An Orgonomic Theory of Good and Evil
The Orgone Directional Thesis
'Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil.'
Genesis Chapter 3
‘This greatest riddle in nature’
Reich (referring to consciousness) in Character Analysis
One can define goodness as thoughts, intentions and acts that lead to benefit, happiness and value. Evil can be defined as thoughts, intentions and acts that are undertaken to cause harm or to destroy value. Although good and evil are hard to define exactly most people would agree that they exist.
Orgone is a life-energy discovered by Wilhelm Reich. In my work I define it slightly more broadly than Reich did as a life-force - a continuum of spirit, energy and matter properties. I argue previously that such a continuum itself possesses consciousness rather than just giving rise to consciousness mechanically or energetically. I call this the, ‘Orgone-As-Conscious-In-Itself,’ view and it forms the basis of an Orgone Continuum, Life-force Theory of Consciousness. I believe that orgone is a conscious, universal and physical life-force. If orgone is such a continuum, the basis of reality, this brings to mind a key philosophical problem. This is a problem common to all philosophical and religious views: why does evil actually exist? In the terms here, if a universal, creative life-force exists, why is there also evil?
Reich had two theories which could lead to an orgonomic theory of good and evil. One based on desert formation and one based on an experiment called the Oranur Experiment. I shall call these the Desert Thesis and the Oranur Thesis respectively.
The Desert Thesis was based on Reich's experiences during his cloudbusting operations. He noticed that deserts were prickly, oppressive environments that are thirsty and water depleted. He observed that plants in the desert developed hardened exteriors and hollowed out interiors, like a cactus. He put forward an analogy with certain hardened, dried-out and hollow character types in people, part of a process which Reich called character armouring. He likened some of these character types in people to a certain 'desert-like' structure. Reich didn't develop this idea but it formed the creative basis of Demeo's in-depth Saharasia study.
Based on Reich’s work, Demeo's PhD anthropological study found a cross-cultural, statistically significant link between desert cultures and armoured character structures going back some five millenia. This was especially reflected in the way children and young adults were treated. In the Desert Thesis we have a sequence of steps that leads to suffering and therefore evil. Firstly, there is a change in the type of environment - desertification. This causes widespread trauma as generations of people in previously lush areas compete for now scarce resources or starve. Warriors take over what resources remain and raid the fallen cities and towns before invading the non-desert regions next to them. So the next stage is mass societal trauma over many generations. In reaction to this mass trauma humans armour. This is both a physical armouring of muscles in order to suppress uncomfortable feelings and a character armouring. This armouring gets structured into families and then into societies which reproduce the armouring in each generation. This creates ongoing suffering and evil.
In synopsis we have desert-trauma-armouring-societal armouring-evil. This process then repeats without the need for the initial agent (the desert). Armoured cultures being more aggressive then take over or influence less armoured cultures globally.
Demeo has argued in personal exchanges that the Desert Thesis represents the 'cause' of human suffering. Aligning causation and an aspect of a process is common to materialism and the new evolution of materialism - which I call energy-ism. I define energy-ism as the attempt to explain all phenomena through the movement of energy. I see it as an update of materialism but essentially sharing much in common with it. Energy-ism, like materialism, cannot explain the causation of armouring. It also cannot explain many other observations such as possible paranormal phenomena. Any non-local or spiritual phenomena or anything outside of time (eg. precognition) are also beyond its remit. It is very difficult to explain consciousness too with a materialist or energy-ist viewpoint (except to characterise it as an accidental epiphenomena).
Epiphenomena are a mere side-effect of something else. For example, consciousness can be seen as an epiphenomena of neurons in the materialist view or as an epiphenomena of the movement of energy in the energy-ist view (for example the view of consciousnesses in Systems Theories). Both views I consider to be unsatisfactory explanations for consciousness. This is a separate topic but briefly, we can look at a couple reasons why this is so. One, it is taking something that is a primary characteristic of reality (consciousness) and making it a secondary characteristic (an epiphenomena). Something that all organisms strive toward – expressing their consciousness - is just a side-effect of the material or energy within those organisms acting as a machine or a system. Something that appears to lead the process (consciousness) is relegated to an after-effect. In any case, the universe is not simply a machine or a system and nor are the creatures within it. A better analogy would be that the universe and the entities within it behave like organisms (Sheldrake). Secondly, it doesn’t explain why the universe creates ever greater consciousness if the universe itself is accidental and not driven by a conscious force.
To return to causation, materialists and energy-ists must misclassify it as causation itself appears to be an aspect of consciousness. They do not want consciousness within their theories if it can be avoided. Therefore materialists (and energy-ists) often assign causation to material or energetic effects or agents. For example the agency of the brain is given a causative role by materialists in consciousness. An agent of consciousness, the neurons, 'causes' the consciousness. Or DNA 'causes' and 'directs' the organism like a mini-Emperor. As Sheldrake has noted this is like saying a TV set must 'cause' its pictures because that’s where the pictures ‘are’. Never mind that organisms without any neurons at all can have the traits of being conscious (such as the dislike of harmful stimuli that even an amoeba will display). Let’s forget that people born without much of their physical brains can still be mentally normal (from MRI studies of those with greatly reduced cerebral brain matter see Sheldrake's Science Delusion and elsewhere). Never mind that some organisms exist prior to DNA or RNA even being created or that genetic information is transferred without DNA (such as through membranes). We must ignore that we do not know how exactly DNA creates a template for the organism as a whole, if in fact it even does do that. We must instead take a step in the chain of effects, the neural hardware (the brain) or the protein synthesis processor (DNA), and label that as the ultimate cause. One cannot in fact find causation anywhere in materialist or energy-ist theories. Causation must either be ignored, invented or dismissed as irrelevant. Sheldrake gives a deeper exposition of the unsatisfactory nature of the mechanistic view of science in The Science Delusion if one wants to examine this and related areas in depth.
