Leon Southgate MSc 2018



Illustration Courtesy of http://www.orgonodrome.gr


In my article on consciousness and orgone, mainstream and Reichian views of consciousness (1) are discussed. They are mostly found to be lacking and a new orgonomic theory of consciousness, the Orgone Continuum theory is suggested. This theory can be classified as orgonotic pan-psychism, although it has idealist aspects (energy being seen as a mode of consciousness). Orgonotic pan-psychism is different to other pan-psychic theories in that it outlines a scientifically discernible continuum (orgone) as the physical basis for the immanence of consciousness in the universe. It describes a monistic continuum which has three parts: orgone consciousness[1], orgone energy and orgone matter. Consciousness itself is defined broadly as any and all experience.

Reich’s view of consciousness was alternatively classified as a pre-runner of the system’s theories of consciousness. In system theories, consciousness is an emergent property of the behaviour of matter or energy. This unfortunately turns consciousness into epiphenomena, an effect of something else.

System Theories

Epiphenomena approaches unavoidably deny people personal agency (our minds are reduced to the level of an automaton). One recent approach describes how materialism can, after all, explain consciousness. The experience of personal cognition is downgraded to a ‘passive’ side-effect in their view (2). Their endorsement of a pure emergence also makes consciousness divorced from physical reality as it implies dualism – of the material world and the emergent consciousness. If the realm of physicality generates the realm of consciousness, these realms have to be separate otherwise consciousness would be pre-existent in matter. Pre-existence of consciousness would imply pan-psychism rather than emergence.

In Sheldrake’s evolutionary pan-psychism, the universe, although already conscious, can evolve consciousness in its constituents, such as individual organisms or even in non-organisms like planets and stars (3). Sheldrake puts forward a limited emergence within a broader pan-psychism. Reich’s middle period of work however was characterised by the now traditional type of materialist, epiphenomena view described earlier, broadly categorised as the system theories of consciousness. They view cognition as a newly emergent phenomenon of mechanistic or energetic processes in a previously non-conscious universe.

Consciousness is an emerging characteristic of an orgonotic-material system in Reich’s view (during his middle period).

The Oranur Period

During a rereading of the oranur material[2] the author has found evidence that Reich may have actually begun to change his viewpoint closer to the author’s own view of consciousness. This was before Reich’s imprisonment and prior to the spiritual awakening he may have experienced there. It indicates that this possible spiritual change is in keeping with prior changes expressed in published material in the late 1950s.

Reich often waited years before publishing new material. He would make sure he was certain of any new observations before putting them before the world. Also perhaps he liked to give things time to develop. He was acutely aware of the ‘too muchness’ of his work (4). The main paper I quoted in previous essays as illustrating his earlier, materialistic conception of consciousness was published in 1956 (5). He may well have written or conceived of this paper years earlier. In any case, it very precisely reflects his most materialist views on consciousness during his middle period of work in the 1940s. Also Reich didn’t have time in 1956 to monitor the subtle philosophical implications of what was being published in other areas (in this case how his work differed from Freud’s in psychological and physical terms).

From 1951 to 1957 he was under tremendous pressure. He mounted the first ever desert cloudbusting expedition in 1954. He was under attack from all sides. His life and liberty were under threat from officialdom. He felt like he was living in a ‘glass house’ (6). At the same time he was discovering many new things very quickly such as the use of a post-radioactive substance called ORUR (orgone charged radium). He put this to use in cloudbusting, making the even more powerful Spacegun (a radioactively connected cloudbuster). He was successfully desert greening in Arizona (at first purposefully without rain) and charting the effects of DOR (deadly orgone). He was also using the powerful ORANUR energy[3]. Reich was interacting with space vehicles and their occupants, which he called Ea for Energy Alpha. It was an intense and turbulent time when he published much more quickly as he notes in his last book, published in 1957, Contact with Space (CwS) (7).

The Beginning of Consciousness as Primary

Through Reich’s views on the causation of deserts in CwS we can ascertain that Reich was perhaps changing from viewing matter and energy as the primary reality to viewing consciousness as primary. But before discussing this further one needs to review a central dilemma in orgonomy that relates to this change in view – a dilemma that has been unresolved for decades despite a claim otherwise.

