Allan Kardec-THE Spirit's Book_ The Principles of Spiritist Doctrine (1989)

39
THE SPIRITS’ BOOK
assemblies, which numbered the most eminent scientists of the world among their members,
had only contempt and sarcasm for ideas which they did not understand, but which were
destined to revolutionise, a few years later, science, industry, and daily life. how can we hope
that a question foreign to their labours shouk! meet with any greater degree of favour at their
hands?
The erroneous judgments of learned men in regard to certain discoveries, though regrettable
for the honour of their memory, do not invalidate the title to our esteem acquired by them in
regard to other matters. But is common-sense only to be found associated with an official
diploma, and are there only fools and simpletons outside the walls of scientific institutions?
Let oor opponents condescend to glance over the ranks of the partisans of Spiritism, and see
whether they contain only persons of inferior understanding, or whether, on the contrary,
considering the immense number of men of worth by whom it has been embraced, it can be
regarded as belonging to the category of old wives fables; whether, in fact, the character and
scientific knowledge of its adherents do not rather deserve that it should be said -"When such
men affirm a matter, there must at least be something in it?"
We repeat that. if the facts we are about to consider had been limited to the mechanical
movement of inert bodies, physical science would have been competent to seek out the
physical cause of the phenomena; but the manifestations in question being professedly
beyond the action of laws or forces yet known to men, they are necessarily beyond the
competence of human science. When the facts to be observed are novel, and do not fall
within the scope of any known science, the scientist, in order to study them, should throw his
science temporarily aside, remembering that a new study cannot be fruitfully prosecuted
under the influence of preconceived ideas.
He who believes his reason to be infallible is very near to error. Even those whose ideas are
of the falsest profess to base them on reason; and it is in the name of reason that they reject
whatever seems to them to be impossible. They who formerlv rejected the admirable
discoveries that are the glory of the human mind did so in the name of reason; for what men
call reason is often only pride disguised, and whoever regards himself as in-fallible virtually
claims to be God's equal. We therefore address ourselves to those who are reasonable enough
to suspend their judgment in regard to what they have not yet seen, and who,