Demeo in Saharasia, classes the desert as an 'agent'. An agent, as we have seen, is a step in the process of something happening. Here the desert is a step in the process of armouring. But in personal discussion he states that the desert is actually not just an agent but the cause of armouring. If that is the case then what is the cause of the deserts? The Ice Ages ending may have caused the deserts. Or perhaps a solar system cataclysm such as noted by Velikovsky caused the great desertification of 4000BC to present. But what then caused the Ice Ages or the solar system cataclysm? Obviously this is a never ending series of 'effects' in a chain. So are we then to conclude that mankind's suffering is simply due to being victimised by a hostile environment? If we take the deserts as ultimately causative of armouring and thus of human evil, we are indeed the victims of external circumstance. It should be noted that I am not saying here that deserts are not an immediate precipitating factor in the appearance of armouring.
Even if we say alternatively that there is a functional identity or functional relationship between deserts and armoured society then this means that the psychic phenomena of evil and the physical phenomenon of a harsh desert environment arise from one Common Functioning Principle (CFP). So we haven't bypassed consciousness at all in the Desert Thesis but merely relocated it a step backwards as the CFP (of which the desert is a variation), see illustration below.
Desert Thesis - Common Functioning Principle of Evil
The desert becomes a variation of evil consciousness (represented physically by Oranur/DOR) if a causative theory is to be had within the Desert Thesis. Although there is convincing evidence for the Desert Thesis in Demeo's Saharasia and as useful a theory as it is, I don't believe it is a causative theory on its own. This is not a criticism. Saharasia does not have to be a causative theory to be successful. I believe it is a sequential theory as it describes a sequence of effects.
As we have discussed, causation is problematic in any material or energetic theory. Classical Western philosophy has questioned if causation can lie within the material or energetic planes. Perhaps causation can only be found within consciousness.
Oranur is a destructive energy created when a small amount of nuclear radioactive material (NUR) is placed for some time within a powerful orgone accumulator (OR), hence the term, ORaNUR. It attacks people physically and psychologically and creates a storm of reaction within a strong orgone field. Eventually the orgone field (OR) can overcome the NUR creating a very powerfully positive substance called ORUR (ORgone treated URanium). No one has tried to investigate orur for nearly 70 years since Reich. Reich felt that orur could help provide one of the most powerful healing modalities ever known. Reich believed that orur could, ‘turn into one of the greatest healing powers humanity had ever possessed.’ (Contact with Space). There has been one single published oranur experiment since Reich which didn't attempt to replicate Reich's effects, even on a small scale, though it did confirm an anomaly (Milian, V. Pulse of the Planet 5). Reich did detail his oranur experiments in great detail and there were dozens of witnesses (mostly doctors) to the effects documented.
Oranur, by virtue of an ability to find a person's weak spots, may possess some kind of consciousness I believe. Reich felt oranur had an acute selective ability to find a person's weaknesses, but he didn't look into why it has this ability. Both orgone and oranur seem to be able to intelligently relate to the body and mind - to make conscious selections, they are not dumb energies working mechanically as Reich would be the first to admit. So an Oranur Thesis, by courtesy of perhaps already including consciousness, could be developed into a causative theory of good and evil. The orgone philosopher, Steven Katz, and myself both believe orgone and oranur to possess consciousness inherently (see also Steve's Blog). Reich hinted at this view himself but did not develop it. I have argued in detail that orgone, the creative energy of the universe, is itself conscious in the Orgone Continuum Theory. If orgone is conscious, oranur probably is too, seeing as orgone and oranur are possibly aspects of a singular force.
Katz initiated the Oranur Thesis in a theological context, alongside his mentor, Bob Passotti. Katz notes that the artificial division between physics and metaphysics had, just as Reich noted in the First Oranur Report (In Selected Writings of Wilhelm Reich, Oranur Chapter), irretrievably broken down. According to Katz, the orgone energy is the creative energy that emerges from God and oranur is itself a portal to the demonic realms. So there is a functional identity between orgone and God’s functioning and between oranur and the demonic realms according to Katz. The artificial boundary between the subjective, good and evil, and the objective, orgone and oranur, is no longer completely viable. The psychic and the physical could be one and the same. If we take those two aspects of the orgone continuum (orgone and oranur) as inherently possessing consciousness, there can perhaps be no division at all. They are not even really distinct aspects of a single entity in that case, two sides of the same coin for example (this was the position that Reich argued in Contact with Space). Any differentiation between the physical and the metaphysical become merely hypothetical if the force in question is itself conscious. The physical and the metaphysical become merely two modes of looking at the same entity.
Medical View of Evil
Reich took what I call a ‘medical view of evil’ and this is actually the consensus throughout religion and philosophy. An alternative view, that I call the ‘eternal warfare view of evil’ has few modern supporters. In the medical view of evil, it is assumed that there is a singular God or singular universal mind, or in secular terms, a universal nature. Although this singular entity is omnipresent (everywhere) and omniscient (in all awareness) it is not omnipotent (all powerful). Contrary to the simplistic, strawman arguments of the militant athiests, most religious views do not see God as the 17th century version - an omnipotent 'High God' supreme creator being. The High God concept so loved by Dawkins would be considered idolatrous by most modern theologians (because it reduces God to a human-like being). God is also not omnipotent in at least one sense because all beings are said to have their own free will, to do good or evil. In addition, many consider God to be transcendent of all human terms including good, evil, existence or non-existence. Omnipotence is another human concept which would be transcended by such a God. Most monotheistic views would agree that individual beings have their own minds and can follow their own paths. There are a few religious and materialist exceptions which advocate complete determinism but these are the exceptions as the implications are nonsensical to most people. Some implications of materialistic determinism is that we are all merely robots living in a machine universe and one can predict absolutely everything theoretically. Consciousnesses is merely a convenient illusion in this view.