Armouring and Deserts

Reich identified muscular and psychological armouring – the hardening of the human soul and body (in response to trauma) as the mechanism of human misery. Reich had noted a connection between deserts and armouring since the 1950s when his work with cloudbusters and deadly orgone (DOR) got started. Reich noted the, ‘red thread that connects the first formulations about the character armour thirty years ago with the problems of desert development’ (8). He traced the connection between deserts and human character, drawing a correlation between the physical desert and the emotional desert in mankind, ‘desert souls will enhance desert development; and desert development will increase DOR or staleness in the human emotions’ (9). Reich observed that desert life-forms tend to be hard and spiky. It is a harsh environment that can produce harshness in one’s character. Reich connected DOR with the actual physical creation of deserts through a DOR substance (orite). He observed that deserts develop both in people and in the environment at the same time.

Demeo had completed a successful MA in Kansas University doing the first academic study of cloudbusters. He wanted to go on to study them at PhD level but his PhD cloudbusting project was scuppered by the intervention of a US government agency (the National Science Foundation) (10). Reluctant to leave his university in Kansas, he turned to another central topic for him – human behaviour. Demeo took those connections Reich had found between deserts and emotions and developed his Saharasia thesis. Demeo found evidence for a connection between deserts and armoured societies with characteristics such as circumcision, female genital mutilation, lack of freedom for the young, female repression, harsh treatment of infants, slavery and a tendency to warfare. He argued that these characteristics found expression in desert cultures before spreading to the rest of the world through warfare and conquest. Demeo found a correlation between the start of our present armoured societies and the formation, 4 to 6000 years ago of harsh external conditions in the inception of the great deserts – the Sahara, which stretches from Morocco all the way to China. Previous to the great deserts north Africa was wet and lush and there is no clear evidence of warfare he argues.

Demeo states,

‘The great "drying up" of Saharasia was accompanied by a massive shift in human behaviour, as recorded in the "stones and bones", and other human artefacts of that period. Those findings definitively answered what Reich called the "riddle of the origins of human armouring.." [4] (11).

However, in the quote above Demeo goes considerably further than Reich.

Reich noted two great riddles:

1)     The existence of consciousness.

2)     Why there was an initial creation of armouring leading to widespread human misery (12).

Reich was the first to note a connection between deserts and human armouring but he never claimed to have solved, ‘the riddle of the origins of human armouring’. Reich found a correlation, a step in the process, not the cause of human misery.  Correlation does not equal causation.

Reich certainly charted a connection between deserts in the world and deserts in mankind, but to say deserts are the cause of armouring (or that deserts explain armouring completely) would imply one knew the solution to human misery. If the cause of man’s problems is to be purely environmental (deserts) then the solution should be purely environmental too. This is not the case as Demeo has himself evidenced. Bringing lush conditions back to previously arid countries (through cloudbusting) doesn’t bring a quick end to war and conflict, though we don’t know the longer term effects of increasing environmental lushness.

So whatever the merits of the Saharasia thesis, and it does appear to evidence a correlation between armoured societies and desertification, it doesn’t indicate the actual cause, or primal origin of armouring itself. One may as well say the end of the last major Ice Age (which preceded the global change to deserts) or the Big Bang caused human misery, or as Douglas Adams joked, ‘coming down from the trees,’ was the primal mistake. In a material explanation there has to be something material which is the first cause, but this then goes backwards in an unending chain of events forever (as Big Bang theorists, to their detriment, know only too well).

However, none of this is in any way a criticism of the Saharasia theory itself. One can support a connection between catastrophic changes in the world environment and changes in human behaviour, whether from Velikovsky, Demeo or even in the Bible and other ancient texts. The only criticism here is the use of Saharasia as a sole foundational explanation of human misery. As can be seen shortly, Reich agreed with such a position and this is documented in CwS.

