He “almost” fails because of the men.
3. The “enemies of the Light” rejoice.
4. God/Ishmael intervenes and founds a new "chosen nucleus" (the so-called Brotherhood).

The psychological effect is clear: to legitimize a specific institution (the "Fraternity" group) as only faithful guardian of the divine plan, ...the "faithful remnant" surrounded by darkness. This is completely foreign to the way Kardec deals with societies and groups: he always relativizes, warns against local fascination, and subjects any group to the scrutiny of the whole of Spirits and reason, never sacralizing it.

This was, without a doubt, the point to which all the scattered forces should converge—all those who did not receive the seed of the pebble.

Certain that chance is a meaningless word, and witnesses to the events that led to the raising of this tent, all spiritualists had a sacred duty to come here and gather—to hear the sacred word from the good Guide Ishmael — The only one who directs the propaganda of the Doctrine in this part of the planet and the only one who has the responsibility for its progress and development..

Several conceptions contrary to Spiritism. There is no sacred word when it comes to Spirits, no matter what name they present themselves by: there are ideas and conceptions that must be analyzed in the light of reason. Ismael is a mystifying Spirit – perhaps the very one who writes this message – and one of the most intelligent (and, for that very reason, one of the most dangerous to the unwary). Note the word "unique" (which directs the propaganda of the Doctrine in this part of the planet and which is responsible for its progress and development), which is so absurdly false, since Spirits do not act alone, much less those who incite humanity to good. This idea is just another way to keep believers in their word in obsessive fascination.

From a Kardecian Spiritist point of view, this paragraph is a Red flag of fascination.:

• “"Sacred Word" of a Spirit;
• This Spirit is the "sole" director of the propaganda and the spread of the doctrine in an entire region.

Kardec insists that:

• no Spirit It must be accepted blindly;
• the truth results from a gathering of many Spirits, mediums, and independent centers, confronted by reason;
• any spirit that claims to privilege, exclusivity, absolute mission, unquestionable authority should be immediately put under suspicion (this is linked to descriptions of mystification and fascination in The Mediums' Book).

Here the text calls for exactly the opposite: critical renunciation in favor of the "sacred word" of a "single guide".

But, unfortunately, my friends, you have not yet been able to grasp the great significance of the word — Fraternity!

It's not a term, it's a fact; it's not an empty word, it's a feeling, without which you will always find yourselves too weak for this struggle that you yourselves cannot measure, such is its extraordinary magnitude!

Ishmael has his Temple, and upon it his banner — God, Christ, and Charity! Ishmael has his little tent, where he seeks to gather all his brothers — all those who have heard his word and accepted it as true: and it is called Fraternity!

Another anti-Spiritist point (in the Kardecian sense):

1. In Kardec's work, there is no such thing as “"Temple of a Spirit"”. The "temples" he acknowledges are, at most, those of conscience and moral practice. For him, the Spiritist institution is... school, laboratory, study group, not a sanctuary consecrated to a Guide.
2. The triad "God, Christ, and Charity" on a temple banner resembles a confessional motto, not a doctrinal concept. In Kardec's philosophy, charity is a natural consequence of understanding the law of justice, love, and charity; here it becomes a slogan on a sect's banner.

I ask you: Do you belong to the Fraternity? Do you work towards the construction of this Temple whose motto is: God, Christ, and Charity?

How, and in what way?

My friends! I may be unfair to you in what I am about to say: your work, done entirely according to—not the Doctrine—but according to what exclusively interests your feelings, cannot bear good fruit. This work, without regime, without discipline, can only, according to the doctrine you have embraced, bring thorns that tear your souls, poignant pains to your Spirits, because, by distorting the principles on which it rests, you give constant and fatal entry to that which, finding you divided by selfishness, pride, and vanity, will easily overwhelm you with the full weight of its iniquity.

It's almost comical, given the level of hypocrisy of this Spirit. If these words were applied to all those who do not study Spiritism where it truly exists – in Kardec's works – they would be absolutely justified… But this Spirit knows the ground he treads on well, which causes the central idea to be reversed as he speaks of himself.

However, would the same thing happen if you were united? Do you believe in the efficiency of a large army led by several generals, each with their own system, their own method of operation, and with divergent points of view? Never! Under those conditions you will only find defeat, because—note well—what you cannot do with the Gospel: unite yourselves for the love of good, your enemies do, uniting themselves for the love of evil!

They do not follow diverse guidelines, nor do they pursue diverse objectives; everything converges on the Spiritist Doctrine — Revelation of the Revelation — which does not suit them and which they need to destroy, for which they employ all their intelligence, all their love of evil, submitting themselves to a single direction!

New reference ridiculous to Roustaing's work. The pattern here is of millennialist victimhoodThe doctrine (actually, the Roustaingist reading under Ismael) is a "Revelation of the Revelation" persecuted by "enemies of the Light" who unite "out of love for evil." This type of Manichean dichotomy is foreign to Kardec, who has a much more nuanced view of Spirits and men. He does not speak of "enemies of Spiritism" organized in a single evil front; he speaks of ignorance, interests, bad influences, but always recommending calm, patience, discernment—never this climate of cosmic war around a specific temple.

The struggle grows daily, for the will of God, initiating His creatures into the mysteries of the afterlife, becomes ever more evident. However, given your Spirits' precarious state in the face of the Doctrine, as I have just described, I ask: — With what element do they, your Spirits, rely on in the daunting task they are about to undertake, filled with responsibility?

In what corner of the Earth does the great tabernacle already stand where you will raise your thoughts; in what corner of the Earth have you built the great wall against which the weapons of your adversaries will be broken?

Is it possible that, like the five foolish virgins, you have completely lost sight of your peace? Should you count on the others, who do not sleep and who anxiously await the coming of their Lord?

But if that is so, how can we make use of the lessons that are constantly given to you in order to make your vigilance a truth and your prayer a holiness?

If that's the case, where are the fruits of that fruitful daily labor of your friends from beyond the grave?

Have your archives, filled with communications, perhaps rotted away, eaten away by moths—touched by mold?

Where, I ask again, is the security of your faith, the stability of your belief, if, having a single doctrine for strong and unwavering support, you subdivide it, multiply it according to the whims of your individualities, without considering the collective that could give you strength, if you constituted a homogeneous element, perfectly prepared by those in charge of revelation?

But where is the advantage of subdivisions? Where is the real interest for the Doctrine and its development, in the dispersion you make of your great whole, thus already giving a terrible example to the uninitiated, since you preach fraternity and yet divide yourselves, full of dissension?

Where are the advantages of such a course of action? Are they in the diversity of names you give to the groups? Why is that? Is it because this or that group has received a greater gift from the divine patrimony? Is it because it suits the propaganda you are promoting?

Here, he is merely paving the way, with despicable ideas, so that he may later come up with the solution to the "division".

But for propaganda, we need its building blocks. I ask: — where is the school for mediums? Does it exist?

Do those men who are willing to study the mysteries of the Creator with you, preparing their Spirits for the resurgence of the afterlife, perhaps find in you disciplined instruments—mediums perfectly aware of the important role they play in the human family and filled with that seriousness which gives an idea of the greatness of our Doctrine?

Or is your propaganda limited solely to talking about Spiritism? Or are your individual and collective duties and responsibilities limited to making a fool of those who observe you, judging you to be crazy and visionaries?

My friends! I know how painful all this is that I tell you, for each of my thoughts is a pain that deeply affects my spirit. I know that your consciences perfectly feel the full weight of the truths I expose to you. But, as I told you at the beginning: — we have responsibilities and commitments undertaken, from which we seek to free ourselves by all means at our disposal!

If my mission on Earth is not yet complete; if I still deserve from the Lord the grace to come and clarify the doctrine that was revealed to me there, giving you new knowledge compatible with the development of your intelligences; if I see that each passing day of your existence—illuminated by the sublime light of revelation, without you producing work worthy of the grace granted to you—is a cause of scandal for your own consciences; I must use this blunt language of a friend, so that you, truly aware of your duties as Christians and Spiritists, may unite in a great fraternal group, where—strengthened by mutual support and the protection of the good—you may face the extraordinary work that you must accomplish for the emancipation of your Spirits, work that will undoubtedly cause a great revolution in Humanity, not only in the areas of Science and Religion, but also in customs!

I tell you once and for all, my friends: — Your work, your labors cannot remain within the narrow confines of goodwill and propaganda, without the elementary means indicated by the simplest reason.

It is completely irrelevant to refer you to the words of Jesus Christ when he said that—light was not made to be put under a bushel. It is irrelevant and has no application, because you do not possess your own light!

Create light through your efforts; illuminate your whole being with the sweet clarity of virtues; discipline yourselves through good morals in the Temple of Ishmael, a temple where God is worshipped, Christ is venerated, and Charity is cultivated. Then, yes; distribute the light, it belongs to you!

The phrase means, in practice:

• You only have genuine "light" if you Disciplinary within the Temple of Ishmael.
• Outside of his work, his job "causes intoxication to the eye," yields "bitter" fruits, etc.

It is a mechanism of controlThe criterion for the authenticity of doctrine (reason, universality, method) is shifted to the criterion of belonging to the “right” temple”. This is a denial of the principle of the universality of Spiritist revelation.

And it belongs to you, because it is a sacred product of your own effort, a brilliant achievement of your Spirit — engaged in the sublime struggles of Truth.

Outside of these terms, you may produce works that intoxicate the eye, but never works that speak sincerely to the heart. You may produce strong emotions, which is why many gladly indulge in the worship of the marvelous; however, they will never leave the gentle impressions of Truth vibrating the strings of divine love in the great human heart.

Outside of this orthodox convention, it is possible that plants may grow in your groups, but it is also quite possible that their fruits will be quite bitter, quite poisonous, determining, contrary to what should happen, the moral death of your Spirit — the destruction, from the very foundation, of your Temple of work!

If the Gospel does not truly become a shield in your spirits, who will be able to help you, since Revelation tends to absorb all consciences, emancipating your century? If the Gospel in your hands only serves as profane books, which delight the soul and enchant the mind, who will be able to help you at the moment of this planetary revolution that is already being felt, which will give dominion of the Earth to the good, prepared for its development, which will cause the transmigration of the obsessed and hardened to the world that is proper to them?

Kardec does indeed speak of Earth's transition from a world of expiation to a world of regeneration, and of the migration of refractory Spirits to less advanced worlds. But:

1. He avoids all apocalyptic tone From "imminent planetary revolution" to frighten.
2. He doesn't tie This process does not belong to any "temple" or "movement" directed by a particular Spirit.
3. He insists that everything is done according to general laws, without miracles, without privilege, without clergy.

Here, the same general idea (transition, migration) is appropriate as rhetorical device of urgency Serving the Temple of Ishmael: if you don't align yourself with the Brotherhood, with this "extraordinary work," you risk being among the "transmigrated.".

