Main Contributors
Let’s talk about Orgone. A form of energy allegedly discovered by Wilhelm Reich, it has spawned an entire system of belief and generation of quackery. Due to the complex nature of this post, I’m going to break it down into topics. Let’s start with the basics:
What is Orgone?
From Wikipedia:
Orgone energy is a term coined by psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich for the “universal life energy” which he was convinced to have discovered in published experiments in the late 1930s. Reich claimed that Orgone energy was a “life energy” which filled all space, was blue in color, and that certain forms of illness were the consequence of depletion or blockages of the energy within the body. These theories are considered pseudoscience by most.
In many ways, the concept of Orgone bears certain resemblances to the Chinese concept of Qi, or how the force worked in Star Wars before Lucas changed his mind and decided informed us it was caused by midi-chlorians. The concept was actually originally based on the Freudian concept of libido. Though Orgone doesn’t obey the same set of laws as the rest of the physical universe (it isn’t subject to the laws of Thermodynamics, for example), it can still be captured and directed. Again, much like Qi, Reich believed that certain illnesses were caused by a lack of Orgone in key places in the body. Naturally, Reich created a machine called a cloudbuster, which he claimed could cause clouds to dissipate merely by manipulating Orgone fields. Later, certain conspiracy groups adapted the technology to disperse so-called chemtrails.
So why should we reject this premise?
Lack of any evidence. Beyond that, lack of any hypothesized mechanism for what Orgone is, how it behaves, or how it is able to do what people think it does. Wilhelm Reich was not a total crackpot; realizing that he was dealing with science outside of his professed field, he enlisted the help of some notable physicists in order to verify his claims. Subsequent tests showed that Reich’s Orgone accumulator was not able to generate the intended effect. Since then, nobody has been able to show conclusively (i.e. in a controlled test) any effect from the direction or accumulation of Orgone energy. Nor have physicists, with their ever-increasing knowledge of what the universe is made of, uncovered some type of particle or field that bears resemblance to Orgone.
All modern claims of the existence and effects of Orgone are anecdotal (personal testimonies), by people who are already believers. Unfortunately (and as amazing a discovery as Orgone would have been), Orgone seems to be yet another theory rejected by science proper, and then adopted down the road as a pet cause of a group of conspiracy theorists.
Crystals
Wilhelm Reich’s “discovery” has taken off with the advent of the internet forum. Today, the internet is littered with sites willing to sell you crystals meant to generate Orgone fields. Depending upon the forum (and subsequently the conspiracy), Orgone can allegedly protect from everything between harmful chemicals sprayed into the atmosphere by the government to control our minds, to cancer-causing cell towers. Fortunately, insofar as conspiracy theories go, this one is relatively harmless. These crystals don’t bring down airplanes, and they aren’t successful at blocking cell phone signals. If people want to run around burying crystals in the ground, there isn’t any reason to stop them. However, their beliefs are still misguided.
What’s the final verdict on Orgone? Science is constantly creating and testing new hypothesis — most of them turn out not to be correct. Every once in a while, conspiracy theorists will pull something out of the “rejected by science” bin, and wave it around to support their claims. The fact that nobody supports their beliefs fits nicely into their conspiracy framework, and it becomes the science that they don’t want you to know. There is no proof of the existence of Orgone, and the effects of Orgone have never been observed. To any reasonably minded person, this should be enough to doubt the existence of Orgone.
12 responses so far ↓
1
AaronRGod // May 14, 2008 at 10:19 am
Hey there fellas,
I finally decided that I’d send you a little note about the appearance of the credibility of your evidence. Now don’t get me wrong: I respect the writing that you guys do on this site - you have some very interesting and entertaining articles. It’s just that I feel that you may be waining in the effective evidence department when the majority of your links all come from Wikipedia. Personally, I feel that Wikipedia is good for general reading, but isn’t necessarily great for use as evidence in an argument. Perhaps in the future, you may wish to delve in to some of the websites quoted on Wikipedia articles to make sure that you’re obtaining the correct facts and data, rather than just rolling with the interpretations of countless article editors with unknown motives and beliefs regarding any topic. Maybe I’m really pointing out the irony of skeptics taking Wikipedia at face value? (:
Now I am aware that there was a study a couple of years ago which found that Wikipedia has nearly the same level of accuracy as other online encyclopedias like Encyclopedia Britannica (I have the physical article from a different source if someone wants a copy, but here’s a link to the news article: http://www.news.com/2100-1038_3-5997332.html), but my assertion is simply that, from a professional point of view, Wikipedia links may not be the most credible looking thing to fill up your articles with.