Human misery, which is perpetuated by armouring, is an effect that exists within our own consciousness. If it weren’t for the current state of human consciousness we could transform the deserts and have enough water and food for everyone. Consciousness therefore might be a logical place to look for a cause of armouring. It is important to know the cause of things if one wishes to address effects fully. It is certainly difficult to treat an illness without knowing its cause, especially one as deep and as intractable as human armouring.

Good and Evil

In an essay on orgone and good and evil (13) functions in consciousness are associated with the genesis of good and evil. These functions express themselves through orgone and DOR energies respectively. In other words the primary aspect of orgone could be a physical consciousness[5] that becomes manifest as orgone energy or as DOR energy (and both later can become matter). Orgone matter is fundamental to life (for example as SAPA Bions[6]). DOR matter (such as orite) is fundamental to death and deserts as Reich notes in CwS. There is a neat circularity between the breakdown of sand heralding the bions (which led to the discovery of orgone) and the breakdown of lush living environments which leads to the sands (of the deserts). The actual cause of good and evil however is not likely to be material but to lie within the most fundamental strata, an orgonotic consciousness. Orgone and DOR energies are but the expressions of this consciousness. Matter is in turn, the expression of orgone and DOR energy and so is twice removed from the deepest reality. Looking for causation in matter looks somewhat futile therefore.

DOR and Consciousness

Reich believed that deserts were caused by DOR energy which in turn is initiated by consciousness. He believed that deserts were in the first place created by evil consciousnesses, in the guise of extra-terrestrials.

Once created it is perpetuated by armoured man’s outside-influenced and weakened consciousness and emotional state. This is quite a fantastic statement and it has hardly ever been commented upon within orgonomy.

Reich notes that,

‘DOR is the basic drought-supporting factor...DOR “eats mountains and levels them off to sand dunes”...Sahara sands is caked, crystallised soil mixed with Orite’ (14). (Orite is a DOR orgone substance).


‘Ea causes strong DOR’ (15). (Ea being Reich’s term for UFOs and their inhabitants, meaning Energy Alpha).


‘The American Sahara...The Tucson basin, the hottest spot in the US south western desert, may for 25,000 years have been submitted to Ea attacks without man having been aware of it. Were the Ea which we saw in the sky possibly space machines which had been keeping deserts going for ages, preventing rain all along the times?’ (16).


‘Ea has caused the deserts of the planet, supported by earthman’s emotional desert.’ (17)


‘...Twig by twig they die until the stem topples over, too. Armoured man passes by this devastation over the ages without noticing it....he is slowly deteriorating himself.’ (18).


‘He believes all deserts to have been man made over the past twenty five thousand years.’ (19). Reich is quoting a TV reporter talking about his cloudbusting in Arizona.


‘The first victories in combating desert, and its makers, the Ea, had been won.’ (20).


Man himself is responsible for desert making and desert breaking. Man has the tools of knowledge and the tools of technology at his disposal today to combat desert development, and even to turn existent deserts back into green, rich pastures for man and animal alike. The first obstacle in the way of OROP Desert is not the outer desert, but the inner, emotional desert of man’ (21). (OROP means Orgone Operation of cloudbusting).


‘Man himself had obstructed this redemption for which he had prayed all over the globe so long, so hard,’ Reich goes on to note that in face of these challenges, ‘How patient life is...’ (22).


Reich noted a correspondence of the inner desert to the outer one in the environment, but the inception of the desert process he thought was way back in time, at least 25 thousand years ago (23). It doesn’t matter whether Reich was right or wrong in the naming of ETs or other persons as the initial cause of deserts and thus possibly armouring, the key thing is he is saying a conscious entity or entities created the deserts, which in turn may have led to the mass armouring on Earth. This is the same as saying a force within consciousness created the deserts. So in effect, Reich is pronouncing the primacy of consciousness over the energy and material functions of orgone and DOR on this planet. Reich clearly spelled out this conclusion in his last book (CwS). Reich was by then on a road to a more spiritual and consciousness related view as not long after this time he was of course imprisoned and had a possible spiritual awakening there as detailed in this essay (24) and as discussed in Katz’s blog posts and radio shows (25). At the very least, the armouring change in people’s consciousness and the desertification, were simultaneous as anatomically modern man lived through both the prior Ice Ages and the latter birth of the great deserts.