What will become of you—who will be able to help you—if the lamp of your spirit lacks the element of light with which you can see the unexpected arrival of Christ, bearing witness to the value of the good and the moral weakness of the wicked and the ungrateful?

If you have been called to the wedding feast of the Son of your King, why do your spirits not take on the garments worthy of the banquet, exchanging with us the toast of love and charity for the fellowship of Christ with his people?

If everything is ready, if only the guests are missing, why do you give up your place to the lame and crippled who, though last, will be first at the abundant table of divine charity?

The evangelical parable is used in a way exclusivist and invertedThose who don't enter the "tent" lose their place; the "lame and crippled" (those outside) will occupy it. The subtext is: Don't lose the privilege. of being in the “right” group (Fraternity under Ismael). In Kardec, the same parable serves to show that the “first” (privileged, instructed, orthodox) can be the last, but always in a moral sense, never institutional (“entering the temple of such a guide”).

Have these points from the Gospel of Jesus Christ, despite the Revelation, not yet provoked your meditation?

This echo that reverberates throughout the atmosphere of your planet, saying — The times have come! — is it a mockery from God's messengers, intended to terrify your spirits?

Is it possible for us to prepare for the times to come, living amidst dissension and struggle, as if we did not constitute a single family, guided by a single doctrine to govern our actions and feelings?

Is it possible for us to prepare for the times to come by constantly highlighting scandal, presenting ourselves to men as ambitious individuals who do not hesitate to seize even divine things for the pleasure of the flesh and the satisfaction of worldly passions?

But it would simply be an obsession of the Spirit—to pretend to be freed from one's commitments and to enter the kingdom of God covered in these human passions and miseries!

This would be tantamount to not believing in the very thing you claim to believe in; it would be mocking your Creator who, while not demanding sacrifice from you, asks that you not turn His house of prayer into a den of thieves!

My friends! Without charity there is no salvation — without brotherhood there can be no unity.

Unite, therefore, through brotherhood, under the watchful eye of good Ishmael, O Lord, your Guide and Protector. Save yourselves through Charity, distributing good everywhere, indiscriminately, without hidden thoughts, to those who ask you for at least a moral testimony of your faith, which may compel them to respect in you the well-intentioned and truly Christian individual.

The sentence encapsulates the ideological core of the text:

1. The union is not only based on principles (as Kardec proposes), but “under scrutiny”"From a Guide, with a capital G.".
2. This Guide is "yours," national/regional.
3. The figure of “"Protector"” It is centralized and personalistic.

Kardec accepts the idea of individual and collective guardian spirits, but Never transforms them into regulatory authority Regarding doctrine: Protection is intimate, moral, and silent; it does not translate into exclusive revelations, banners, temples bearing the name of the Spirit, nor into a monopoly of direction.

Regarding the propaganda you seek to carry out, solely to attract a greater number of followers to your fold, I will say—if the easiest means you have found are the healing of your obsessed brothers, home visits, and the expansion of fluids—then you have a modest task for your meditation and study.

And, reading and understanding, call upon me whenever you wish to hear my word, and I will come to clarify the points you find doubtful—I will come, in new terms if necessary, to show you that this aspect which seems easy for the propagation of the Doctrine—is the greatest obstacle thrown in your path—it is the stone placed at the wheels of your triumphant chariot—it will ultimately be the cause of your disastrous fall, if you do not know how to guide yourselves with the discernment required of those who engage in such a great cause.

Typical closing of a spirit that proposes itself as permanent oracle. In terms of Spiritist criticism:

• A psychological dependence is created between the medium/group and this communicator.
• Discouraged universal control (confront communications, seek other independent sources) because “he” is always available to clarify.

In the Kardecian method, a serious Spirit:

• It encourages methodical doubt;
• It encourages rational examination and comparison;
• It avoids positioning itself as the sole source of information.

Here the opposite occurs.

May God grant that the spiritualists to whom I speak, those men who have been given the grace to know in spirit and truth the Doctrine of Christ, have the goodwill to understand me—the goodwill to see in my words only the interest of the love I dedicate to them.

Allan Kardec

The entire text shifts Spiritism away from philosophical-moral science of collective revelation for a messianic religious system centered on:

• a national guide appointed (Ishmael),
• a specific temple/flag/motto,
• an institutional group (“Fraternity”) presented as the elected core.

Several passages illustrate exactly what Kardec describes as signs of mystification and fascinationA spirit that declares itself unique, that demands obedience, that sacralizes its own word, that places itself at the center of revelation in a region of the planet.

Points that are partially true (need for study, discipline, seriousness in mediumship, danger of dispersion) are used as hook to legitimize the sectarian solution: centralization under Ishmael and under the "Brotherhood".

The rhetoric is strongly religious, emotional, with millenarian traits, in contrast to Kardec's rational, analytical, and methodical style. Even when addressing themes dear to Spiritism (planetary transition, migration of Spirits, importance of the Gospel), it does so within a specific framework. confessional, no scientific-philosophical.

The book in question – Prayer According to the Gospel, attributed to the spirit of Allan Kardec – ends as follows:

The House of Ishmael
The Brazilian Spiritist Federation is a civil society. religious, educational, cultural and philanthropic, endowed with legal personality and recognized as a Federal, State (RJ) and Federal District (DF) Public Utility, according to the following decrees: nº 47.695/1960, nº 4.765/1934 and nº 7.399/1983, respectively.

Its purpose and objectives are:
– the theoretical and practical study of Spiritism;
– the observance and dissemination of its teachings;
– the practice of spiritual, moral and material charity;
– and, finally, the integration of the Spiritist Societies of Brazil into its organization.

It is the responsibility of its National Federative Council to develop, expand, and coordinate the plans of the Federative Organization, aiming to achieve complete harmony of thought, as well as unity of program and action.

The Brazilian [non-]Spiritist Federation, in an incredibly hypocritical manner, still proudly displays the title of "House of Ishmael." Truly, this mystifying Spirit has made its home in this "Vatican" of the Brazilian [non-]Spiritist Movement. It declares itself a religious civil society, causing a deviation from the purpose of Spiritism and, with great hypocrisy, claims to observe the dissemination of its teachings, while in practice it has spent the last few years... 130 years gradually contradicting them. The reason for this article, incidentally, is due to the recent publication of a video on the FEB Editora account, spreading the false idea that the communication analyzed above was from Kardec, inciting unification, a project pursued by the Brazilian Spiritualist Vatican (aka FEB) since approximately 1890 (as we have already demonstrated in...). article about the deviations of the FEB).

It is up to all True Spiritists defend the truth about Spiritism and demonstrate it. all These deviations – the attempt to replace the Promised Comforter with a religious, dogmatic, ridiculous, and anti-doctrinal version!

I had been waiting for this work for a long time, without knowing exactly what to expect. Upon hearing the news that the authors had returned to Spirits such as André Luiz and Emmanuel, many were internally distraught and prematurely judged the work without yet knowing it.

Having finished reading it—a task that, honestly, I will have to do again, with even more attention—I must say that it can only reflect the high standard of the title it bears. Far from being an affront to reason, it is a product of intelligence and inspiration. It rescues the Spiritist methodology, demonstrates the true role of Kardec, now forgotten and undervalued by Spiritists themselves, and becomes a bridge for this Spiritist Movement now established, for the resumption of true Spiritism. Without offending sensibilities, the work demonstrates, in an excellent way, that we have not been abandoned and that, returning to Kardec, we will easily and firmly separate what is useful from what is not—as the authors themselves have done. Far from inciting persecution or criticism, I believe we should encourage the reading of this work, respecting the time and freedom of each reader.. Again, I believe it should be seen as a safe bridge to the firm ground of doctrinal truth.

I can't go much further than that, because I think the importance of the work requires dedicated reading from everyone who cares about Spiritist themes. The title of the work and the fact that it demonstrates that there is indeed much to be gained from André Luiz and Emmanuel will surely attract the attention of many. The work also offers many teachings and much reflection, becoming, at least for me, intensely moving.

I conclude by expressing my gratitude for the effort and dedication, for which there is no reward other than the happiness of doing good, to Paulo Henrique de Figueiredo and all others involved in this work. Thank God, the times of restoration have arrived, where each of us can find grateful compensation in the task of replacing the bricks of the building that is being constructed. more than two thousand years ago, by Spirits dedicated to good. Thanks be to God!

If you choose to purchase through the following link, you will also be supporting our efforts: https://amzn.to/49QFaxs

The work known as “"Manuscript of Purgatory"” It occupies a particular place within Catholic literature of a mystical nature. Its narrative describes an ongoing exchange between the religious Sister M. d. IC. and the spirit of the deceased Sister MG., whose voice, according to the account, instructs, admonishes, clarifies, and comments on his own condition in the post-mortem state, over the course of years. The text, upon being evaluated and declared free of doctrinal error by theologians and ecclesiastical authorities, acquires internal spiritual and disciplinary value.

This institutional recognition, however, exposes a theological and disciplinary dilemma. Official Catholic doctrine denies the possibility of spontaneous and habitual communication between the living and the dead., allowing it only under the regime of an exceptional miracle and for strictly defined purposes. In catechetical terms, it is a extraordinary event, not a natural law., and any human attempt at direct evocation should be rejected, traditionally associating it with superstition or the devil.

However, the narrative content of the book contradicts this formulation. There is no episodic phenomenology. There is continuity, progressive instruction, detailed description of the communicator's spiritual state, and temporal regularity. In short, there is mediumship, regardless of the devotional nomenclature applied. Therefore, the work presents an irreconcilable tension between the stated dogmatic formulation and the described spiritual practice.

The strategy of permanent exception

To resolve this conflict, the work employs a rhetorical device: it qualifies the phenomenon as a "privilege," a "visit permitted by God," and therefore not as natural mediumistic communication, but as a “singular mystical grace.” This semantic shift does not alter the nature of the phenomenon; it merely protects it institutionally.

This is the same historical mechanism used to justify the visionary experiences of Catholic mystics—be it Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Ávila, or the Curé d'Ars—: when it occurs under ecclesiastical tutelage, Dialogue with the afterlife is a "miracle."“; when it occurs outside of it, is it "illusion", "heresies", "spiritism" or "demonic action"?“. The criterion is neither ontological nor moral — it is jurisdictional.

Natural law versus theological privilege

The contrast with the Spiritist methodological perspective is instructive. Allan Kardec does not define the phenomenon as a mystical concession, but as a law of spiritual nature: Spirits communicate because they live, think, remember, and inhabit another dimension of reality, and not because they are invoked under miraculous circumstances.. The Kardecian approach requires:

• systematic observation
• critique and comparison of messages
• universality of education
• deception control
• absence of personal authority as a criterion of truth

The Catholic manuscript, however, uses the opposite criterion: Ecclesiastical authority = legitimacy; absence of ecclesiastical authority = demonic suspicion.. There is no methodology; there is hierarchical ratification. The phenomenon is identical — only the validation structure differs.

