Opinion and Reason

Opinion and Reason

Marco Milani

Text published in the Spiritist Leader Magazine, ed. 192, Nov/Dec 2022, p. 16-17

Allan Kardec, highlighting that discarnate Spirits often only express their own opinions on many points [1] and that these opinions may differ among themselves, underscores a fundamental methodological question for the validation of Spiritist knowledge: the agreement of information obtained from independent sources that do not mutually influence each other.

Currently, considering the speed at which information spreads in the electronic environment, it is hardly conceivable that mediumistic groups and their members are unaware of what is disseminated in different media. When it comes to information that clashes with the doctrinal teachings presented in Allan Kardec's works, accepting it implies hastily and thoughtlessly abandoning or ignoring established knowledge.

Certainly, Spiritism is dynamic and foresees the advancement of this knowledge, but under specific conditions that allow validation based on objective, rational, and logical elements. If robust evidence is lacking, new information should be regarded only as hypotheses, subject to future validation and open to questioning regarding their veracity.

Prudence in scientific attitude marks the expected seriousness of researchers. Blind acceptance of hypotheses, often due to emotional aspects and personal interests, diverges from the pursuit of true knowledge. In contrast, irresponsible relativism that flexibilizes reason in the absence of corroborative facts and uses fallacious arguments to disguise reality does a disservice to the search for truth.

Regarding information produced through mediumship, prudence demands that the content be analyzed through the lens of reason, without prior acceptance or refutation based on the supposed Spirit communicator's signature or the intermediary incarnate.

There is no argument from mediumistic authority, meaning the validity of the message's content is independent of the sympathy or affection one might have for the messenger. If it were otherwise, Kardec would not have rejected various communications bearing venerable signatures obtained by the same mediums who collaborated in the Parisian Society of Spiritist Studies and mediated lofty teachings from noble Spirits [2].

Incarnates must undergo the same scrutiny. When taking a platform or expressing themselves in writing as a Spiritist representative, the manifested content demands careful analysis, using the corpus of knowledge presented by Allan Kardec as a comparative reference. As José Herculano Pires asserts in his work "The Stone and the Tares," in Spiritism, Kardec's work is the touchstone.

By revolutionizing the proposal for generating knowledge about spiritual reality, Spiritism causes a cultural rupture with the dogmatism assumed by the church, which was supposed to be the monopolist of faith based on sacred mysteries, approaching instead scientific investigation grounded in its investigative method.

The centrality of Spiritist epistemology lies in critical analysis and the agreement of information revealed through mediumistic exchange, capable of promoting the internal consistency of its doctrinal-theoretical framework, which differs from any other explanatory proposal of spiritual reality presented to humanity.

The moral consequences arising from this spiritual knowledge, encompassing fundamental philosophical questions, represent the guiding aspect of personal conduct and provide enlightenment regarding the meaning of existence.

The cultural baggage of adherents varies significantly, leading to an uneven understanding of doctrinal principles and values. Thus, despite there being only one Spiritism, there are different levels of doctrinal maturity among those who self-declare as Spiritists, leading an external observer to erroneously assume that the interpretative diversity of concepts and practices stems from a fragmented theoretical body.

By assuming doctrinally disconnected information as Spiritist, without any logical foundation based on facts or universal agreement, individuals ignore the necessary methodological coherence to validate knowledge. This occurs when they incorporate their own opinions or those of others, including those of mediumistic origin, as sufficient arguments to oppose the teachings of the Spirits presented by Kardec.

Admiration and emotional attachment to mediums and speakers cause adherents trapped in attitudes and practices typical of traditional religions to place the validity of information in their incarnate idols, as if these were legitimate links to the sacred. Blind faith finds no support in Spiritist doctrinal foundations but can manifest in those who are still in the process of adapting to Spiritist culture.

Opinions on any subject are perfectly understandable in light of freedom of expression and conscience, but their recognition as part of Spiritist knowledge depends on a rational, analytical, and coherent attitude in line with the validation method and established Spiritist principles.

-----

[1] See chapter II, item 99, of the work "What is Spiritism," by Allan Kardec. [2] See chapter XXXI of "The Mediums' Book," by Allan Kardec.