Reich certainly connected DOR with social and environmental negativity. Noting that there had been a 15% decrease in crime in Los Angeles since his desert cloudbusting operation in nearby Arizona, he asks, ‘Had DOR removal and the betterment in the drought situation brought this about?’ (26).

Reich ascribed a, ‘functional identity between organismic and atmospheric OR energy’ (27). Which means, in practical terms, that orgone in the atmosphere can behave in similar ways to orgone in an organism – it chases out DOR energy and does battle with it. Reich states, ‘I had the impression of a tug-of-war between the forces of Life and the forces of Death, between OR and DOR.’ (28).

Reich noted a number of parallels between living organisms in a state of DOR and deserts:

·        Staleness

·        Dryness

·        Secondary drives (and secondary vegetation)

·        Eventual adjustment

·        Excitation upon breakthrough of DOR

·        Functional fevers and functional tornadoes (clearing out DOR).

The common factor in all of this is OR versus DOR, whether in the organism or the environment. This anthropomorphism is the closest Reich gets to directly ascribing consciousness to OR and DOR functions. In fact if Reich were to stick to his view from his middle period (that OR and DOR functions energetically but has no consciousness) Reich’s statement above would not make any sense. How can a non-conscious OR in the atmosphere be functionally identical to a conscious OR in the organism if OR lacks consciousness in its primal state? This functional identity, but without consciousness, is just an assumption, an assertion without rationale.

Freud and Reich - A Reconciliation

It should be noted that it might not be entirely correct to call orgone simply a life-energy. As Reich stated in CwS, orgone is both the force of ‘Life’ and of ‘Death’. Further to that, as Reich was possibly beginning to touch upon, orgone is perhaps also a non-energy consciousness, a consciousness ‘force’. Freud recognised the psychic elements of this force as Eros and Thanatos or Libido and the Death drive but denied this ‘force’ a physical reality as energy (although the early Freud, fresh from his neurology studies did think the libido, or Eros, might be materially based in some way).

Reich recognised the physical, energetic elements of this force as orgone energy and then its counterpart as the DOR aspect but denied this force any psychic reality of its own. Orgone does not have independent consciousness according to Reich in his middle period[7]. It is clear that this view of Reich’s was a judgement rather than a position based on evidence or even a position that was thought through in any detail. Reich never really examined the consequences of his views about consciousness, he just assumed that orgone had no independent consciousness and left it at that. He criticised Freud’s psychological conception of the life and death impulses but did not examine the implications of his own purely energetic, de-psychologised conception of the same processes. Reich saw both life and consciousness from a Darwinian, gradualist, linear perspective. It would have been very hard for him to imagine either life or consciousness as pre-existent in the climate that permeated science at that time. This gradualist, step-by-step structure-building approach also influenced Freud to a great degree.

Freud and Reich are like two halves of the same puzzle and will always belong together because of this perfect fit between what each man couldn’t see for himself. Freud psychologised a dual aspect, energetic force (into the Eros and Thanatos instincts). Reich physicalised the psychic aspects of the same force (into Orgone and DOR as pure energy). Both men were correct and at the same time incorrect. As argued in my prior essays, (29) there is some evidence to believe that orgone and DOR have their own consciousness. Without a consciousness to orgone, orgonomy can go no further than where Reich left it and orgonomy where Reich left it cannot explain consciousness. So Freud may well be correct, a Life Instinct exists - even Reich in his middle period could not argue that orgone energy did not behave as a Life Instinct would behave. A Death instinct may also exist and again even Reich in his middle period had to admit that DOR behaved exactly like a death instinct would behave[8]. However, Freud was incorrect to psychologise the Life and Death Instincts as only existing in the mind. It is true that they have reality as orgone and DOR energy, as Reich argued.

Reich on the other hand made the opposite mistake and denuded Orgone and DOR, or Eros and Thanatos, of their independent consciousness. This makes it impossible to understand consciousness from Reich’s middle period point of view apart from as mechanistic epiphenomena. The author’s orgonotic theory of consciousness attempts to correct this imbalance and is the first orgonomic theory of consciousness. Reich’s theories were not orgonomic but system theories.