The irreversible internal contradiction

If, according to dogma, true spiritual communication is extremely rare and always extraordinary, how can this be justified? a recorded communication spanning over more than a decade, With regular frequency and progressive detail? An exception with temporal permanence ceases to be an exception and takes the form of... empirical norm. The manuscript, therefore, It does not confirm Catholic dogma — it violates it through practice..

The text aims to defend orthodoxy; however, by documenting a process of spiritual exchange in a natural way, it inadvertently reveals... the inadequacy of prohibition and the artificiality of the "restricted miracle" as a disciplinary mechanism..

Conclusion

The “Manuscript of Purgatory” serves as an unwitting testament to the viability and continuity of dialogue between the two planes of existence—precisely what Catholic doctrine maintains is impossible except in miraculous exceptions. The work does not demonstrate the fragility of the spiritual phenomenon, but rather the fragility of... discursive control regime over the phenomenon. The contradiction does not lie in the spiritual fact—it lies in an institutional attempt to monopolize it.

The manuscript, instead of denying mediumship, confirms it—it merely changes its name to preserve it within the realm of clerical exclusivity. What is thus proven is not the impossibility of spiritual exchange, but the historical effort of the Church to... managing access to the invisible, ...and not to deny it in its essence.

Introduction

Spiritism, codified by Allan Kardec in the 19th century, presented itself as a doctrine based on the observation of spiritual phenomena and on... search for rational knowledge This text discusses the nature of the soul and its relationship to the material world. It questions whether this proposal – formulated within a scientific context dominated by empiricist positivism – can be considered compatible with contemporary models of science.

During the late 19th and much of the 20th century, it was common to identify "science" strictly with positivist empiricism, that is, with obtaining knowledge only through... observable, repeatable facts and verified by the senses. This reductionism, characteristic of Comtean positivism and logical empiricism, generated later criticism for ignoring important inferential and theoretical aspects of scientific practice. Today, the philosophy of science recognizes alternative models to mere empiricism, including the method. hypothetical-deductive (testing logical predictions of hypotheses) and conceptions rationalists who value logical coherence and inference in domains where direct experimentation is unfeasible (such as cosmology, paleontology, archaeology, or studies on consciousness).

In this article, we comparatively analyze these models of science and the methodological model proposed by Kardec for Spiritism, discussing the extent to which there is compatibility. It is argued, in particular, that: (a) contemporary science admits forms of indirect validation (a) hypotheses (through inference, modeling, and theoretical coherence), not limited to strict empiricism; (b) entities not directly observable – for example, subatomic particles or certain astrophysical objects – can be scientifically accepted, provided their effects are detectable and their existence can be indirectly tested; (c) Spiritism outlined a systematic method of investigation, based on the repetition of independent mediumistic communications with control of variables and comparison of results, seeking consistency; (d) the predominant rejection of Spiritism in the current scientific community does not derive, properly speaking, from a flaw in its investigative method, but rather from its non-materialist ontology, that is, metaphysical assumptions (the existence of immortal spirits) that conflict with the methodological naturalism dominant in science. We structured the discussion in the following sections: first, we reviewed the main models of science (empiricist-positivist, hypothetical-deductive, and scientific-rational); then we described the method of Spiritism according to Kardec; then we analyzed the compatibilities and limitations between the two; finally, we presented the conclusions.

Contemporary Science Models

Empiricist-Positivist Model

In the model empiricist-positivist, Derived from the positivism of Auguste Comte and, later, from the logical empiricism of the Vienna Circle, the ideal science is that which is based solely on observable and measurable facts, obtained through the senses or instruments, with repeatable verification. All knowledge must be derived from direct experience, avoiding metaphysical hypotheses. Within this framework, a scientific proposition needs to be confirmed by repeated sensory observation; anything that cannot be directly observed or experienced would be considered "unscientific." This view led to an emphasis on controlled laboratory experiments and rigorous quantification. Undoubtedly, this model was crucial in consolidating the experimental methodology in the natural sciences. However, subsequent philosophers of science have identified serious limitations in this strict empiricism.. First, pure observations do not exist: every observation is guided by theory (as noted by Norwood Hanson and others), so relying solely on the senses would ignore the role of hypotheses in the construction of facts. Second, the requirement of strict verification has proven problematic – as the logical positivists themselves pointed out when evolving towards a notion of probabilistic “confirmation,” since few theories can be conclusively verified. In fact, Popper criticized verificationism., Arguing that a thousand favorable observations do not prove a theory, but a single contrary one can refute it; hence Popper's proposal to use falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation. Furthermore, positivist empiricism tended to completely reject any discussion of entities or causes not directly accessible to the senses – a stance that was later considered excessively restrictive. Today it is recognized that identifying science with simply collecting observable data is a naive stance.. The actual scientific practice itself was never purely inductive: even during the height of positivism, scientists like Maxwell or Darwin constructed theoretical models to explain the data, going beyond "what is seen." In short, the empiricist-positivist model bequeathed the emphasis on objectivity and experimental repetition, but it was superseded by more comprehensive conceptions.

Hypothetical-Deductive Model

The model hypothetical-deductive This describes science as a process in which hypotheses and theories are formulated and then testable logical consequences are deduced by comparing them with empirical data. This conception took shape in the scientific method of Galileo and Newton, and was made explicit in the 20th century by philosophers such as Karl Popper, who emphasized the role of... conjectures and refutations. In this approach, the goal is not to definitively verify the theories, but rather corroborate or falsify them through rigorous testing. A scientific hypothesis must do predictions or implications that can be confronted with observations: if the predictions fail, the hypothesis is refuted (or must be revised); if they pass the tests, it gains confidence (although it is never proven absolutely). This model addressed problems that naive empiricism could not solve: for example, it allowed us to understand that science advances by proposing creative ideas (hypotheses) and not just by collecting raw facts. The success of the hypothetical-deductive method is evident in the physical and biological sciences: complex theories (such as atomic theory, Darwinian evolution, or relativity) could be accepted because they generated experimentally confirmed predictions. Popperian philosophy of science formalized this ideal, requiring falsifiability – the possibility of proving the theory wrong – as a criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience.. This implied rejecting theories that became so flexible as to explain any result (adjusting ad hoc to the data) and therefore escape refutation. The hypothetico-deductive model, therefore, values logic and testabilityEven unobservable entities can enter the realm of science, provided that the hypotheses about them imply measurable results. For example, 20th-century physicists postulated the existence of invisible subatomic particles (such as the neutrino). deducing effects that they would cause and seeking this evidence. Thus, the hypothetical-deductive method It broadened the scope of science beyond what is immediately visible., Without abandoning rigor: the theoretical is accepted, but confrontation with something verifiable is required (even if indirectly). This balance has become a core element of contemporary scientific conception. Even so, philosophers have noted that in the actual practice of science, hypotheses are not tested in isolation (Quine-Duhem) and that creativity and historical context influence which hypotheses are considered – ideas explored by Thomas Kuhn when showing that science works by... paradigms and scientific revolutions, more than by a simple logical algorithm. This does not invalidate the hypothetical-deductive model, but tempers it: it is understood today that the scientific method is not entirely linear or infallible, It is not a special scientific method, but rather a human construct subject to revisions. As Paul Feyerabend stated, "the idea of a special scientific method is a fairy tale."“[1] – meaning that in practice there is a variety of methods and strategies, not a single recipe.

Scientific-Rational Model

Finally, we can talk about a “rational” scientific model” or rationalist, prevalent in domains where direct and repeatable experimentation is difficult or impossible. In these fields, science operates primarily by logical inferences from indirect evidence, The construction of coherent theoretical models and the rational analysis of available observational data. Examples include cosmology (which deals with unique events such as the origin of the universe), historical geology and paleontology (which reconstruct the history of Earth and life from fossil records), archaeology (which infers past civilizations from artifacts), and even cutting-edge areas such as research on consciousness and the mind. In these cases, the scientific method needs to be flexible: often phenomena cannot be reproduced in the laboratory, so alternative methods are sought. traces, clues and explanatory coherence. The criterion for scientific validity here rests on... inferential validity and in adherence to other established knowledge, as well as in the possibility of making predictions. indirect (For example, cosmology makes predictions about observable traces today, such as cosmic microwave background radiation, to confirm theories about the Big Bang). Indirect validity becomes crucial.A theory is considered scientific if it is capable of logically explaining a variety of facts and is susceptible to some type of test, even if indirect or statistical. This implies admitting entities not directly observable provided they have explanatory power and are accessible. somehow to the investigation. No scientist has ever directly "seen" an electron or a black hole., For example, but the community accepts them as real because it is possible. interact with them indirectly, ...observing their measurable effects and controlling for those effects through systematic experiments or observations. In contemporary philosophy of science, this position is supported by schools of thought such as... realism of entities, according to which it is rational to believe in the existence of unobservable entities if we have as produce phenomena from them or detect them indirectly[2]. Thus, the rigid distinction between "observable" and "unobservable" is softened: as long as something leaves... footprints Reliable in the sensible world, it can fall within the scope of science. This scientific-rational model also emphasizes the logical coherence and theoretical integration. In applied mathematics and theoretical physics, for example, invisible structures or symmetries are often proposed, and if they bring unity and confirmed predictions, the scientific community adopts them – even if direct empirical confirmation takes decades (a typical case being the Higgs boson, theoretically predicted in the 1960s and only detected in 2012). Another characteristic of the rational model is to value the... inference by analogy and consistencyInferring causes from similarities in patterns with other phenomena. In short, modern science is not just "seeing is believing," but also... reasoning in order to believe – although always with the requirement of not contradicting empirical data.

It is important to note that these three models are not mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. Real scientific practice combines empirical experimentation, hypothesis formulation and testing, and the rational construction of comprehensive theories. Chemistry, for example, relied on reproducible experiments (empiricism), but also on deductive atomic hypotheses and theoretical models. Paleontology uses both empirical evidence (fossils) and rational inferences to construct unobserved scenarios. Recognizing this plurality of methods It avoids reducing "science" to a single stereotype and allows us to more fairly evaluate unconventional knowledge, such as Spiritism, from different methodological angles.