Anyway, this was just something to think about. Keep up the good work, gentlemen.
2
Mitchell // May 14, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Hey Aaron,
I link to Wikipedia in my writing a lot, because I find it’s a good way to get a quick overview of a topic (and it often is quite accurate). Please don’t mistake this to mean I get all of my information from Wikipedia. Though I don’t always do exhaustive research into a topic (and some of what I write is my opinion/firsthand experience), I do check sources besides Wikipedia. If you’re interested, I got some of my information from http://www.orgone.org.
As for the veracity of Wikipedia, I generally tend to trust it when the articles are large and well-known, and become more skeptical when the articles are smaller and have fewer contributions. When in doubt, I also like to check out the article’s discussion page to see what’s going on behind the scenes.
Thanks for reading!
3
Aion // May 16, 2008 at 1:38 am
Ugh, Wiki ! Please, Wiki is easily manipulated by bitter shut-ins with too much free time on their hands. Specialists who could contribute and really elaborate artcles often complain about Wiki and the way just one person can utterly destroy an article.
And what about actually READING some of Reich’s work, before passing judgement on Orgone and Orgonomy ? I mean, just a suggestion. Or not, I mean, you could just keep doing what you are doing, regurgitating things about Orgone that other people who also have not been bothered to actualy read Reich have written.
As for the crystals and such, had you actuallly read Reich, or anyone who has, you’d know that Reich had nothign to do with Orgone and crystals. Didn’t write a word about orgone being influenced by crystals. Apparently you’ve seen Reich’s name and Orgone bandied about on sites that have crystals to sell. So what. The only people thinking Orgone and Orgonomy have anything to do with crystals are people who clearly know absolutely nothing about Reich’s work, Orgone, or the scienc eof Orgonomy.
You keep weird company. I’m almost embarassed for you.
Your decree “There is no proof of the existence of Orgone, and the effects of Orgone have never been observed. To any reasonably minded person, this should be enough to doubt the existence of Orgone.” is based on what ?
Ignorance and lazyness. Imagine actually sitting down and researching someone’s life’s work by reading what they published. Why bother when the internet gives you all the easy answers ! You can walk around and feel all smug and superior ! Yay you !
4
kyle90 // May 16, 2008 at 7:51 am
“I’m almost embarassed for you.” says the guy who believes in mystical energy fields that just happen to not be detectable by any scientific means. If your post weren’t absolutely dripping with sarcasm I might bother trying to do this nicely, but as it stands: you are an idiot. So wikipedia happens to disagree with you about the existence of orgone. A rational person would probably understand this to mean that orgone does not, in fact, exist (and yes, a truly rational person would do more research, you are correct about that). But you seem to assume that it implies that wikipedia is wrong and edited only by “bitter shut-ins” who have some sort of agenda against the truth of orgone.
Wait, it’s not the government covering it up? Or “big pharma”? Or the Jews? Or the reptilians from Zeta Reticuli? Just some losers in their parents’ basements? Man, at least most other conspiracy theories are interesting enough to warrant a mention on an episode of The X-Files. But this… oooh, we’re all shaking in fear of the secret global cabal of wikipedia disinformation nerds.
Down to business though, this statement you made caught my eye:
“Your decree “There is no proof of the existence of Orgone, and the effects of Orgone have never been observed. To any reasonably minded person, this should be enough to doubt the existence of Orgone.” is based on what ?”
Thankfully, we don’t have to answer that. Three words: burden of proof. It’s on YOU to show that orgone DOES exist, not on us to show that it’s not. And so far, you haven’t been very convincing. You suggest that we read the actual writings of Reich. This is not a bad idea, but I would counter it and ask: where is the modern research on orgone? Surely if it’s a scientific phenomenon then there must be new research published on it all the time, right? Otherwise you sound like the creationists who accuse evolutionary biologists of “not even reading Darwin”, as if the first text written on the subject is the definitive one. That’s not how science works. (Another point is that modern “research” on orgone, from what I can glean from sites selling the crystals, is all [big surprise here] supportive of the use of the crystals. Funny how fake science always seems to include the words “and for just $69.99, all this can be yours today!” at the end)
Anyways, 3:1 odds says that this guy is selling some product that competes with orgone crystals.
5
Mitchell // May 16, 2008 at 9:05 am
It’s somewhat ridiculous to suggest that one must read the entire life works of a person in order to observe empirical evidence for an effect they wrote about. I’ve never read the Principia Mathematica, but that doesn’t stop me from observing, or even understanding, gravity.