The Re-emergence of the Freudian Unconscious

Reich notes he would not have discovered orgone without Freud, without him, it would not have been possible to penetrate beyond the word language, beyond the unconscious into the bio-energetic expression..’ (30).

However, the unconscious itself, a cornerstone of the Freudian approach, Reich sees as an artefact of repressed orgone, ‘Freud’s irrational unconscious is but the temporary result of the thwarted primary functioning of the cosmic energy.’ (31).

From an orgone continuum point of view however the unconscious becomes more than just a temporary phenomena of armoured man, but the actual repository of both orgone and DOR consciousness. There is no need to suppose that the unconscious will disappear whilst orgone or DOR energy still exists. This whole reality itself is a repository for the battle between the two aspects of this singular force. If there were only orgone and DOR energy, with their separate consciousness, this would be a Manichean view of the universe, an eternal battle between good and evil. But both energies are transcended by an orgonotic consciousness from whence they came, so the Manichean Yin and Yang is subsumed by a wider Tao of consciousness. Or in Western terms, Neitzsche’s good and evil is indeed transcended by something which is beyond either aspect.

Without admitting the consciousness of orgone and DOR, orgonomy cannot comprehend evil apart from as a mechanical slip-up, the accidental thwarting of a mechanically functioning energy. This seems a superficial position. By admitting the consciousness of orgone and DOR the universe as it actually is becomes understandable, both in its good and evil aspects: the lush life-giving plains and forests, the harsh desiccating deserts, growth and decay, the Wagnerian operas and the senseless destruction, life in all its greatness and the ubiquity of death. Also a sentimental romanticization of nature as unarmoured and a condemnation of man as armoured and fallen is avoided – good and evil exist everywhere, from the armoured human thug to the trickster parasite eating its victim alive, to the loving mothers and camaraderie of both the human and animal worlds. Orgone versus DOR, and armouring, become shades of grey rather than a black and white existence only applicable to degenerate man.

Orgone and DOR as consciousness might cause the lines between science and religion, between what can and cannot be known in these fields to become blurred. However, with sufficient humility and a lack of one-sided claims this can be navigated and new vistas opened with the cooperation and inclusion of people of both perspectives.

Had he lived longer this author believes Reich might have realised the implications of his views in CwS and affected a new orgonomic view of consciousness and possibly a rapprochement between the Freudian and Reichian views of reality. Freud and Reich’s views seem perhaps to be no longer quite so at odds within this conception. Reich was denied the chance to continue his work by a deadly conspiracy. He would have had another decade or two at least of productive work. We owe it to his legacy, as one of the world’s greatest ever scientists, to continue his quest and not to be satisfied with where he left it. That would be what he would wish in this writer’s view.

Energy Versus Consciousness

It could be said that these arguments are trying to downplay the realities of energy functions in man’s misery, or are making orgone and DOR into mere mystical concepts. Perhaps the author is elevating consciousness as, ‘The Real Thing’ (which was Reich’s term) and downplaying the gritty reality?

No, human misery (and human happiness for that matter) are quite real and down to earth. Connections between desertification and societal changes have evidence. Orgone and DOR energy are also real. Matter has reality at some level. Even the most ardent idealist recognises the lawfulness of this reality and tries to avoid undue physical risks - pure idealism does not explain why consciousness manifests in such a lawful manner in this world. It just observes that this is so and leaves it at that. It is a theory of minimal explanation even if it is entirely correct. Idealism also leaves one isolated from the contents of one’s own experience. The products of consciousness are divorced from the conscious observer in some idealist perspectives. However, subject and object do not truly separate in this manner, they segue into one another. As the conscious observer one can observe one’s innermost core as an object. Objectivity is itself changed by the subject. Neither is separate. The main alternatives to idealism however also do not always work. The complete opposite of idealism, pure naturalism, leaves one a subconscious anima submerged in nature, isolated from a higher mind. The ‘other’ opposite of idealism, pure materialism, leaves one a ‘philosophical robot,’ one is no more than a machine that accidentally ‘makes’ consciousness.