To return to the medical view of evil, at a deep level, we can all be said to be aspects of one entity. Individual aspects of this entity can become isolated, lose their wholeness or simply choose an evil path. Just as a body or cell can become diseased so can aspects of reality - an organism, an environment, become less whole, less ordered, less vital. So being in a state of evil is therefore a disease, a ‘medical’ issue philosophically. Most religions and humanities take this medical view of evil.
An alternative view (the ‘eternal warfare view of evil’ as I call it) is that the universe reflects a conflict of eternally opposing forces. Generally, a good, constructive force, God, and an evil, destructive force is forwarded. The physical universe is not one singular entity but is the juxtaposition of two or more competing forces. The medical view of evil is more compatible with the monotheistic viewpoint and the eternal warfare view is more compatible with dualistic systems such as Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism from ancient Persia. However some forms of religion, such as Gnosticism, seem to have a mix of the two views of evil mentioned above. Some religions in practise have a mix of the above views even if their theology does not.
It is noted that the dualist view of evil (the eternal warfare view) is not similar to that of polytheism however. Many apparently polytheistic traditions such as Hinduism and native beliefs are ultimately monotheistic in that they posit a singular universal source, for example, Brahma or the Great Spirit. The various ‘gods’ in polytheism are merely conscious entities, like ourselves, but of a different order. Brahma or the Great Spirit is not a 'god' but the universal source, similar to the monotheistic God. Virtually the entire human race takes a monotheistic position ultimately. This is interesting philosophically. I would include Buddhism here and even some agnostics and atheists as the post-modern theological view of God as a transcendental force is very similar to the Buddhist view of the state of Buddhahood. Even many agnostics (including Darwin and Einstein) would likely agree, or at least not reject, the difficult to understand and subtle definition of God that modern theology describes. Dawkins and his colleagues are attacking a 17th century concept of God and a Biblical literalism which is scripturally incorrect anyway (the Bible doesn't have to be read entirely literally, this was not how it was originally intended to be understood by Judaic scholars, theologists argue). It seems virtually all the greatest scientists in history have been theists or at least agnostic. I personally include Reich as a theist. His position, especially in his last years, would be close to the post-modern theological view in my opinion. In letters written in prison he specifically stated his theistic belief and I outline these in the Conclusion. The dichotomy between truth in religion and in science is false and always has been false. However science and religion have also been unified in subtle, almost underhand ways. For example, I view the Big Bang theory as a religious theory (because I don't accept it as empirically evidenced and it implies a creator God). Most people however view it as a scientific theory and take the implications onboard unconsciously (a mechanical universe created by a supernatural God).
I also believe it is important for orgonomy as a science to be able to comprehend consciousness and spirituality – the vast majority of the human race believes there is something beyond the material and energetic planes. Most humans on this planet believe in a spiritual reality. Atheism is not the norm of the human race. Consciousness and spirituality as the mere side-effect of a non-conscious energy or of a dumb inanimate matter just doesn’t stack up for most of humanity. Reich never put forward an orgonomic explanation for consciousness – his theory about perception was an early Systems Theory (see Orgone Continuum). In this theory, orgone moves around inside a membrane, and consciousness somehow arises. Although this theory may well describe part of how perception functions in an organism it is not a very suitable theory for explaining the existence of consciousness itself. I think Reich knew this.
Most orgonomists would agree that orgone is a living energy - a life-force. One can measure the real effects orgone has on plants and environments to increase their life potential. But how can one have life without consciousness? Is it not impossible for a living energy to also not be conscious in itself? Life automatically implies consciousness I believe. Should not a life-force be a consciousness-force also then? Does this living force which itself creates matter, require a boundary of matter before it can be conscious? Is matter therefore more important than orgone in the creation of consciousness? In the current theoretical view of consciousness in orgonomy, it is indeed matter that is more important. This is I believe incorrect. Orgone is primary in genetic terms to matter and is probably inherent to consciousness too. The current position in orgonomy is also internally contradictory. All medical orgonomists tacitly accept that memory is somehow within the orgone. The dissolution of armouring brings to the surface the memories that created it - as every therapeutic orgonomist knows. Therefore memory and consciousness are not local to any single material structure in the body but are somehow connected to the free flow of orgone in the body as a whole (and probably outside it too).
To return to good and evil, there are problems with the medical view of evil. If one says that a certain state of life is an illness that is making a judgement. However unpleasant or dysfunctional that state is seen as being it is still just a state of life. Someone might say that being evil is just a part of life - it is not in itself an illness. If that is a person’s judgement it is hard to disagree. Anything that exists is in effect natural – including armouring and the current few thousand years of evil behaviour and abject suffering of our unhappy and cruelly mistreated world. Our misguided society does not exist outside of nature in a vacuum. Nature has created the circumstances of the universe which has allowed our state of life to exist – even if it is an aberration, it is a natural aberration. Or one could say in illness, or in an evil state of life, one’s functioning is impaired. But again who is to say which set of functions are the proper, full set and which are the impaired, partial set? So the medical view of evil is perhaps unscientific. It is saying in effect, "these are the preferable states of life, we’ll call these ‘health’ and they are ‘good’. These are the ‘bad’ states of life we’ll call these ‘disease’ and they are ‘bad’ states”. There may be good reason for these judgements, they may even be universally agreed - but they are still judgements.