Spiritism according to Kardec

Allan Kardec, pseudonym of Hippolyte Léon Denizard Rivail, structured Spiritism starting in 1857 with the publication of The Book of Spirits, followed by The Mediums' Book (1861), The Gospel According to Spiritism (1864), The Genesis (1868), among other works. From the beginning, Kardec presented Spiritism not as a revealed religion based on blind faith, but as a science and philosophy focused on the study of a "new order of phenomena"—the manifestations of Spirits—and the moral consequences of this discovery. In What is Spiritism? (1859), Kardec defines it as “a science that deals with the nature, origin and destiny of Spirits, and their relations with the physical world” (also bringing an ethical-religious aspect resulting from this knowledge). Here, we are interested in examining the method adopted by Kardec to investigate and validate Spiritist knowledge, comparing it with scientific criteria.

Kardec's method: observation, reason, and universal control.

Kardec was not a natural scientist by training, but an educator with a strong foundation in pedagogy and rationalist philosophy (influenced by thinkers such as Pestalozzi and the French spiritualist tradition). When faced with the phenomena of "table turning" and mediumistic communications, he adopted an investigative stance and... critique. His first step was to gather and observe facts: mediumistic sessions in different groups, where supposedly invisible intelligences communicated through mediums. Kardec applied a strategy of systematic comparison of these communications. Instead of taking an isolated spiritual revelation as absolute truth (a common practice in spiritualist circles of the time), he collected messages from multiple mediums in different places, with no connection between them, and compared them with each other. He thus discarded contradictions and retained the points of convergence. This procedure originated what he called... Universal Control of the Teaching of Spirits[3][4]. As explained in the Introduction of The Gospel According to Spiritism (item II), no individual communicating spirit or isolated medium could have the authority to dictate the doctrine; the guarantee of authenticity would lie in agreement spontaneous and repeated transmission of content by numerous Spirits, through various independent mediums and in various locations. “"There is only one serious guarantee for the teachings of the Spirits: the agreement that exists between the revelations they spontaneously make, using a large number of mediums unknown to each other and in various places."” — wrote Kardec[3]. If a medium obtained a new or "exotic" theory brought by a single Spirit, that idea would remain isolated and should be received with reservation; only if identical instructions Even if these ideas arose independently in various centers, one could recognize in them a general teaching from superior Spirits.[5]. “"Spiritism could not be the work of a single Spirit, nor of a single medium; it (the doctrine) could only emerge from the collective work controlled by one another."” – Kardec summarized in The Genesis[4]. Here we see a clear analogy with the scientific principle of intersubjective reproducibilityInstead of a laboratory, Kardec organized a network of correspondents and mediumistic groups that acted as replicated "experiments," and he functioned as a compiler and critical evaluator of the results.

In addition to this universal control, Kardec established another fundamental criterion: the control of reason[6]. He recommended that Everything the Spirits taught should be subjected to the scrutiny of logic and common sense. humans. If any spiritual communication contained theory “"in clear contradiction with common sense, rigorous logic, and the positive data already acquired"”, Therefore, it should be rejected, no matter how venerable the spiritual name that signed it.[6]. In other words, Kardec did not abandon critical thinking. No medium or spirit possessed infallibility.; Doctrinal consistency and broad agreement were valued more than the supposedly sacred origin of the message. The Mediums' Book, In his work, which is practically a methodological manual for investigating spiritual phenomena, Kardec dedicated chapters to warning against fraud, illusion, and spiritual mystification. He acknowledged that Inferior or deceiving spirits They could spread falsehoods, even using respectable names, and only a rational and comparative examination could expose them.[7][6]. In this sense, Spiritism aimed to... to elevate the study of "spirits" to the status of an observational science., leaving the realm of arbitrary mysticism. “"Until Allan Kardec applied the scientific method to the testimony of Spirits, communications through mediums were considered divine revelations, subject to the realm of blind faith and not rational or positive thought."” – observes Figueiredo[8]. Kardec's merit was precisely in making a "revolution" in this approach: subjecting the supposed revelations to methodical scrutiny, collecting them in large quantities, classifying them, testing their internal consistency, and comparing them with knowledge from other areas (science, philosophy). He transformed what was previously a matter of religious belief (communications from beyond the grave) into an object of structured study, thus founding, in his words, “"a new science, the science of spiritism"”.

It is important to emphasize that Kardec He distinguished two parts in spiritualist science.: one experimental part, “relating to manifestations in general” (especially physical phenomena, such as table turning, rapping, materializations), and a philosophical part, “relating to intelligent manifestations” (the content of spiritual communications)[9]. He himself states in the Introduction of The Book of Spirits: “Spiritist science comprises two parts: one experimental, […] and the other philosophical, relating to intelligent manifestations. He who has only observed the first is in the position of one who knows physics only through recreational experiments, without having penetrated the core of the science.”[9]. In other words, examining curious mediumistic phenomena without extracting principles from them would be superficial knowledge; core of the doctrine It lies in the teachings transmitted by the Spirits on fundamental questions (life after death, moral laws, etc.), the study of which requires depth and reflection. Even so, Kardec emphasizes that this philosophical study must be done with... rigorous method: “the knowledge […] is far too profound and extensive to be acquired in any way other than through persevering study, done in silence and contemplation”[10]. He compares spiritist investigators to "diligent students" and the instructing Spirits to "professors" who have mastered the subject.[11]. This analogy makes it clear that Kardec viewed the process as a partnership between observation/experimentation (the human part of collecting and analyzing communications) and theoretical instruction (the spiritual aspect, bringing knowledge that humanity alone might not attain).

Furthermore, Kardec subjected emerging concepts of Spiritism to refinement. logical-deductive. For example, when investigating phenomena involving tables turning, he formulated the hypothesis of... perispirit – a semi-material envelope linking the spirit to the body – to explain how spirits could act upon matter. This hypothesis came from observations, but also from inferences based on what the Spirits themselves communicated. In the final chapter of The Mediums' Book, Kardec discusses the theory of psychic leverage and the fluidic action of spirits on objects, demonstrating his concern in to provide a coherent explanatory framework to the phenomena. Often, Kardec proceeded like a scientist, deducing consequences from his spiritual hypotheses and asking the Spirits if such consequences were valid., in a rational dialogue. An illustrative example is the question of density of the perispiritThe spirits told him that only the least evolved spirits produced strong physical effects (knocks, movement of objects) because they were "more materialized." Kardec then deduced that this must mean that their "spiritual body" (perispirit) was made of denser matter, giving them physical strength, and questioned whether even elevated spirits... could They could produce physical effects if they wanted to. The answer was that the higher spirits They have moral strength. And when they need physical effects, they make use of inferior spirits as "executors," just as adult humans resort to porters for manual labor.[12][13]. From this exchange, Kardec inferred the concept: “"Since the perispirit is to the spirit what the body is to man, and since its greater density corresponds to lesser spiritual superiority, this density replaces muscular strength in the spirit."”, Therefore, spirits with a dense perispirit have more power over the "fluids" to cause physical effects.[14]. Here we see Kardec articulating observation (the phenomenon of the tables) + hypothesis (perispirit of variable density) + logical deduction (density implies physical force) + indirect testing (asking the spirits and verifying if it does not contradict other information). This dynamic is very close to the hypothetical-deductive method adapted to the circumstances (with the peculiarity that the "experimenters" and "observers" include disembodied intelligences).

In his later works, Kardec made explicit the character progressive and critical of Spiritism. Far from asking for uncritical adherence, he wrote that “"Spiritists should only believe after they understand."”[15]. In other words, rational understanding precedes acceptance – a principle that distanced him from both blind mysticism and religious dogmatism. He even declares in Spiritist Magazine: “We wanted to understand [the explanations] and not believe them blindly; […] we wanted to make Spiritism a science of reasoning and not of credulity.”[16]. This phrase, from 1867, clearly shows that Kardec viewed the Spiritist endeavor as a rational science, which should be based on evidence (even if partially provided by the spirits themselves) and on sound logical inferences. He adds that “"The theory founded on experience was the brake that prevented superstitious credulity […] from causing it [Spiritism] to stray from its path."”[16]. In other words, by constructing theory only after accumulating reliable and consistent facts, the Spiritist movement was prevented from drifting into rampant superstition or individual fantasies. This methodological care is frequently ignored by modern critics, who tend to equate Spiritism with arbitrary supernatural beliefs; in fact, as authors such as Figueiredo (2016, 2019) argue, Kardec implemented a genuine research program. in the 19th century, with criteria for source control, requirements for consistency, and openness to revisions.

To summarize, we can list the main elements of the original Kardecist method:

• Observation of mediumistic phenomena (both physical and intellectual) in a systematic way, recording communications and occurrences.
• Basic hypothesis of the existence of Spirits as intelligent agents behind the phenomena and mediumship; and auxiliary hypotheses (such as the existence of the perispirit, spiritual fluids, etc.) to mechanically explain the observed effects.
• Distributed experimentation and replication: conducting numerous sessions and communications with different mediums, in different locations, to verify the qualitative repeatability of the messages and phenomena.
• Universal Remote ControlCross-comparison of the obtained content; acceptance only of what appears in a consistent and spontaneous manner in multiple independent sources.[3]. Rejection of isolated revelations or those that contradict the overall picture.
• Submission to logic and known factsAny proposed Spiritist principle must be in accordance with recognized scientific and moral data (for example, Kardec engaged with knowledge from astronomy, geology, and biology of his time in...). The Genesis, (attempting to reconcile the information from the spirits with academic facts). If there were a clash, or if the message were inherently illogical, reason and evidence would prevail against the supposedly spiritual message.[6].
• Deduction and theoretical coherenceThe collected spiritual teachings were organized rationally, drawing logical consequences and linking them into a unified philosophy. Kardec sought to give conceptual unity to the Spiritist Doctrine (for example, elaborating the law of cause and effect, the plurality of existences, the spirit scale of spirits, etc.) in a manner analogous to a scientist formulating theories from data.
• Practical and moral purposeAlthough not a "methodological" aspect in the strict sense, it is worth mentioning that Kardec viewed the moral consistency like a seal of truth. He expected that a doctrine originating from superior spirits would promote ethical improvement. Therefore, communications that led to evil, discord, or violated the principles of fraternity would be suspect. This recalls the pragmatic criterion of truth: “"By their fruits you will know them"”, also applied as methodological prudence (if a spiritual message incited something morally absurd, it probably did not come from a high source and, therefore, would not be incorporated into the doctrine).

With these pillars, Kardec affirmed that Spiritism had subjected “spiritual” phenomena to the method of observational sciences., framing them within a rational theory. He himself, in the introduction to The Genesis, He argues that the supposed "miracles" and events considered supernatural, once their spiritual cause is understood according to laws, fall into the order of natural phenomena and the "marvelous disappears."“[17]. This statement expresses a view. demystifierFar from exploring the inexplicable mystery, Spiritism aimed to explain the extraordinary so that it would cease to be so. In other words, Kardec wanted to remove Spiritism from the supernatural realm and place it within the realm of reality. nature, expanding the latter to include subtle dimensions not yet recognized by the academic science of the time.