Orgonotic pan-psychism avoids these pitfalls. It recognises the fundamental nature of consciousness as an irreducible element of reality but it also recognises energy and matter as real variants of this consciousness. It agrees with other pan-psychic theories in that consciousness is immanent in the universe but it also outlines how this immanence actually works practically (within an orgone continuum). It includes an element of idealism in that it recognises the only way to apprehend orgone is through consciousness. So consciousness is primary, rather than energy or matter. Perhaps therefore orgonotic pan-psychism could also be called an orgonotic, Neo-Cartesian monism – a concept to be explained shortly.

Perceptio, Corpus, Orgone

No one has ever, in this author’s opinion, lucidly argued against Descarte’s core position - that the only thing that can be known for sure is that thought, or more widely, consciousness, exists – Cogito Sum. His dualism did not work but he did find the one sure knowledge, which even Neitzsche couldn’t convincingly dismiss in this author’s view. Yes, we cannot conclude from the existence of consciousness (or more narrowly in Descarte’s conception – the existence of thought) that the individual self exists, or that God exists or that any other entity, without a shred of doubt, exists, as Neitzsche argued (32). But then to dismiss from that that there is no sure knowledge, or that reality is fundamentally uncertain in all its aspects is incorrect.

One cannot doubt the existence of consciousness itself. It is hard to imagine consciousness without a perceiving self, but it is of no consequence whether there are many selves, one self or no selves, consciousness still exists. That one sure knowledge is enough to end at least one aspect of the uncertainties of nihilism which Neitzsche discussed. The other existences that Descartes built up (self, God) and that the other philosophical proofs of God maintain[9] are not entirely beyond doubt, but consciousness exists – and that is enough. Philosophers often accept that Neitzsche was correct in asserting that human existence is fundamentally uncertain but there is at least one fundamental certainty - consciousness exists now. Who can argue against that? The future as such is only a concept and not a reality so any claimed future uncertainty of the existence of consciousness cannot be used to argue against the certainty of its existence now. Now is all we have and it contains both the concepts and any reality of the past and future.

Nihilism also dismisses that reality has any ultimate meaning, but meaning is something that only relates to consciousness. For example, a wedding ring cannot have much meaning to itself (or not much more than the consciousness of inanimate matter may assume). The meaning of the ring may depend more on the consciousness of the person wearing it. So the nihilist claim that there is no meaning or goals to reality is really just to claim that there is no consciousness to reality, which is clearly false. Nihilism of ultimate meaning is contradicted by a conscious universe. Consciousness always strives towards goals, great and small - and always creates and strives for meaning. It could be said that one is conflating consciousness and reality in this argument but there is no way to separate reality from the consciousness of it so the two are to all intents and purposes, identical. ‘The thing in itself’ does not exist, there is only consciousness.

Instead of Descarte’s, ‘Cogito, Ergo, Sum’ (interpreted as ‘I think therefore I am’) in a Neo-Cartesian, monistic[10] sense, we could have, ‘Perceptio, Corpus, Orgone’ – consciousness exists therefore body exists, both consciousness and body exist as orgone. The one sure knowledge is that there is consciousness. This consciousness always perceives and anything that is perceived is a body. This conscious, universal body can be described as the orgone continuum. So, ‘Nihilism is dead, Nihilism will remain dead and we are the Orgone![11] (to misquote Neitzsche).

If orgone is the fundament of the universe it has to have this basic characteristic of consciousness. It cannot be left as a mere energy if it is to give a sure grip on a wider reality. Without a non-energetic aspect, orgone as a description of reality breaks down at some point and can only ever be a partial description of the universe.


The essence of the overall argument in this article is that the cause of human misery (and human happiness) lies within consciousness itself and no system or material event, such as desertification, can take the responsibility for what lurks within, good or bad. Likewise no outside system, however seemingly enlightened, can protect us from DOR and evil. Overly strong faith in politics, ideologies, systems, even science itself could also lead into evil. There is a need to look within one’s own consciousness to find the root of Orgone and DOR energies, the birthplace of Eros and Thanatos. Just as no enlightened system can prevent a DOR consciousness from emerging or usurping control over people, the worst of the controlling systems lain upon mankind is always vulnerable to the growth of an inner orgonotic consciousness. From this orgonotic consciousness arise both orgone and DOR energies and from that comes all that we call physical reality in this view. It appears that Reich too was on the path toward this type of outlook as detailed above in CwS.