Although evil is quite separate to goodness, there does not seem to be more than one cosmic energy in the experimentation of orgonomy. There does not currently appear to be a life-force and a death-force with separate and competing consequences. Reich saw evil arising out of the blocking of the path of the creative orgone. Physically, muscular armouring (or brain armouring/immobilisation in schizophrenia) would perform this blockage. Emotionally, this blockage would be maintained by the character structure. So this blockage, armouring, would come into place through these mechanisms Reich described. Humans put these mechanisms into place in reaction to prolonged trauma. So in orgonomy, evil arises from reaction to external trauma (producing armouring) which then places blockages on the free flow of orgone.
Common Functioning Principle (CFP) of Good and Evil According to Reich
(Diagram by Southgate)
The round core of the base arrow (the CFP) represents the orgone energy of the organism.
Reich rejected Freud’s death drive and masochistic drives saying that humans had but one drive - towards pleasure, health and life but that this drive becomes blocked and then expresses itself in a twisted manner in masochism and other situations. Freud’s death drive then became illusory for Reich, the processes being merely the thwarting of the orgone energy in its quest for healthy expression (as illustrated above). Reich did reconcile himself to some extent with Freud's death drive in 'Reemergence of Freud's Death Instinct as DOR Energy' in Orgonomic Medicine Vol2 Num1 1956 but he maintained that although the Death Instinct was a premonition of the DOR energy, DOR itself was not conscious and therefore not an instinctual process. It is matter of argument whether Reich shifted from a materialist tunderstanding of orgone and DOR between 1956 and his death in prison in 1957.
Ultimately, in theological terms, there does not appear to be a supreme good versus a supreme evil - a life drive versus a death drive. Reich’s singular cosmic life-force would rather correspond to the existence of a singular good force of a creative universe. From an orgonomic viewpoint, there appears to be just one cosmic energy that functions creatively (orgone) or destructively (oranur). This doesn’t explain why evil exists however – even if we go through all the mechanics or energetic components - desert-trauma-armour-armoured society. This is still a list of agents in a chain.
The singular force of orgone also doesn’t explain why one cosmic force can manifest in a dualistic way (creativity versus destruction, life versus death, orgone energy versus oranur energy). Our experienced universe is undoubtedly dualistic, we cannot deny that – so why is that so when we can observe only one cosmic force, orgone, and not two forces, an orgone life-force and a separate oranur death-force? We can counter this by arguing that why the universe is dualistic is not important, the point being to change our circumstances. But I would argue that we are inherently inquisitive creatures and in any case, understanding our predicament better may assist us in our struggles.
Orgone Directional Thesis
What I feel is that we have one force – the orgone continuum, but that this force manifests in two distinct ‘directions’. One can have Spirit-Energy-Matter, the creative, 'good' direction of orgone. I agree with Katz, that the creative good direction of orgone may ultimately originate from God. And one can have Matter-Energy-Spirit the destructive direction of orgone or 'evil' which is 'pulled' back towards the spirit realm by negative consciousness.
Orgone Directional Thesis
Spirit-Energy-Matter (Orgone energy, Creativity, Life, Goodness) -->
<-- Matter-Energy-Spirit (Oranur energy, Destruction, Death, Evil).
Nuclear fission corresponds to the evil direction as does conventional electrical forces – both entail the destruction of matter or matter being in a highly overcharged, unstable state (splitting of the nucleus or loss/overflow of the charged particle/field respectively). This leads to release of energy in the form of nuclear radioactivity or excess electrical charge, which then impacts consciousness in various ways (spirit). So again, Matter-Energy-Spirit.
In the good direction I propose that we have an outburst from consciousness or spirit which manifests into orgone energy and then into matter, Spirit-Energy-Matter. In the evil direction you have consciousness as the ‘attractor’, or ‘consumer’ of energy but the process first becomes manifest with matter. There is the destruction of matter, which then moves into the realm of orgone energy as excitation (oranur) or depletion (DOR). This energetic change then stimulates and is absorbed by consciousness or spirit as I call it. So in both the good and evil directions, the causation I believe lies in spirit or consciousness. (I define spirit as physical consciousness – see The Orgone Continuum Theory).
In goodness the cause, within spirit, is prior to the processes in energy and then matter. In evil the cause is subsequent to the process (of Matter-Energy-Spirit). It is still a causative process in evil but instead of being a prior ‘initiator’, it is a subsequent ‘attractor’ or 'consumer'. In terms of time one is before the process (goodness) and one afterwards (evil) but in terms of cause, the cause lies within consciousness and is the primary principle. So the cause is independent of the time events, especially in the evil direction. Spirit or consciousness lies outside of time I believe. It is only energy and matter that lie within time I contend. This is why I believe precognition is a logical occurrence incidentally.
Nuclear radioactive material within a highly charged orgone environment creates oranur. This corresponds to the evil direction too. Matter breaks down (nuclear destruction) this creates orgone energy overcharge (oranur) which then impacts consciousness (spirit), so Matter-Energy-Spirit. X-rays can also create oranur in a high charge orgone environment. This too corresponds to the evil direction. X-rays, like electricity in general, are a destruction or overcharge/overflow of matter - electrons or charged particles in intense movement. This antagonises the orgone energy field thus creating an overcharged atmosphere (oranur energy) which then affects the body and mind (spirit). So the evil direction applies of Matter-Energy-Spirit. The CERN lab incidentally is likely to create large amounts of oranur - the equivalent of a city's electrical charge rushing around the high orgone environment of the Swiss/French border.