Compatibility and Limits between Spiritism and Scientific Models

In light of the foregoing, we can now compare the method and premises of Spiritism with contemporary models of science (empiricist, hypothetical-deductive, and rational), highlighting points of compatibility as well as the limitations that hinder its recognition as "scientific" by the current academic community.

Compatibilities of Spiritism with scientific models

• Empirical observation and repetitionAlthough dealing with unusual phenomena, Kardec's Spiritism valued systematic observation and repetition of phenomena – a clear point of contact with scientific empiricism. mediumistic sessions In a sense, they functioned as controlled experiments (there were defined conditions: mediums, groups, schedules; recording of occurrences; tests such as marked tables, baskets for psychography, etc.). Kardec sought repeatability Qualitative: for example, he obtained the same answer to a spiritual question posed to different mediums unknown to each other, which he interpreted as a repetition of a result under varying conditions. This emphasis recalls the positivist ideal of repeated verification. While it is true that not all spiritualist phenomena were easily reproducible on demand (a challenge also faced in areas such as parapsychology), the methodological approach was empiricist: to collect as much fact as possible. The physical phenomena associated with Spiritism (table turning, apparitions, raps, etc.) were documented and studied experimentally by Kardec and contemporaries such as Crookes and Richet., similarly to how one studies an unknown natural phenomenon. Thus, in the aspect of observational attitude, There is compatibility with the empiricist model: Spiritism was not based solely on arguments from authority or unique revelations – it appealed to experience, even in a region considered heterodox.
• Hypothetical-deductive method and indirect testabilitySpiritism formulated clear hypotheses e.g., “"The spirits of deceased humans survive and can communicate."” – and drew verifiable consequences from them. For example, the hypothesis of Communicating spirit leads to the prediction that Different independent mediums can transmit substantially identical messages originating from the same Spirit or on the same subject., or even that certain mediums present information that is unknown through normal means (paranormal lucidity). Kardec and other researchers conducted tests such as this: they verified whether mediums could report facts that were later verified, whether similar messages appeared in different places, or whether mediums could influence physical objects (typology, table movements) under controlled conditions. In many cases, success in these predictions was claimed, reinforcing the hypotheses. Important: Kardec's method included practical forgery of deceptive communications – he deliberately asked tricky questions or requested answers from mediums to problems, in order to identify contradictions or ignorance on the part of the communicating spirits, discarding supposedly wise spirits who might fall into error. This amounts to refuting hypotheses (in this case, the hypothesis of the authenticity of such communication or spiritual identity). Although the nature of spiritualist phenomena makes it difficult to apply tests reproducible on demand (a Spirit does not “obey” the experimenter as a chemical reagent would), the logical structure is hypothetical-deductive: an invisible agent is postulated and its observable effects are derived. The very idea of universal control it resembles a multicenter trialIf the hypothesis "spirit X taught doctrine Y" is true, it is expected that multiple mediums receive the Y doctrine independently and coherently; If this does not occur (if only one medium says Y, while others present profound disagreements), then the hypothesis is considered not to have been confirmed and Y is not accepted. This type of criterion serves the purpose of testability. Furthermore, many Spiritist propositions admit, at least in principle, indirect tests or predictions. Example: the reincarnationist doctrine (Spirits returning to physical life) generates predictions such as the existence of spontaneous memories of past lives in some people – something that, in fact, was investigated by scientists like Ian Stevenson in the 20th century. Another: the existence of the perispirit implies that phenomena of the appearance or action of "spiritual bodies" can be recorded, which motivated materialization research in the past. In short, Spiritism does not formulate dogmas that are unfalsifiable in principle; it opens up for examinations, ...even though, until now, such tests have not convinced most scientists. Spiritist concepts can be (and have been) confronted with data – for example, the idea that Spirits could cause cures has been tested in studies on spiritual healing and healing mediums; the idea of spiritual influence has been tested in controlled automatic writing experiments, etc. Therefore, at the level of... research structure, There is a relevant similarity with the scientific method: Spiritism establishes a A set of hypotheses about invisible causes, deducing consequences and searching for evidence. of them.
• Rational coherence and logical inferenceKardec insisted that Spiritism be a “"science of reasoning"” and not from mere crude observation[16]. This aligns strongly with the scientific-rational model discussed. In complex scientific fields, it is accepted that... internal logical coherence The existence of a theory and its ability to explain diverse phenomena speak in favor of its validity, even before any final verification. In the case of Spiritism, there is a coherent theoretical frameworkConcepts such as reincarnation, the law of moral cause and effect, different orders of spirits, the perispirit, and fluids form an interconnected system that aims to explain everything from differences in human personality to haunting phenomena. This theoretical framework did not emerge from nothing: it was inductively constructed from hundreds of spiritual messages and experiences, and then deductively adjusted to eliminate contradictions – a process very similar to what occurs in the formulation of comprehensive scientific theories (compare this to the evolution of the theory of biological evolution, which aggregated various lines of evidence into a unified framework). inference by analogy It also appears that Kardec often resorts to analogies with physical science (such as comparing the density of the perispirit with the density of gases, or comparing the plurality of inhabited worlds with Copernicus' principle) to rationally strengthen the Spiritist theses.[18][19]. He argued, for example, that accepting the existence of an inhabited spiritual world governed by laws was no more "anti-scientific" than admitting, at the time, the existence of invisible microbes – both of which were postulated to explain observed effects. Unobservable entities They are a central point of compatibility: Spiritism postulates spirits and perispirit, which we do not see directly; however, modern science also deals with hidden entities (particles, fields, etc.), whose acceptance is based on detectable consequences. If we consider Spirits as theoretical entities, mediumistic manifestations would be the observational effects which corroborate its existence. In this sense, The epistemological status of spirits could be equated with that of other theoretical entities.They are not purely “metaphysical” objects (beyond detection), but rather they cause objective phenomena (mediumistic writing, healings, visions) that can be investigated. The criteria that science applies to quarks or dark matter – consistency of detections, absence of a simpler alternative explanation, predictive capacity – can, in theory, be applied to spiritualist phenomena. For example, if I obtain mediumistic communications with verifiable information unknown to the medium, and this is repeated in several cases, the inference to the best explanation could suggest an intelligent extracorporeal source (spirit) as the most plausible hypothesis, rather than fraud or chance. Thus, The inferential logic used in spiritualist research is of the same nature as that employed in forensic science, archaeology, or natural history., ...where a cause not directly seen is inferred from traces. It is no coincidence that Kardec called Spiritism... “"observational science"” and compared it to the historical sciences (he mentions that, as in history and geology, Spiritism deals with facts that cannot be reproduced at will, but which are observed when they occur and from which laws are derived)[20][21]. In The Genesis, He justifies the method used by saying that “The observation and agreement of facts led to the search for causes; the search for causes led to the recognition that the relations between the visible and the invisible world exist by virtue of a law; once this law was known, a multitude of spontaneous phenomena hitherto misunderstood were explained [...]; once the cause was established, these phenomena re-entered the order of natural facts.”[22][17]. This explanation could be found in a treatise on scientific methodology: this is exactly how rational sciences proceed – they accumulate facts, infer a unifying cause or law, and then interpret the scattered phenomena in this new light, removing their mysterious aspect. In short, the way of reasoning Kardec's Spiritism is compatible with the scientific method: it is inductive-deductive, demanding internal coherence and consonance with other truths. It does not rely on unquestionable dogmas, but on a network of evidence and arguments.
• Indirect validation and practical utilityCurrent science acknowledges that a theory can be accepted based on indirect validation, that is, by the set of converging evidence and explanatory capacity, even if each component cannot be verified in isolation. Spiritism is in a similar position. As Figueiredo (2016) pointed out when analyzing Spiritist epistemology, “If the hypotheses of spiritist theory cannot be validated one by one, experimentally as in [conventional] science, their coherence and usefulness can be recognized in their entirety, as a philosophical theory.”[23]. In other words, one can judge the the entire Spiritist building because of how well it is articulated and the fruits it produces, even without being able to measure each brick separately. This is in line with criteria used in complex scientific fields: for example, the theory of evolution It is accepted by the robust body of interdisciplinary evidence, even though we cannot "repeat" the Cambrian evolution; similarly, one could evaluate the spiritist theory by the set of phenomena it illuminates (near-death experiences, mediumistic phenomena, transcommunication, etc.) and by its consistency. Furthermore, Kardec and his followers argue that Spiritism has a moral and practical utilityIt provides ethical meaning, consolation, and a change of mindset. This is not a scientific criterion in itself, but within the philosophy of science there are those who recognize that... fertility of a theory The extent to which it opens new avenues for investigation and application is also a point in its favor. For example, quantum mechanics has been valued not only for explaining data, but for generating technologies and new questions. Similarly, Spiritism has generated a vast cultural movement, countless works, social assistance practices, and psychological studies (such as Spiritist psychology in Brazil). This can be seen as indicative that it touches on real aspects of human experience (even if only in the psychological dimension). In terms of research, the Spiritist doctrine has inspired experimentation (from William Crookes' investigations with physical mediums in the 19th century to current research on spiritual healing and the neurophysiology of mediums). All this suggests that, at least as research program (in the sense of Lakatos), Spiritism has shown to have a “"firm core"” (The spiritualist hypothesis) with a belt of testable auxiliary hypotheses, some corroborated and others adjusted over time. So, from a methodological and heuristic point of view, there are several Points of contact between Spiritism and science.Both seek to explain observed phenomena, both use induction and deduction, both value consistency, both correct themselves with new data, and both aspire to a unified, non-contradictory body of knowledge.

In short, if we consider only the method and the epistemological structure, Spiritism it could to be seen as compatible with contemporary scientific models: it carries out empirical observations (as empiricism demands), formulates testable hypotheses (as the hypothetical-deductive method requires), and constructs a comprehensive theory with rational inferences (as in the rational-scientific model). It is no coincidence that a communicating Spirit even declared in Spiritist Magazine: “Spiritism is a positive science; the facts upon which it rests are not yet complete; […] this science […] will prove to even the least insightful that its entirely moral objective is the regeneration of Humanity, and that, unlike all speculative sciences, its teaching is the opposite of materialism, which proceeds by hypothesis. [Spiritism] proceeds with analysis, establishes facts to trace back to causes, proclaims the spiritual element, after verification; such is its clean and straightforward manner; it is the straight line that should guide every convinced Spiritist.”[24]. This message (attributed to the spirit Jobard in 1864) impressively summarizes the view that Spiritism followed a scientific path: analytical, factual, causal, and anti-dogmatic ("without evasions"). It is worth highlighting the contrast with materialism "which proceeds by hypothesis"—that is, from the Spiritist point of view, materialism is also an unproven metaphysics. We then arrive at the heart of... divergence current.