Reich may not have been fully cognisant of the implications of his Ea statements in CwS (for a view of consciousness as primary) but he was heading in that direction from around 1951 onward this author believes (the time of the oranur experiment to his imprisonment). The continuity of Reich’s thinking in this last period evidences the arguments that have been made here and elsewhere in the author’s essays on consciousness and orgone (33). Had Reich left prison and made it to Switzerland as he planned, this author believes he may well have developed and looked into a theme of a primary orgonotic consciousness.  

The relationships charted in this essay can be summarised as follows:





CFP means Common Functioning Principle, an Hegalian dialetic but in reverse. Orgonomic dialetics trace backwards from the variations towards the root, the CFP.

By contrast, in Hegalian dialetics, the interplay between two variations traces forwards and creates a third, new entity.

‘ORG CON’ means physical Orgone Consciousness. This is the overall CFP in this diagram.

‘OR Energy’ means Orgone in its life-positive state of energy functioning (Eros), which is one variation of ORG CON.

DOR Energy’ means Deadly Orgone or Orgone in its state of life-negative functioning (Thanatos). This is the second variation of ORG CON.

Each variation (OR Energy and DOR energy) becomes the new, lesser CFP for the second part of the diagram.

As can be seen above there appears to be no direct causative relationship between deserts and armouring. They are only related through DOR energy. The foundation of DOR is itself ultimately rooted in an orgonotic consciousness.

Freud and Reich’s conceptions of Eros and Thanatos, OR and DOR are unified in this view which elucidates both the existence of good and evil psychically and energetically as well as their life and death functions in reality and their ultimate transcendence by a thinking, bodily orgonotic consciousness, or as shorthand in Latin - Perceptio, Corpus, Orgone.


[1] The term orgone-consciousness rather than simply consciousness is used for two reasons: firstly to emphasise that consciousness is defined primarily as a physical (but not material or energetic) phenomena. It might be described as physical because the experiences of consciousness appear to be ‘bodily’ in some way, even if this is just an imagined body in a dream or a game. Secondly the term is used to distinguish a seamless continuum - consciousness segues into orgone energy functions without a specific frontier between energy and consciousness.

[2] The Oranur Experiment and Contact with Space.

[3] The acronym means ‘orgone against nuclear radiation’, it describes strongly activated orgone energy, usually achieved via radioactive stimulation.

[4] Demeo went on to state that this view is in the context of ‘large open questions’ but a correlation between deserts and armouring still falls well short of being a ‘definitive origin’ to armouring.

[5] This article has already touched upon how it is that consciousness can be physical but just to expand a little - the contents of consciousness, including its experience of itself, are in effect, the experiences of a ‘body’ – be it a virtual one in a game, a body in a dream or a ‘real’ one in waking life. All bodies have a degree of physicality according to their lawfulness (i.e. their continuity in time and space and their commonality between observers). Consciousness itself, although physical in this definition, may not be purely ‘energetic’ as it does not appear to be entirely bound by time and space, cause and effect. Even abstract ideas and emotions might possess some level of ‘body’ as a pattern existing in thought.

[6] Bions are tiny vesicles intermediate between non-animate and animate matter created when matter is heated to incandescence and placed in water. They appear to be alive but are simpler than an amoeba, lacking a nucleus or DNA. They can be viewed with high end live microscopy and are about the size of a small clump of viral particles. They have been confirmed numerous times by various doctors and researchers as documented in decades of orgonomic literature (see Bion section here, http://orgonecontinuum.org/reich-biblio.html). Mainstream science has also confirmed the existence of such partial bio-forms but either purposefully misclassifies them as non-living proteins or misses that they can be abiogenetic (created from non-living matter).