The Desert Thesis also corresponds to the Directional Theory. The desert reflects a breakdown in the planetary balance of matter - a change in the water balance of the planet as a whole. The change in water availability turns a previously lush life environment into a harsh oranur, death environment energetically. As the water levels change the plant and animal life is destroyed and complexity is reduced, life becomes scarce. Ecological cooperation is reduced and competition becomes the key in a fight for individual survival. The life environment, exposed to the sun without cloud-cover becomes overcharged or depleted, an oranur or DOR environment respectively. In reaction to this deadly change and in order to protect themselves from it, humans become armoured, physically and in character type. This armouring becomes embedded and recreated by society and the rest, as they say, is history, sadly. So water depletion (matter) leads to an oranur/dor type environment (energy) which in turn leads to armouring and character changes (spirit) - Matter-Energy-Spirit. There is an energetic change before a matter change but the evil process is only manifest when the matter changes so therefore I take matter as the beginning of the process in the evil direction.
The Directional Thesis is also seen in bions. Bions are tiny vesicles the size of a clump of viruses, discovered by Reich. Other scientific heretics, such as Gaston Naessens, have also discovered similar vesicles. Bions are not yet recognised by mainstream biology. They are halfway between matter and life and are created when sterile matter is superheated in water. Bions are revolutionary in biology. Biogenesis from inanimate matter is absolutely real. Proto life-forms can be created from non-living matter in a humble kitchen or a simple lab. It is unclear exactly how these proto life-forms evolve upwards into complex forms but the initial emergence of life is known. I have seen it myself under completely sterile conditions with top of the range light microscopes. Newly formed living vesicles were clearly visible - from super heated iron particles in totally sterile conditions (Peter Jones, Orgonomy UK).
The Directional Thesis can be seen in healthy bions such as SAPA Bions (Sand Packet Bions). Reich first saw these bions when sand was broken down in the bion process. In SAPA bions I believe there is a movement from unseen life/consciousness (spirit) to orgone energy to the material bion (matter). The preceding unseen 'life/consciousness' part could be corresponded to spirit awaiting its emergence into the energy and material realms, but this is not evidenced currently, it is just my intuition. However, the observation that higher orgone charges within matter (for example sun-heated sand) can lead to more developed and luminous bions may support my position eventually.
In unhealthy, less developed bions, such as the disease causing T-Bacilli, the reverse appears to be true. The matter of the body breaks down and the cells devolve into the smaller, T-Bacilli rod bions. So the evil direction, Matter-Energy-Spirit, appears to be involved. There is a loss of material integrity in the cells, then an ongoing energy loss and finally death or reintegration into spirit. However it's also true that an energy change (loss of orgone charge) precedes the matter change here (cells to T-bacilli) but the general direction is still one of Matter-Energy-Spirit. As argued previously, the T-Bacilli process only becomes manifest with the changes in matter. If the orgone energy charge is corrected the matter will remain intact and the T-Bacilli won't form. The change in matter (healthy cells to T-bacilli) leads to further energy changes (DOR) and eventually changes in spirit or consciousness (disease, death).
Fire and the consumption of plants and animals can also be corresponded to the evil direction. Although fire is essential for our survival, from the point of view of the matter involved it is destructive. No animal or plant wants to be eaten. If we could ask its opinion, I doubt coal would want to be burnt. Matter may itself have consciousness since it ultimately derives from spirit I believe. I doubt matter would desire to be destroyed. From an animal or plant point of view, becoming food is not good. Animals can be cruel or even evil and all the negative emotions and attributes of man can be seen to a lesser degree in animals. Jealousy, anger and other emotions can be seen in animals. Plants go to great lengths with poisons and barbs not to be eaten and their communication and sensory abilities belie having much more advanced consciousness than many would credit. Plants, like animals do not generally like being eaten. It would appear that the evil direction is built into material nature and is unavoidable in this realm. But the evil direction appears to be outweighed by the sheer force of the creative direction emanating from the core of the universe. An apple tree needs its fruit to be eaten and destroyed in order to propagate its seeds but the tree itself produces prodigious amounts of fruits, much more than would ever be needed for survival of the species – so the good direction is the strongest in the apple tree. It doesn't appear that orgone and oranur are two equal directions either. Could we have such an amazing universe if that were the case? If the spirit realm is the primary realm of the universe and one of its innate tendencies is to move outwards into energy and matter then that would also indicate that the good direction would have precedence. The creative existence of the universe and even the consumptive and reflective existence of evil would indicate the primacy of goodness. This is because the universe itself is a creative process. Creative processes reflect the good direction generally.
Matter and energy contracting backwards into spirit would coincide with the evil direction. Expanding outwards and forwards from Spirit to Energy to Matter would correspond to the good direction. This has philosophical and religious implications regarding the nature of prayer and meditation. Goodness in prayer and meditation might start with spirit but inspire changes in energy and manifest finally in material reality. Prayer and meditation would not be an escape from reality back into spirit - it would be a creative process, from spirit outwards. In prayer one would enter the spirit realm, become refreshed and then move outwards into the energy and matter realms.
Goodness in sexuality might also essentially be an expansion outwards from spirit to energy to matter. First there is a conscious connection (spirit), then an energetic attraction (fusion, rise in energy levels) and finally material unity (consummation), so, Spirit-Energy-Matter. The modern tendency to divorce sexuality from its spiritual beginnings appears to be an example of travelling in the opposite direction to goodness.
