Dogmatic modern science: Science versus Spiritism

I have just responded to an objection related to the topic of Science versus Spiritism (the subject wanted to impute Spiritism to the imagination). I found it interesting to reproduce it here:

“X, está evidente que você fala do que acha que é, ou seja, fala de opinião própria. Isso não é ciência. Provavelmente o amigo desconhece que a Ciência (com “C” maiúsculo) foi formada juntamente à metafísica, e que os grandes gênios do passado, foram, também, grandes filósofos, tratando da questão de Deus e da Criação afastados, porém, da teologia, dogmática e retrógrada. Natural, pois a Ciência, tornando-se tão dogmática quanto a Igreja, virou as costas para a metafísica, tachando de supersticioso, místico ou louco aquele que ouse tocar no assunto sobre Deus ou sobre a espiritualidade, ainda que de forma racional. Pois bem, amigo. Foi justamente o que fizeram aqueles que deram início ao Rational Spiritualism, in the 19th century, and that was precisely what Kardec did in the study of certain phenomena that, despite crossing humanity, were treated in a dogmatic way, both by the Church and by Science.

What modern Science does not realize, because it has forgotten this knowledge, is that, by acting as it does, it acts like the Church. While the latter led man by the dogma of the fall through sin and punishment, the former leads man by the dogma of materialism. Both one and the other make him absent from his responsibilities: the latter, because it subjects man to the will of third parties — he acts bad through the influence of the devil and he acts well through the influence of Christ — and the first because he becomes man is this machine that acts in this or that way simply by force of sensations, acting chemically on his brain ((not excluding from here, of course, the influence that “body chemistry” and even genetics have on the individual. Just highlighting- If they are not the only factors, why, when faced with a great temptation, the individual can choose, by his will, not to give in to it.)). They fall into the same error as certain ancient scientists, who attributed good and bad behavior to white bile and black bile. The only difference is that modern science does not treat the psychological with leeches, but with pills.

I said that Science, in the past, dealt with metaphysics, in a rational way (and, of course, not at all mysticistic). It turns out that, for her, a key was missing, just as psychology of the time was missing, which investigated man as an incarnated soul only through the processes of logical induction and extrapolation. This key, which came to give, was Spiritism, not this false “spiritism”, gathered between the lines of false ideas, arising from errors and opinions of supposed mediumistic works, but the spiritism studied by Kardec, with methodology, that Spiritism that, more than 150 years ago, advanced knowledge, or paths to it, that modern Science is only now beginning to verify. It is important, of course, to separate the errors, natural to the human side, found in the science of the time (such as the theory of fluids), from the successes of the part that concerns natural law. What Kardec did was investigate the causes of certain effects, from which he deduced a Doctrine, which touches not only on the issue of certain material phenomena, but which is entirely moral in aspect.

The researcher and scientist who had the good faith to investigate the works “O Céu e o Inferno” and “A Gênese” (taking care to refer to the recent editions of FEAL, where we are sure that they are the original works of Kardec, untouched) would find, with great surprise, something very different from what they thought Spiritism was, and, however much they might end up disagreeing, by imputing whatever it was to Kardec, they could not conclude this study without realizing that he launched very seriously into this research, which constituted something that, contrary to what you think, was not a religion.”