Also, not that I think Wikipedia is a bad source, I’ll point out for a second time that it was not my only source. (Curiously, Aion didn’t seem to be able to identify which part of what I wrote about was incorrect.)
6
ToddInCali // Jun 27, 2008 at 3:10 pm
kyle90:
You could not be more incorrect, I have absolutely nothing to peddle as far as Orgonomy is concerned, and I never made any weird conspiracy claims, which appears to be an obsession of yours, not mine.
I had to laugh at you, saying gee, maybe I should actually READ something about a subject before I pass judgment on it! But then you immediately pawn off your own responsibility by saying we should really only be bothered with what is CURRENTLY being written. This is good enough in general if you are just a technician. Experts in their respective fields simply do not consider this to be enough.
You give Darwin as an example, it’s a pretty good one. You imply that this first text was not significant enough or definitive enough to be bothered with - just read what’s been written recently, it’s modern. Again, this is good enough for amateurs and technicians, but there is a great deal you will never know or comprehend, no matter how arrogant you are about your own self imposed ignorance.
Now you demand of me a burden of proof. I don’t have anything to prove here, my statements I stand by, YOU and others posting on the topic do not even KNOW anything ABOUT it. You hold up the counterfeiters and fraudsters of the internet as definitive of the subject and representative of it. I’m simply saying that this is a remarkably stupid and ignorant thing to do.
7
ToddInCali // Jun 27, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Mitchell:
You’ve never read Principia Mathematica ? Why not ?
You claim that wiki was not your only source, it IS the only source you quoted and placed prominently, incorrect information and all, as though it were authoritative.
I never said that you had to read the entire life works of Reich to come up with a somewhat plausible and accurate definition of orgone. If you were an honest man and had done ANY real work on the subject, you would have found that “Selected Writings” has a quick and thorough summary of much of Reich’s work, and in his own words.
Reich is an easy target for people like you.
You’ll never actually read his work, much less understand it. You’ll just parrot what others who have wither also not read anything from the source, or just grab any internet bullshit and hold it up as representative of Reich’s work.
Have a little integrity. Just a little, it wont kill you.
8
Mitchell Gerskup // Jun 27, 2008 at 5:19 pm
You claim that wiki was not your only source, it IS the only source you quoted and placed prominently, incorrect information and all, as though it were authoritative.
Wikipedis is a pretty authoritative source, in most popular matters. That being said, you still haven’t identified the incorrect portions of what I wrote.
Reich is an easy target for people like you.
Agreed. It isn’t much of a challenge to go after somebody like Reich, but I don’t always have the time to go after more serious pseudo-science, and beating a dead horse can sometimes be fun.
Now, if you would just be kind enough to point out what you think is incorrect.
9
fastronaut // Sep 3, 2008 at 10:50 pm
O, this one was way too easy. The thing to really be skeptical about is Reich’s assertion of a mind-body connection, since that actually makes up a bulk of his contribution to the arena of therapy. Or you might want to dispute his claims that fascist ideology employs specific rhetorical strategies. In other words, you should go for much bigger game.
10
fastronaut // Sep 5, 2008 at 7:04 pm
(And since you guys seem to like classical references, I thought I’d pass along this observation. In a way I see Reich as an modernist inheritor of German romanticism, having attained, in the fabrication of orgone, his own version of the mystical Blue Flower.)
11
fastronaut // Sep 5, 2008 at 7:06 pm
A, not “an.”
12
earwig // Oct 8, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Ahh you skeptics are so clever. You think that you know everything by doing nothing other than reading other people’s opinions.
I’ll make no statements about the existence or otherwise of orgone energy but having built an ‘orgone accumulator’ about nine years ago while studding science at university I can say that it does exhibit strange thermodynamic behavior. I find it hard to explain how the inside temperature of the OA could drop below the outer ambient temp and then rise up above the outer ambient temp over the course of a day (twice over two months of study) and in general remain at a constantly higher temp inside than the ambient air outside. Einstein could not explain this either and abruptly ended correspondence with Reich once Reich had proved beyond doubt that the phenomena was real.
The mind-body connection was demonstrated by measuring the skin potential of subjects and correlating it to the subjective emotions at the time. Happiness/pleasure = voltage rise, anxious = voltage drop. Seems like a clear mind-body connection to me. I also would recommend some actual reading of his work.
As for crystals and orgonite - again a few simple experiments will easily establish that interesting things are occurring. The ice one and plant growth tests are both easy and orgonite is simple to make (or buy).
http://www.orgone-art.com/anglais/visibleeffectvegetation.htm
You must log in to post a comment.