Destructive emotions tend to travel in the opposite direction too. Hatred for example, if acted upon, imposes itself materially, the energy then contracts in the victim and the spirit of the victim is immobilised – Matter-Energy-Spirit. In abusive situations the material level of an organism or environment is attacked, its energy released and then consumed by the attacker at the spirit level, so Matter-Energy-Spirit – evil.
It puzzled Reich why man was the only animal to become an aberration in nature, to build psychotic, armoured, nature-destroying societies. I think the Directional Thesis may answer that to some degree. It is perhaps not the nature of mans aberration that is unnatural but simply the degree. Other animals also armour (there is some evidence that the processes of armouring Reich noted in man are also seen in primates and sheep for example). There is evil in nature but these other animals cannot overcome their environment or impose their consciousness to the degree that humans can. Humans also survive most environmental traumas - other animals without our generality and adaptation abilities would simply die out in that area. So other animals, similarly traumatised, would not survive in a newly armoured state. Our aberration is possibly a question of quantity not quality then. We also have a greater degree of consciousness with which to be evil with when compared to some animals. Cats will maim creatures for fun in their play, lions will gradually eat younger elephants whilst they are still living (if they are desperate) and killer whales will follow their prey for days on end gradually weakening a frightened whale mother and calf. Monkeys engage in politics, ants practise warfare occasionally. However, the balance between good and evil is contained in animals. In man it is not. We are exhibiting a natural phenomena but in an out of control, aberrant and abhorrent way.
The Directional Thesis may actually imply that orgone is not simply a life-force but a life-and-death-force, dependent on the direction of the consciousness that is identical with it. This is certainly beyond where Reich envisaged orgone in his extant work and I'm not sure if this would even be within orgonomy. To some extent it reconciles orgonomy with the Freudian view of a death drive although this is entirely unintended. Although Freud had many reasons for not liking orgonomy, personal and political, perhaps he did sense there was something missing from it. The Directional Thesis seems closer to Star Wars than orgonomy in some ways. George Lucas quietly referenced something very similar to bions in his stories and knew all about 'The Force', a force very similar to something real - orgone (Blog Article). In Star Wars the Force is not called a life-force or a death-force. Both the good Jedi and the evil Sith use the 'Force' but in different 'directions'. In Star Wars, The Force is simply orgone plus consciousness. Which is still just orgone (as orgone itself is conscious I believe).
I think the spirit realm or consciousness would indeed create the direction of this orgone force, for good or for evil. So essentially good and evil are states of consciousness which manifest in distinct ways in the energy and material realms. I see the spirit realm as being the realm of our individual and mass consciousness. However I think this realm of individual and mass consciousness would generate something more than just the parts of itself, the whole always being greater than the sum of its parts. In other words, the whole always exists at a different level of functioning than the constituent parts. So, all of our consciousnesses together, I believe, may generate God (and vice versa, God continually creates us). So God, as the greater whole with its own deeper characteristics, might be transcendent of the spirit realm of our ordinary consciousness and thus transcendent of good and evil. This could imply that there is a higher consciousness beyond good and evil or even a transcendent mystery underlying the universe. A mystery that may even be transcendent of consciousness itself if that isn't a contradictory position. If such a position is possible this implies that there may be an impenetrable mystery to the universe which is by definition unsolvable. However God might not be transcendent of consciousness itself but rather transcendent of consciousness as we know it. This brings us back to the point that the good and evil directions may not be equally balanced. I believe the creative force starts with this transcendent force, God, moves into the spirit realm of ordinary consciousness and then continues outwards into energy and lastly matter. This means this creative direction, a reflection of a singular unified universe, is much more powerful than the merely consumptive direction of evil which doesn't so much create destruction but rather attracts matter back toward a state of spirit.
Pulsation of orgone is central to its functioning on a biological and cosmic level. The pulsation of orgone would not be the same as its directional process I believe. Pulsation would continue regardless of the direction.
Reincarnation appears reminiscent to the directional process described. Perhaps reincarnation reflects the overall movement of Spirit to Energy to Matter (goodness) then back again from Matter to Energy to Spirit (evil) in a cycle. Once in this world, a baby jumps from Spirit to Energy to Matter continuously growing until it is adult. So this reflects the good direction. But an organism like a baby, at the same time as it is growing continuously, experiences pulsation of their energy. So the pulsation which appears essential to orgone energy would continue in either the good, expansive life direction or the evil, contractive death direction. Nature’s growth and contraction seems to pulse between these life and death directions.
Perhaps on a larger scale, of civilisations or cosmic processes, there is a natural process of Spirit to Energy to Matter pulsing alternatively with Matter to Energy to Spirit. So one could get pulsations of good and evil directions but the overall larger direction would be toward one or other pole perhaps. One could have a temporary evil direction then as a part of a pulsing process towards a greater goodness.
On an individual level as we age we go through the Matter-Energy-Spirit process so technically this would be an evil direction, but this contraction process might just be a stage before again emerging into a new and greater lifetime which would involve the Spirit-Energy-Matter direction again. So perhaps alternation between light and dark, good and evil, is inevitable to some degree.
One could argue that the evil direction of Matter-Energy-Spirit would make the sun, the source of life on this planet, evil. But orgonomy views the sun quite differently to mainstream science. The sun might not be a destructive furnace that burns fuel like some kind of huge but primitive nuclear power station. Rather it could be a galactic focus of orgone streams, a colossal superimposition of orgone that literally burns with this gigantic cosmic power. So it could be a constructive fire of orgone fusion rather than a destructive fire process. The conventional view of nuclear fusion processes powering the sun may also imply a constructive direction - to a degree at least. There are in any case, problems with the current explanations of the sun. For example, there is the anomaly that the surface is hotter than its core. If the sun was a destructive furnace shouldn’t the core be hottest? It is known experimentally and experientially that the sun emits huge amounts of orgone. Perhaps the sun as a collector or creator of galactic orgone energy is a better explanation. In any case, it appears the sun could be a Spirit-Energy-Matter process in part or wholly.
