Talk:Kardecist Spiritism

message: Well, in general I think the article is well-written, but I can not agree with the use of the words "kardecism" and "kardecist", once the name Allan Kardec CREATED and used to define the new doctrine was Spiritism. There is no other Spiritism. Its followers are called "spiritists". The doctrine does not contain Kardec´s opinions, ideas or beliefs, so the term "kardecism" is totally inappropriate. But I again have to say that, apart from that, the article is very good. --ArturF 16:12, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there is also a non-Kardecist form of Spiritism, but the Kardecist form was (and is) very strong in some countries, among others France. Andries 18:18, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

text: That is arguable at best.  And it is also beyond the rather obvious point that there are indeed other doctrines that are ocasionally called Spiritism, such as British Spiritism (related to the Fox Sisters), which does claim that spirits of the deceased do not reincarnate.  I do not particularly like the tendency of Kardecists for trying to claim that they are every other school of though, only more evolved, and in this stance it is not defensable at all. Luis Dantas 20:18, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

text: As a matter of fact, I DO blame Kardec for his pretentious posture.  One would think he patented the word or something.  Saying that his doctrine is "the true" Spiritism does not make it true, nor clarifies anything.  On the contrary, it is encouragement to error. Luis Dantas 03:13, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We can't ignore custom and usage. However much purists may wish to restrict the use, word meanings drift. You can find in The Times archive that since at least the 1860s "Spiritism" has been used as a synonym, quite often a pejorative one, for Spiritualism, and Wikipedia should mention that (just as it mentions that "hoover" has become a general term for vacuum cleaner, no longer exclusive to the The Hoover Company). See the The Catholic Encyclopedia and Talk:Spiritism. RayGirvan 03:36, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That may well be true, but it is a different matter - actually, you are arguing for a wider meaning for "Spiritism" than that used by Kardecists, while I propose a stricter one.  Custom and usage vary a lot among countries, I suppose.  The way to go is probably including the various definitions and specifying when and where one is most likely to find each. Luis Dantas 04:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I've no problem with Kardec as being the primary definition, as long as others are mentioned. I can only speak for English language usage, but a quick Google on (Spiritism -Kardec) finds many references for usages of the word (some negative, some not) outside the Kardec context. I have a strong suspicion that in UK usage, the term "spiritist" (small s) may predate Kardec anyway. The earliest The Times reference I can find - 1867 - uses it as a general anthropological term for belief in spirits. RayGirvan 11:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: Addendum: I just checked the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. First citation for "spiritist" = "one who believes in spirits": 1855, a year before Kardec's first book  Le Livre des Esprits. RayGirvan 16:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)