Limits and divergences: the problem of non-materialist ontology

If the Spiritist method shares so many similarities with the scientific approach, Why is Spiritism not accepted as conventional science? Here we enter into the aspects of ontology and of historical and cultural context. The main barrier is that Spiritism affirms the existence of a reality non-material (spirits, the immortal soul, God as supreme intelligence, etc.), whereas modern science – from the end of the 19th century through the 20th century – adopted as fundamental assumption O materialist naturalism. In other words, professional science operates under the assumption (not explicitly proven, but methodologically adopted) that all phenomena can and should be explained by material causes or energy within physical space-time, excluding intentional extra-physical agents. This assumption, of course, arose from the triumphs of physics, chemistry, and biology in the 19th century in explaining much of what was previously attributed to spiritual or divine beings (lightning, diseases, the origin of species, etc.). Thus, a kind of [missing word - likely "understanding" or "understanding"] was formed. “materialist ”dogma” within the scientific culture: Any hypothesis that invokes spirits, souls, or supernatural forces is discarded a priori as unscientific.. Note: this is not an experimental refutation – it is a prior definition of scope. By convention, academic science does not seriously consider spiritualist hypotheses because it judges them to be reminiscent of pre-scientific explanations. Even when spiritualist researchers or parapsychologists present intriguing evidence, the community often rejects or ignores it, as accepting it would imply breaking with the prevailing paradigm.

We can list some. limits and objections What do current scientific perspectives raise against Spiritism (and, correspondingly, why can such objections be understood more as metaphysical choices than flaws in the Spiritist method)?

• Incompatibility with the prevailing materialist paradigmSince the beginning of the 20th century (following the decline in interest in psychic phenomena at the fin-de-siècle), science has consolidated itself into a paradigm where Consciousness is a product of the brain, not an autonomous entity.. All neuroscience and materialistic psychology are based on this. Spiritism, by postulating the Spirit as a thinking substratum independent of the body, directly contradicts this axiom. Thus, for most scientists, no matter how much evidence of anomalous phenomena is presented, Accepting a "ghost in the machinery" would amount to regressing to pre-modern explanations. Thomas Kuhn would argue that Within an established paradigm, anomalous facts are either discarded or assimilated in a way that does not shake the dominant theoretical structure.. Spiritualist phenomena have been treated as marginal anomalies, or attributed to fraud, illusion, hysteria – alternative explanations that preserve the materialist paradigm. This is a point of ontological divergence: Spiritism and contemporary science start from different premises about what exists.. As long as this difference persists, genuine dialogue will be difficult. Figueiredo (2019) notes that we live under a “dogmatic materialism, in the mold of the conceptual domination imposed by the Church for centuries” and that, from a Spiritist point of view, the current cultural landscape It marginalizes any spiritualist approach.[25]. In other words, he compares modern materialist dogmatism to ancient religious dogmatism: both reject on principle ideas that threaten their basic tenets. “"Jokingly, detractors [of Spiritism] call it an aberration of the 19th century, for doing science by considering the human being as an incarnate soul. The materialist laughs at this idea, as the priests mocked those who saw the Earth revolving around the Sun."” – writes Figueiredo, highlighting the historical parallel[26]. This quote perfectly illustrates the scenario: the modern rejection of Spiritism often occurs... with scorn, without impartial evaluation of the evidence., This is analogous to the Galilean rejection based on dogma and not experimentation. Therefore, the central divergence is not in the method (Spiritism makes observations, proposes hypotheses and tests them, just like science); it is in the... metaphysical reference. Science says: “even if we don’t have all the explanations, there must be a physical cause behind these phenomena” (if the phenomena even occur); Spiritism says: “the best explanations for these phenomena are intelligent extra-physical agents.” This dispute cannot be resolved solely with empirical data, because data can always be reinterpreted within each worldview. For example: if mediums correctly describe a hidden event, the spiritualist sees proof of communication with spirits; the materialist skeptic alleges luck, cryptomnesia, or yet-to-be-discovered fraud. Each side accuses the other of... “"violation of Occam's Razor"”The spiritualist finds it forced to suppose a thousand frauds and coincidences to deny the spirit; the materialist finds introducing spirits an unnecessary multiplication of beings. In short, there is a paradigmatic impasse.
• Difficulty in achieving strict reproducibility and control.From a strictly methodological point of view, current science also criticizes Spiritism (and psychic research in general) for the lack of consistently reproducible phenomena under controlled laboratory conditions. Although Kardec pursued qualitative repetition, he could not summon spirits on demand to repeat an identical effect as many times as he wished. Many spiritist phenomena appear to occur sporadically and depend on multiple variables (medium's personality, spiritual environment, etc.) that are not easily isolated. This contrasts with, for example, physics experiments, where any laboratory can follow a protocol and observe the same result (within the margin of error). low immediate reproducibility This places spiritualist research in a situation similar to that of historical or social sciences, which also deal with complex and contingent phenomena. The difference is that, in psychology or medicine, researchers deal with statistics on many individuals to infer effects – while in spiritualist phenomena, each event is unique and often large samples are not available (for example, a notable physical medium emerges only every few decades). Thus, the scientific requirement of measurable repeatability under standardized conditions is a practical limit for the acceptance of Spiritism. It's not so much a difference in philosophical method (because we have seen that Kardec did indeed try to replicate and control them), but there is a limitation in the object: spirits are free agents, not chemical reagents. Therefore, convincing the scientific community requires even more robust and explicit evidence. Contemporary research in parapsychology attempts to circumvent this with statistics (e.g., extrasensory perception tests with thousands of attempts to see a small but significant deviation from chance). There are meta-analyses suggesting that certain effects exist, but since they are not large and easily demonstrable, they remain controversial. Therefore, from the point of view of current scientific practice, Spiritism suffers from a scarcity of results that can be replicated in a practical way. quantitative and on demand. However, it can be argued that this does not invalidate Spiritism itself, but only explains why it has not gained legitimacy: Mainstream science favors phenomena that it can manipulate at will.. Phenomena that escape this control are left aside, even if real, until an appropriate methodology is developed for them.
• Contamination through belief and lack of neutrality.Another point of divergence is that many Spiritist scholars already... believe In the doctrine, they may lack the desired critical distance. That is, confirmation bias is alleged – seeing what one wants to see. Of course, this also occurs in other areas (researchers become enamored with their theories), but there are community mechanisms to correct it (peer review, independent replication). In Spiritism, historically, research has been restricted to the Spiritist circle or sympathizers (with exceptions of outsiders like William James or some physiologists who were interested). Conventional science tends to distrust results produced in an "ideologized environment." This generates a vicious circle: due to prejudice, independent scientists do not replicate Spiritist phenomena, therefore these are only studied by those who believe; then credibility falls. Kardec, however, invited sincere skeptics should check the facts for themselves. The Mediums' Book, He provides guidelines for avoiding self-deception, precisely concerned with objectivity. But from the point of view of the broader scientific community, this integration did not occur – Spiritism remained separate as an autonomous movement, which makes validation difficult in the eyes of institutional science. This is not exactly a methodological “error” of Spiritism; it is partly a consequence of... sociological context From the scientific perspective, after the Victorian era, studying mediums became an academic taboo (with rare exceptions), ending any possible convergence. If, hypothetically, a sufficient number of secular scientists were willing to rigorously reproduce spiritualist investigations, perhaps results could be achieved that transcended the threshold of belief. In any case, the lack of scientific recognition is also reinforced by the absence of validation by... neutral sources.
• Lack of quantitative and predictive integrationModern scientific models value theories that, in addition to providing qualitative explanations, also offer... quantification and numerical prediction. For example, Newton's theory of gravity not only qualitatively explains which planets orbit, but also quantifies orbits and predicts new positions. Spiritism offers qualitative explanations for many phenomena (it says, for example, that affection spiritually binds incarnate and disincarnate beings, explaining visions of deceased loved ones; or that high morality improves spiritual attunement, explaining healing phenomena). However, it rarely provides definitive answers. mathematical laws or specific predictions that can be numerically verified. In part, this stems from the nature of the object (free consciousnesses do not lend themselves well to equations); still, from the point of view of current philosophy of science, this is an epistemological weakness. It makes Spiritism resemble social sciences or early evolutionary theories – a lot of explanatory narrative, little measurement. This does not mean that it is not science (historical sciences are also largely qualitative), but it confers a different epistemological status from the model of physical-chemical sciences. Perhaps Spiritism could develop in this direction – for example, statistically quantifying reincarnation phenomena (percentage of children who remember past lives under certain conditions), or modeling the distribution of types of communicating spirits, etc. In Kardec, there were some attempts to outline classifications and percentages (such as the Spiritist scale of spiritual purity, or to affirm that most communicating spirits are of a medium or lower order). However, this remained qualitative. In short, for current science to recognize something as "well-established," it often seeks... formalization. Spiritism, precisely because it deals with subjective and moral aspects, has not been formally quantified. This is an inherent limitation, but one that weighs on the consideration of "is it a science?".
• Explicit metaphysical chargeSpiritism explicitly assumes several metaphysical/philosophical premises: the existence of God, teleology (moral purpose of life), a spiritual conception of the human being, and universal moral progress. Modern science, by choice, avoids teleological or theological notions, preferring mechanistic and localized explanations. Although many scientists individually believe in God or have personal visions, the scientific method works as if such things did not interfere with phenomena (principle of naturalistic objectivity). In this sense, Spiritism blends scientific propositions with others of a philosophical and ethical nature.. For example, the existence of the spirit can be put to the test, but the existence of God is beyond any empirical testing; Kardec affirms it philosophically as the first cause, but strictly speaking, this is not the case. science. This mixture makes dialogue with science difficult, as science tends to compartmentalize. However, it is worth emphasizing that many great scientific theories also arose from broad metaphysical visions (Newton, for example, was influenced by deism, and this permeated his physics; the idea of order and simplicity in nature has philosophical roots). Spiritism, for example... worldview, It goes beyond what science considers its domain – and within this going beyond lies its spiritual and moral dimension. The epistemic critique here is that Spiritism may never be entirely scientific because it contains elements of rational faith (e.g., divine justice, the purpose of existence) that are not falsifiable or measurable. However, spiritualists themselves retort that This moral/spiritual aspect does not invalidate the scientific nature of the phenomenological aspect.Comparatively, physical cosmology has mathematical (scientific) models but also deals with metaphysical questions (why there is something rather than nothing, what "caused" the Big Bang) that go beyond strict science – and yet we still consider it respectable. Kardec conceived of Spiritism as threefold: science, philosophy, and moral consequence. The scientific part would deal with spiritualist facts and their laws; the philosophy, with the implications for who we are; and the moral part, with ethical application. The intertwining of these aspects, while enriching the doctrine, also clashes with the narrow scope of the natural sciences. This difference in approach makes it difficult to recognize Spiritism in environments where an absolute separation between fact and value, science and morality, is preached.