So we have a force that has both a life and a death direction, the former proceeding from Spirit to Energy to Matter (orgone, sapa bions, creativity, sexuality, free movement, life, goodness). The latter direction proceeds from Matter to Energy to Spirit (oranur, t-bacilli, destruction, desertification, armouring, death, evil). The cause of the directional processes ultimately lie in consciousness or spirit I believe. Goodness in consciousness is causative as an initiating, creative outburst into energy and then matter. Evil in consciousness, on the other hand, is causative as a post-process consumer, an attractor of matter back into energy to be ultimately consumed by spirit. This puts a whole new slant on the ‘consumer’ society.
The above is a logical proposition as I believe orgone and oranur, with some evidence, to be inherently and independently conscious. As noted previously Reich believed oranur to have highly selective diagnostic abilities which I feel also imply a level of consciousness in the oranur energy. Katz has argued that oranur opens gateways to demonic realms. I argue separately and detail preliminary evidence in The Orgone Continuum that orgone is itself conscious. Katz argues that orgone originates from God’s creative processes.
An implication, politically and religiously of this theory is that the processes of good and evil, being innate and natural and involving nothing more than the direction of a universal force means that we can separate good and evil from the human or natural systems we contemplate. Evil as a process could use any system of thought, government or endeavour. The same is true of goodness. This means that we would have to remain on our guard within any human institution or activity. The ‘system’ might perhaps be less important than the intentions of those within it. Even a ‘good’ system might work to produce evil or an 'evil' system could be neutralised and made to work more in the direction of goodness depending on the consciousness of those within it. It would also mean that we cannot take refuge within any group, idea, philosophy or science - we should rather examine where our own consciousness, individually and collectively, is heading. This is not to say all philosophies and systems are equal. Good and evil are in essence consciousness that expresses itself within energy and matter in certain ways. Some systems will elucidate good and evil processes better than others. Different philosophies will have different intentions - both hidden and explicit. Understanding consciousness is a foundation of philosophy. Therefore some philosophies will reveal this more truthfully and fully and some less so, also encouraging good or evil behaviour. Ultimately, the origin of good and evil lies within our own consciousness however.
There are some grey areas remaining. Little is known about oranur physics presently. It certainly seems apparent that orgone can transform into oranur but could oranur also occur as a separate energy to orgone? If that were so it could change the understanding of an orgone continuum to a more dualistic view of opposing forces - at least at some level of functioning. Mainstream physics claims to know all the fundamentals of nuclear physics but the many claims of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) do not seem to be going away - see the physicist, Mallove or Infinite-Energy.com. It may well be that LENR are real, in which case it could be that the nuclear radiation is coming not from the nucleus of the atom but from an aether field - the orgone continuum. It could be just that the atomic radiation initiates an aether effect - just as it is thought occurs in oranur physics (I am conflating orgone and aether here for convenience). Conventional nuclear reactions were initially hypothesised to also be an aether effect by most physicists including Lord Kelvin in the early 1900s. Kelvin didn't think the atomic nucleus could contain enough energy to account for the nuclear radiation. One can suspect from Miller, Demeo and others that a dynamic, cosmic aether was dismissed erroneously. Therefore if LENR and the aether are real our understanding of nuclear physics and hence oranur physics (which is related to nuclear physics) may be modified in the future. The entirely random nature of radioactive decay has also been challenged (Anderson and Spangler). This would also support an underlying aether having an effect in nuclear physics. The evidence we have so far in orgonomy, LENR and conventional nuclear reactions are certainly compatible with the existence of a single orgone continuum I believe. Lastly, as I postulate that Spirit is the basis of the orgone continuum, consciousness may be able to create oranur (and orgone energy) directly, theoretically speaking. So even if oranur were shown to occur without nuclear or electrical irritation it still may not dismiss the existence of a single orgone continuum. It is a complicated subject.
Katz has a monotheistic theological position but he believes there are numerous physical and consciousness forces in multiple universes, orgone and oranur being but two of these forces. Until evidence indicates otherwise I currently take the position that there is one unified force-field behind all reality (which I also view as singular). So in my current view we have a single orgone continuum, with different manifestations - orgone energy and oranur energy being two of these basic and universal forms.
It has been said to me that to examine consciousness or to look beyond the Desert Thesis is somehow wrong – un-orgonomic. It has been argued that to look at armouring or orgonomy from a consciousness perspective is not being true to its original intent. This is I think an ideological position. Orgonomy should not be held hostage to any ideology in my view, even Reich's own, though that changed over the years. We don't know from his extant writings what his views were in his final years. His two books written in prison were stolen. As Katz (WR in Prison radio episode) has noted, Reich was said by some of his prison visitors to have undergone a profound spiritual change during that time. He prayed, attended church services and advised his son to pray. Such a profound change may well have affected how Reich viewed orgone in the last part of his life.
In any case, it is documented that Reich believed that consciousness may have been at least partly behind the phenomena of deserts, oranur and dor (and thus armouring and therefore evil). In his last published book, in which he detailed the use of modified cloudbusters towards UFOs, he recounted the following from his Log Book,
‘Tonight for the first time in the history of man, the war waged for ages by living beings from outer space upon this earth (with respect to DOR, Drought and Desert, WR 1956) was reciprocated with ORANUR with positive result.’
