Difference between revisions of "HPB-SB-3-6"
m |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{Style P-HPB SB. Title continued |Mrs. Denton Again in the Field |3-5}} | {{Style P-HPB SB. Title continued |Mrs. Denton Again in the Field |3-5}} | ||
| − | ... | + | {{Style P-No indent|is proven by these phenomena—to the departure from scientific methods indulged in in these investigations by men whose very names should have been a guarantee of scientific accuracy, and to the illogical methods by which the claim that these phenomena are the result of disembodied “spirit action, spirit intelligence and spirit power” is said to be established.}} |
| + | |||
| + | Mr. Editor, the proposition out of which this controversy has grown, is to the effect that Spiritualism, unlike Christianity, rests on a proven or provable basis; a basis of demonstrable fact, and not of faith. I have attempted to show that in order to prove the correctness of this claim Spiritualism must not only prove the genuineness of its phenomena, but it must prove (as Christianity should have been required to do of its phenomena), that their occurrence is due to organized, conscious intelligence, existing outside and independent of all human activities; and I think I have shown this. Can you tell me, then, why it is that my critics, while they persistently condemn my conclusions, have at no time attempted to show me the fallacies of that reasoning by which my conclusions are reached? Why does not Dr. Buchanan— why do not you—why does not any Spiritualist who is capable of reasoning, endeavor to show me in what my error consists? Dr. Buchanan’s plea that it is “too great a waste of time,” is, to say the least, an unworthy rebuff to admitted honesty. Beside, insult is not argument, and “scorn” is not often convincing to one who has reached a conclusion by honest endeavor to arrive at the truth. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Respectfully, &c., {{Style P-Signature in capitals| Elizabeth M. F. Denton.}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''Wellesley, Aug. 2d,'' 1876. | ||
Revision as of 23:10, 16 July 2023
< Mrs. Denton Again in the Field (continued from page 3-5) >
is proven by these phenomena—to the departure from scientific methods indulged in in these investigations by men whose very names should have been a guarantee of scientific accuracy, and to the illogical methods by which the claim that these phenomena are the result of disembodied “spirit action, spirit intelligence and spirit power” is said to be established.
Mr. Editor, the proposition out of which this controversy has grown, is to the effect that Spiritualism, unlike Christianity, rests on a proven or provable basis; a basis of demonstrable fact, and not of faith. I have attempted to show that in order to prove the correctness of this claim Spiritualism must not only prove the genuineness of its phenomena, but it must prove (as Christianity should have been required to do of its phenomena), that their occurrence is due to organized, conscious intelligence, existing outside and independent of all human activities; and I think I have shown this. Can you tell me, then, why it is that my critics, while they persistently condemn my conclusions, have at no time attempted to show me the fallacies of that reasoning by which my conclusions are reached? Why does not Dr. Buchanan— why do not you—why does not any Spiritualist who is capable of reasoning, endeavor to show me in what my error consists? Dr. Buchanan’s plea that it is “too great a waste of time,” is, to say the least, an unworthy rebuff to admitted honesty. Beside, insult is not argument, and “scorn” is not often convincing to one who has reached a conclusion by honest endeavor to arrive at the truth.
Respectfully, &c.,Wellesley, Aug. 2d, 1876.
Cruelty to Women
...
Dr. Buchanan on Speculative Vagaries
...
Elementary Spirits, Art-Magic, &e
...
What is a Dream?
...
Editor's notes