In conclusion, we can say: Spiritism shares with science a love of facts, the use of reason, and the search for universal laws., but it clashes with established science by to postulate a spiritual ontology which most consider unacceptable. The central disagreement is more metaphysical rather than methodological. And the methodological difficulties that exist (elusive phenomena, low experimental control) end up being viewed through the lens of ontological bias: for the skeptic, they are proof that there is nothing real there, instead of simply being technical challenges to overcome. It is a scenario where, broadly speaking, Each side accuses the other of not playing by the rules.The Spiritist accuses science of closing its mind to inconvenient evidence due to a philosophical attachment to materialism; science accuses the Spiritist of not producing strong enough evidence and of appealing to the supernatural unnecessarily. To move forward, a middle ground would be needed: an honest and open scientific effort to investigate spiritual phenomena without presupposing their impossibility, and even greater rigor from Spiritist scholars in presenting evidence under increasingly demanding standards. Until this happens systematically, the "official" incompatibility persists.

Conclusion

The analysis performed indicates that There is potential compatibility. between Kardec's Spiritism and contemporary models of science, provided the focus is on methods and criteria validation, and not in metaphysical assumptions From each perspective. Spiritism was conceived with a remarkable scientific spirit for its time: Kardec adopted rigorous observation, data comparison, hypothesis formulation, and verification through agreement and reason – procedures that strongly echo scientific methods (whether empiricist or rationalist). Far from being a set of mystical dogmas, The original Spiritist doctrine presented itself as a research program on spiritual reality, Analogous, in its intentions, to a scientific program. Current science, in turn, is no longer restricted to sensory positivism: it recognizes the indispensable role of theoretical constructs, accepts indirect validations, and considers it legitimate to infer unobservable entities when there is indirect empirical support and logical coherence to do so.[2]. In that regard, Nothing, in theory, prevents the phenomena studied by Spiritism from being the subject of scientific research. Indeed, fields such as parapsychology and transpersonal psychology have addressed similar topics, albeit often under strong external skepticism.

The critical point that emerged is that the main divergence lies in ontological aspectSpiritism requires admitting the objective existence of immaterial spirits and the survival of consciousness after death, whereas the scientific establishment operates with the opposite hypothesis (that everything is reduced to physical-chemical processes). This divergence cannot be resolved simply by invoking methods – it is a confrontation of... paradigms. As long as the materialistic paradigm dominates unchallenged, spiritualist proposals will be automatically rejected as unscientific., independently The quality of their data is a concern. It's a situation reminiscent of what Kuhn described: different paradigms are incommensurable until a scientific revolution occurs or an accumulation of anomalies forces change. Today, some argue that anomalous phenomena related to consciousness (near-death experiences, truthful memories of past lives, mind-matter effects in quantum physics, etc.) are indications that the strictly materialistic paradigm may be incomplete. If this perception grows, we may witness a re-evaluation of spiritualist hypotheses in a more benevolent light. It wouldn't be the first time.Meteorology was once considered witchcraft, astronomy was once astrology, chemistry was once alchemy – pioneering ideas were rejected as pseudoscience until appropriate methods and concepts allowed them to be integrated into a legitimate scientific scope. It is possible to imagine, therefore, that the study of consciousness and possible non-local or non-material aspects of the mind will be a turning point in the coming decades, bringing to light questions to which Spiritism offered pioneering answers.

In conclusion, To the question of whether Spiritism is compatible with contemporary scientific models, the answer is twofold.. On the one hand, Yes, It is compatible in terms of methodological approach: Kardec employed empiricism, cross-testing, logic, and theoretical construction – elements present in the empiricist, hypothetical-deductive, and rational models. He himself emphasized that Spiritism must submit to the scrutiny of reason and facts, exactly as is expected of a scientific discipline.[6]. Furthermore, many Spiritist concepts do not challenge science itself, but merely extend its scope (for example, the idea of different planes of existence does not contradict any known physical law – it only postulates one beyond it). On the other hand, There is a current incompatibility. especially because the dominant science arbitrarily limits its scope to the measurable material world., rejecting phenomena of a spiritual nature as nonexistent or irrelevant. Spiritist ontology clashes with materialist ontology – and as long as the latter is a non-negotiable principle From a scientific standpoint, Spiritism will be considered "unscientific" by the mainstream., despite of its intrinsic methodological merits. Ultimately, it is a conflict between metaphysical assumptions, not evidence or logic. The very idea of science is not fixed: it has evolved and expanded over time. Perhaps in a future where science integrates the dimension of consciousness more fully, the gap with Spiritism will diminish. Until then, a difficult dialogue remains – but, as we seek to demonstrate, not because of an intrinsic impossibility of reconciling the Spiritist method and the scientific method, but rather because of a choice of worldview.

In terms of philosophy of science, the case of Spiritism illustrates how Epistemological criteria can be influenced by conventions and even cultural biases.. If we judge Spiritism by the criteria epistemic (coherence, testability, explanatory scope, error control), he performs much better than is usually assumed: Kardec foresaw and addressed validation issues that many pseudoscientists ignore. He sought precisely no falling into the traps of subjectivity (hence the universal control and the veto of the illogical). Where Spiritism "sins" in relation to current science is in its presupposition that mind and spirit are fundamental realities – but this is not a proven sin, it is a starting point for disagreement. Like all philosophical disagreements, it can only be resolved through frank debate and honest consideration of the evidence.

In short, There is nothing in the contemporary scientific method that, in principle, prohibits the investigation of spiritualist phenomena and hypotheses.; What there is is a cultural consensus who despise them for being associated with the “supernatural.” When we examine them historically, we see that this consensus can change – it has already changed in relation to other ideas. Therefore, Spiritism can claim, if not today an accepted scientific status, at least the right to be evaluated according to fair scientific criteria, and not discarded based on unproven assumptions. After all, as Kardec himself rhetorically challenges: “"Why didn't those who criticize us for taking the initiative take it themselves?"”[27]. In other words, if the scientific community believes that the Spiritist method could be improved, let them refine it and try to investigate the question of the soul themselves – this is how science advances, through curiosity and testing, not through a priori negation. Ultimately, the compatibility or incompatibility of Spiritism with science depends on how we define science: if it is a free and rational search for truth, nothing prevents dialogue; if it is a rigid set of materialistic dogmas, then there will truly be no agreement. The evidence suggests that the dividing line is not in the evidence, but in... attitude towards them. Current science acknowledges invisible planets, elusive particles, and ten mathematical dimensions – perhaps one day it will also acknowledge that consciousness can transcend the body, if solid evidence continues to emerge. When that day arrives, Allan Kardec will possibly be revisited from an interesting historical perspective: that of one of the forerunners of a broader science that includes the spirit in the understanding of reality.

References

• Allan Kardec – The Book of Spirits (1857). A foundational work of Spiritism, it presents the principles of the doctrine in the form of questions and answers attributed to the Spirits. The Introduction highlights the division between the experimental and philosophical aspects of Spiritist science.[9].
• Allan Kardec – The Mediums' Book (1861). Details the phenomena of mediumship and methods of investigation. Kardec guides careful experimentation and universal control of communications. Example: explanation of how inferior spirits produce physical effects through “"density of the perispirit"”[28][14].
• Allan Kardec – The Gospel According to Spiritism (1864). In Introduction (item II – Authority of the Spiritist Doctrine), exposes the Universal Control of the Teaching of SpiritsThe need for agreement across multiple communications to validate a principle.[3]; emphasizes subjecting all spiritual teaching to the scrutiny of reason and logic.[6].
• Allan Kardec – The Genesis (1868). Develops scientific and philosophical aspects, discussing method. Chapter I and the introductory chapters reaffirm that Spiritism proceeds through observation, deduction of laws, and rejection of the unexplained supernatural.[21][17].
• Allan Kardec – Spiritist Magazine (periodical, 1858-1869). Contains Kardec's methodological reflections and records of investigations. Examples: Magazine from May 1864, p.210, regarding opponents who misunderstand Spiritism[29]; Magazine from January 1867, p.27, where Kardec states that he made Spiritism "a science of reasoning and not of credulity"“[16].
• Paulo Henrique de Figueiredo – Spiritist Revolution. Allan Kardec's forgotten theory: (2nd ed., FEAL/Maat, 2019). A work of historical and philosophical research that recovers Kardec's original project. It analyzes the epistemological structure of Spiritism and argues that Kardec applied a scientific method appropriate to spiritual facts. It emphasizes that Spiritism is “"science of reasoning"” and discusses the possibility of validating Spiritist knowledge through global coherence.[30][23].
• Paulo Henrique de Figueiredo – Autonomy: the untold story of Spiritism (FEAL, 2019). Historical research that contextualizes Kardec within the landscape of 19th-century ideas. Contains chapters on the scientific method in the moral sciences and observational sciences, showing the influence of Rivail/Kardec's thought. Cites Kardec's documents emphasizing the diversity of origin of the communications (“"It could not be the work of a single spirit or medium."”[4]) and the role of critical reason. It also addresses the subsequent methodological distortion in the Spiritist movement and the need to return to the original rigor.
• Alan F. Chalmers – What is science, anyway? (1976, various Brazilian editions). Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Discusses the decline of positivist verificationism and highlights that scientific theories include unobservable entities, whose existence is assumed if we can infer them from phenomena.[2]. Useful for understanding the legitimacy of hypotheses such as those of Spiritism within a realistic framework.
• Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962). It presents the idea of scientific paradigms and how ideas outside the paradigm are rejected until paradigmatic crises occur. It helps to contextualize the rejection of Spiritism as a result of an established materialist paradigm, rather than the empirical refutation of Spiritist ideas (since most of them were never even formally tested by mainstream science).
• Karl Popper – The Logic of Scientific Research (1934). Defines the hypothetical-deductive method and falsifiability. Although Popper viewed paranormal phenomena with skepticism, his criteria can be applied: are spiritualist theses falsifiable? (Ex: “Spirits exist” – difficult to falsify directly, but the derivative “Mediums must provide verifiable information that they would not normally obtain” is testable). He also discusses the conjectural nature of all science, which opens up space to consider spiritualist conjectures if they are treated critically.
• Paul Feyerabend – Against the Method (1975). He criticizes the notion of a single scientific method and defends methodological pluralism ("anything goes"). His famous quote that there is no fixed scientific method.[31] This supports the idea that spiritualist research should not be dismissed simply because it does not follow conventional patterns, since the history of science itself shows episodes of unorthodox methods leading to discoveries.
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy – entries “Scientific Realism and Instrumentalism” and “Theoretical Terms in Science”. They discuss the status of theoretical entities and the question of observability. They provide a conceptual basis for arguing that admitting spirits is no different, in principle, from admitting electrons: it is a matter of postulating something to explain phenomena, then evaluating its explanatory success.
• Brian D. Josephson – “Pathological Disbelief” (2004). A short article by Nobel laureate physicist Brian Josephson discussing how the scientific community sometimes rejects new phenomena due to prejudice, citing the case of psychic research. Although it does not directly address Spiritualism, it reinforces the thesis that sociological mechanisms – and not a lack of evidence – often hinder the acceptance of certain fields.
• Ian Stevenson – Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation (1974). Empirical study on children who claim memories of past lives, rigorously conducted with interviews and verifications. It is an example of scientific research (published in journals) on a central spiritualist theme (reincarnation). The results, although controversial, show that it is possible to approach these issues with academic methodology and obtain suggestive evidence, challenging conventional explanations.