Contact with Space pp37.
This indicates that he believed intelligent, conscious beings had a hand in the emergence of deserts, oranur and dor on Earth – the essential precipitant of armouring and evil.
To explain the background here, Reich had used oranur to boost the effects of the cloudbuster. The Cloudbuster was connected via the metal grounding pipes to a box of orgone treated nuclear materials, a few mgs of radium and some other small amounts of materials (orur). It is not clear from Contact with Space whether the Cloudbuster was also connected to water but it appears that it was only the orur material that was used with the cloudbuster (Reich had previously used the orur material on its own to influence the sky). He called this modified cloudbuster a Spacegun. He thought the Spacegun possibly created or shooted energy rather than simply channelling it like the unmodified cloudbuster. Incidentally, Reich had two terms for extraterrestrials and their craft – ‘Ea’ – Energy Alpha and ‘DOR-men’. He used the latter term because he thought that some ETs may require a more DORish, oranur type environment.
I believe orgonomy should be free to grow wherever it grows without undue worry if it changes from where Reich left it in his extant publications. Although of course, at the same time we should also protect the original discoveries and theories for future generations to make of it what they will. Some of Reich's experimental work, for example, orur, has not yet even been examined within orgonomy, some 70 years after Reich passed (orur is orgone treated uranium). However, there is good post-Reich evidence for his psychiatric work, the cloudbusting and the orgone accumulators (Selected Annotated Reich Bibliography). So there is a huge amount of work and value as yet untapped within orgonomy just as Reich left it - but that doesn’t mean it should never change.
Reich was never static in his quest and those who follow in his footsteps should not be either. Reich had not reached the end of his journey scientifically when he was imprisoned. He was certainly reaching the peak of the mountain-top but he was not quite standing on the summit in my view. His time was cut short by forces beyond his control.
Inspired by Katz's work on Reich's spiritual period I have identified five distinct stages that Reich's work went through.
First Stage - Character Analysis
Second Stage - Bio-electrical Studies
Third Stage - Bio-energy
Forth Stage - Cosmic energy
Fifth Stage - Spiritual Identity of orgone.
The Directional Thesis would belong to this last stage though it has aspects of the previous stages too.
Reich, although recognising the commonality between God and orgone (one could argue between consciousness and orgone) still thought that these were distinct aspects of reality in practise. I believe that these aspects are completely unified, any seperation is just a result of our own limited perception of an entity which unites consciousness and physicality indivisibly in all respects.
There appears to be a number of interesting parallels with the book of Genesis. The tree in genesis is reminiscent of the Common Functioning Principle. A root which branches out into variations is like a tree. A fruit tree also symbolises good and evil - its productivity symbolises goodness and the destruction of its fruit symbolises evil.
The CFP and Tree of Life
Adam and Eve eat of the tree in the centre of the garden which the serpent tells them will make them as 'gods' (because then they will know good and evil like the Serpent and the Lord himself). The central location of the tree in the 'midst' of Eden symbolises the balance of good and evil in nature. The garden of Eden also symbolises how good and evil is contained in nature. To go beyond its borders is to go beyond the boundaries of nature, which the Lord forbids. Once the psychic boundaries are breached however, Adam and Eve become aware of their animal natures and are embarrased of their nakedness. As Adam and Eve have eaten of the tree of knowledge they find themselves banished by the Lord amongst the dust outside the garden which grows ever less fertile now. The less fertile earth symbolises the desert process upon mankind. Adam and Eve's offspring, Cain, offers fruit to the Lord, ignoring the fat of the land which Abel offers. The killing of Abel by Cain symbolises the armoured man attacking the less armoured and the process of warfare this unleashes. The Lord guards the tree of life which he doesn't want Adam and Eve to partake of lest they 'live for ever'. The tree of life symbolises knowledge of the life-force, orgone. The Serpent and the Lord refer to themselves as 'we' or 'us' - which appears to symbolise a group of 'gods' not 'God'. Mankind must make the journey through the testaments before finally returning to the tree of life when we are ready to take the next step in our spiritual evolution (knowledge of orgone).
Some may wonder, given Reich's early criticism of mysticism, whether Reich really did believe in the existence of God and for that matter, of evil. Reich not only repeatedly pointed to the unity of aether and God and confirmed the validity of the religious feeling in his books but in his letters in prison specifically stated the following,
'I was deeply moved. I felt a new, universal faith in Life and Love, comprising all monotheistic beliefs..' Wilhelm Reich, A Personal Biography, Ollendorf, pp146
'...You know and have learned to trust in God as we have understood the universal existence and rule of Life and Love.' a letter to Peter Reich from Wilhelm, Ollendorf, pp146.
He felt that the reception of his work was affected by a fear even deeper than that of sexuality, the fear of knowing God (see Offshoots of Orgonomy, Num. 12 pp8).
Reich also believed in the existence of evil,
'I have won the battle against evil,' from letter to court, Ollendorf, pp 135.
He spoke of an,
'Enemy of Man,' Ollendorf, pp 146.
I will leave the concluding words to Reich,
'The sharp boundary lines between physics and what is called "metaphysics" have broken down. The metaphysical intuition has a physical basis: "God" and "Ether" are one.'
Selected Writings of Wilhelm Reich pp422.
'All boundaries between science and religion, science and art, objective and subjective, quality and quantity, physics and psychology, astronomy and religion, God and ether are irrevocably breaking down, being replaced by a conception of the basic unity, a basic CFP (Common Functioning Principle) of all nature which branches out into the various kinds of human experience.'
Selected Writings pp423.