(The references above were selected to cover primary sources of Spiritism, contemporary analyses of Spiritist methodology, and works of philosophy of science relevant to the concepts discussed. Emphasis was placed on authors and documents cited in the text, as indicated by the reference notes.)[8][24]

---

[1] [2] [31] SciELO Brazil – Science: Key Concepts in Philosophy

https://www.scielo.br/j/trans/a/ZW8cbFBfqgYW6KMdKSnswmx

[3] [5] [6] [7] The Gospel According to Spiritism – Introduction – II — Authority of the Spiritist Doctrine – Kardecpedia

https://kardecpedia.com/roteiro-de-estudos/887/o-evangelho-segundo-o-espiritismo/2052/introducao/ii-autoridade-da-doutrina-espirita%20paragrafo%206%20em%20diante

[4] [8] [15] [16] [17] [20] [21] [22] [24] [25] [26] [27] [29] Autonomy: The Untold Story of Spiritism_nodrm.pdf

[9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [18] [19] [23] [28] [30] Spiritist Revolution. Allan Kardec's forgotten theory:

Introduction

O article by Heron Volpi (“THE EVOLUTION OF THE SPIRIT: Allan Kardec’s “Evolutionism”) assumes from the outset that Spiritism is ”a religion“ subject to the same criticisms as other traditional beliefs. This premise ignores the original Kardecist definition of Spiritism as threefold aspect doctrine – science, philosophy and morality – and already calls his argument into question. Volpi maintains that Allan Kardec was "repeatedly racist" and that he incorporated the racial evolutionism to please 19th-century science. From these points, we will develop a structured critical analysis, pointing out conceptual errors, methodological flaws, and contradictions in Volpi's claims. We will use only works by Kardec to confront accusations of racism, showing that his teachings emphasize equality, brotherhood, and condemn prejudice and slavery.

Spiritism as Science and Morality (not merely a religion)

The author's premise is flawed. Volpi repeatedly defines Spiritism as a "spiritist religion" and argues that it "appears to be based much more on discourse than on empirical science." This view disregards Kardec's statements that Spiritism is... new field of knowledge. In his foundational works, Kardec presents Spiritism as science of observation and philosophical doctrine, with its own moral implications:

• “"Spiritism is, at the same time, a science of observation and a philosophical doctrine. As a practical science, it consists of the relationships established between us and the Spirits; as a philosophy, it encompasses all the moral consequences that arise from these same relationships.".
• Kardec reaffirms: "Spiritism is the new science that comes to reveal to men […] the existence and nature of the spiritual world.".

Universalist moral doctrine. In addition to science, Kardec emphasizes the character moral and ecumenical of Spiritism:

• “Spiritism is a moral doctrine that strengthens religious sentiments in general and applies to all religions. It belongs to all, and to none in particular. […] It leaves each person the freedom to worship God in their own way.”.

These texts make it clear that Kardec did not see Spiritism as a dogmatic religion, but as a path complementary to the Christian faith, reinforcing charity and freedom of worship. Therefore, classifying Spiritism **“like any other religion”** constitutes a conceptual error: the author disregards the threefold defining aspect of the Spiritist Doctrine and ignores the frequent Kardecist affirmations that it is justified by reason and experience, not by the imposition of faith.

Methodological flaws and inconsistent use of sources.

Volpi's article presents itself more as a personal reflection than rigorous academic research. The author himself admits to having written it in first person, Based on personal experiences in Spiritist centers:

• “"To begin, I must clarify that I, personally, circulate among various Spiritist centers in Brazil […] I am writing this text trying to understand the spaces of which I myself am a part.".

This approach indicates strong subjectivity. There is no systematic methodology: he admits that his "short-term research" gathers personal accounts and isolated statements. At the same time, he mixes sources of varied nature (blogs, reports such as those by Chico Alves and CartaCapital, an interview from UOL) without a clear historical criterion. We found no direct citations to historical documents or reliable academic studies to support his conclusions. In short, It lacks scientific rigor.He begins the article as an amateur ethnographer and transforms it into an opinion piece. This flawed approach is revealed in the final text itself: he acknowledges that, since it is not a lengthy study, he must "be careful with generalist assertions"—which, however, does not prevent broad and contestable statements.

Central conceptual errors

• A poorly founded Eurocentric and evolutionist view. Volpi insists that Kardec “allocated racial evolutionism in his discourse” and treated Spiritism as “for a paratopic place” of belief based on discourse. This interpretation ignores that, in Spiritist works, ideas of “evolution” refer to general moral progress, not to a fixed hierarchy of races. Kardec discusses how the original man appeared in various points of the globe, but emphasizes that such “varieties do not form different species: They are all from the same family.”"For him, physical differences (skin color, etc.) result from natural factors (climate, customs) and do not imply spiritual merit. Thus, the notion of..." human species The only one that underpins all the coding (cf. questions 53 and 54 of LE"All men are brothers in God, because they are animated by the spirit and tend toward the same end." These principles directly contradict the idea of permanent "superior races.".
• Disregard for the moral focus of Spiritism. Kardec emphasizes that the main purpose of the Doctrine is to moralize, not to classify or exclude people. The teaching of "Do not do to others what you would not want done to you" is present in the book. The Gospel According to Spiritism as the ultimate guiding principle of human conduct. Furthermore, he states that Spiritism aims to... “"to instill in men the spirit of charity and brotherhood"” and thus erase the remnants of social barbarity. These positions indicate a profoundly egalitarian orientation, opposed to discrimination. Therefore, portraying Spiritism "like any other religion" based on empty rhetoric is an unfounded exaggeration: the Spiritist doctrine claims coherence between thought, experience, and morality, not limiting itself to apologetic rhetoric.

Allegations of racism: the author's theses versus the Kardecist context.

Volpi claims that Kardec was racist on "several occasions" and that his Spiritism had racist discourses rooted in... evolutionism of the sciences of the 19th century. In fact, in 1862 Kardec published in Spiritist Magazine the article “"Spiritist phrenology and the perfectibility of the black race"”, In which, reflecting the beliefs of his time, he says that "black people are undoubtedly of an inferior race... they are true children." However, this text, which reflects the science of the time, was separated from its main corpus and does not reflect the axiological teachings of Spiritism. On the contrary, the main works codified by Kardec contain clear messages of equality:

• Equality before divine law: The Spiritist answer to the question “Are all human beings equal before God?” is emphatic: “Yes, all tend towards the same end, and God made his laws for all.” In other words, God did not create anyone with “natural” privileges, because *“the body of the rich man decays like that of the poor man”*. This answer (LE 803) destroys the idea of any essential inequality.
• Universal brotherhood: Kardec questions whether, since not all men originated from the same "Adam," we should cease to be brothers. The answer was: *"All men are brothers in God, because they are animated by the spirit and tend towards the same end"*. This statement (LE 54) concludes that distinct appearances do not break fraternal bonds: from a moral point of view, humanity is a single family.
• Condemnation of slavery: The Spiritist codifier analyzes slavery in several sections (LE 829-832). He concludes that “"Human law that enshrines slavery is contrary to nature."” and that it will disappear with moral progress. He criticizes those who benefit from this practice: *“He who takes advantage of the law of slavery is always guilty of violating the law of Nature”*. In other words, Kardec considered it morally reprehensible to enslave one's fellow man, even more so when the law of the time was already beginning to see freedom as inalienable.
• Rejection of racial hierarchy: Kardec ironically addresses the notion of "purer blood" in the context of slavery: *"Those who act in this way consider themselves to have purer blood. Fools! They see nothing but matter. It is not the blood that is more or less pure, but the Spirit."* Here he makes it explicit that the only relevant "purity" is spiritual, not biological. This statement directly refutes the idea that skin color constitutes a legitimate moral or evolutionary criterion.
• Spiritualist answers about human origins: In The Book of Spirits, Kardec transcribes questions to the Higher Entities about human diversity. The answers attribute the differences in appearance to natural factors ("climate, life and customs") and affirm that they do not form distinct species. The Spirits confirm that man has appeared in various places and times, but without signifying separate races. This reinforces that, for Spiritist thought, the multiplicity of ethnic groups is only a transitory appearance – never a justification for prejudice.

These central teachings from Kardec's works are inconsistent with accusations of racism which Volpi attributes to him. Even acknowledging that Kardec reflected questionable scientific concepts of the 19th century (such as phrenology), it must be emphasized that his official doctrine exalts universal brotherhood. On several occasions, he rejects prejudice: in addition to the examples cited above, Kardec repeatedly affirms the evangelical maxim of love for one's neighbor. We do not find in his books any passage that justifies discriminating against someone based on race or color. On the contrary, “"the unity of the human race"” It is an explicit Spiritist principle (LE 54).

Conclusion: critical analysis and academic support

In short, Volpi's article presents serious conceptual and methodological flaws. It disregards the Kardecist definition of Spiritism as a scientific-philosophical-moral system and restricts it to the category of "religion," ignoring that Kardec aimed to unify science and faith, not contradict them. His argument about racism in Kardec is based on personal interpretations and specific texts, but it clashes with clear statements by Kardec in favor of... equality among human beings, in condemning slavery and promoting universal brotherhood.

There is no significant academic support for the author's theses. Instead of historical research or rigorous critical analysis, Volpi uses unverifiable accounts, secondary statements, and recent journalistic reports. His own criteria—personal circulation in Spiritist centers and subjective accounts—do not constitute scientific evidence. To date, no serious academic study confirms the article's central claims. On the contrary, criticisms of Kardec arise more in media debates and anti-racist editorial initiatives than in historiographical investigations. Therefore, Volpi's conclusions have much more the character of personal impression than of the result of academic study, which weakens their credibility as a historical analysis of Spiritism.

References: Quotations taken from the works of Allan Kardec and from an excerpt of Heron Volpi's article as indicated. Our argument is based on the answers of the Spirits codified by Kardec – especially The Book of Spirits, The Gospel According to Spiritism and The Mediums' Book – which emphasize spiritual equality and condemn all forms of oppression. These sources directly refute the author's misinterpretations.