[7] For details of this view of Reich in his middle period and his view then on Eros and Thanatos see Reference number 5.

[8] See Reference 5 for Reich’s original statements.

[9] Cosmological ‘proof’ is based on the principle of a first cause which must by necessity point to God (one cannot have a material or energetic first cause (an infinite regress). It is either God/consciousness or no first cause at all - eternity).  Teleological ‘proof’ is based on the principle from inherent order and apparent purposefulness of the universe. This proof has grown stronger the more physics has advanced and the more the incredible order of reality has become apparent. Strong atheism was first to decline amongst physicists as they were the first group of scientists to appreciate the growth of comprehension of cosmic order. (The multiverse explanation tries to reintroduce chance as an explanation for this intricate order but generally fails on the basis of a lack of empirical evidence). Ontological ‘proof’ is based on the principle from the idea of God as the perfect being as inherent and necessary in the mind. We know mind and thought exist without doubt and we can imagine a perfect being in our minds so the perfect being must also exist in reality (Descartes). Moral ‘proof’ (from Kant) is based on the postulate that God is a prerequisite for human morality and happiness.

[10] Instead of the Cartesian dualism of mind and body, there could be a Neo-Cartesian monism of thinking-body or a universal bodily-consciousness. Instead of Descarte’s two substances, there would be just one substance that is both mind and body – here termed orgone. In Newton’s private letters a similar pan-psychic monistic view was his personal position on consciousness - for more see Dennis William Hauck (2017) The Roots of a Science of Consciousness in Hermetic Alchemy, Rosecroix Journal, http://www.rosecroixjournal.org, Vol 11.

[11] The original quote is, ‘God is dead, God will remain dead, and we have killed him’.




1)     Southgate, L. (2018) http://www.psychorgone.com/orgone-biophysics/implications-of-orgone-for-consciousness-research-part-1

2)     Oakley and Halligan (2017) https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01924/full

3)     Sheldrake, Rupert, 2011, The Presence of the Past, Coronet, UK.

4)     Higgins, Wilhelm Reich Selected Writings (1960) Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.

5)     Reich, Wilhelm, 1956, Re-emergence of Freud’s Death instinct as DOR Energy, Orgonomic Medicine Volume II, Num 1 pp 11 as quoted in http://www.psychorgone.com/orgone-biophysics/implications-of-orgone-for-consciousness-research-part-1

6)     Contact with Space (CwS), Wilhelm Reich (1957) Republished by http://wilhelmreichtrust.org/

7)     ibid

8)     Selected Writings, Wilhelm Reich, pp455

9)     CwS 152

10) Pulse of the Planet journal, Orgonelab, No. 3 1991 pp 63

11) http://www.orgonelab.org/events.htm

12) Selected Writings pp516

13) Southgate, L. (2018) http://orgonecontinuum.org/good-evil.html

14) Contact with Space pp165

15) CwS pp165

16) CwS pp168

17) CwS pp165

18) CwS pp156

19) CwS pp196 (Reich is quoting a report on his work on Arizona TV broadcast in 1955)

20) CwS pp202

21) Wilhelm Reich, CORE (Cosmic Orgone Engineering, OROP Desert, Part 1: Space Ships, DOR & Drought, ( Publications of the Orgone Institute, Vol. VI, Nos. 1­4, July 1954 accessed on Feb 2018 from https://ia800708.us.archive.org/2/items/ContactFromSpaceByWilhelmReich/Contact-from-Space%20by%20Wilhelm%20Reich.pdf

22) CwS pp239.

23) Wilhelm Reich, CORE (Cosmic Orgone Engineering, OROP Desert, Part 1: Space Ships, DOR & Drought, ( Publications of the Orgone Institute, Vol. VI, Nos. 1­4, July 1954 accessed on Feb 2018 from https://ia800708.us.archive.org/2/items/ContactFromSpaceByWilhelmReich/Contact-from-Space%20by%20Wilhelm%20Reich.pdf

24) Southgate, L. (2018) http://orgonecontinuum.org/good-evil.html

25) Dr Steven Katz – Radio Shows http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mystic-paranormal Blog https://harborsforlife.wordpress.com/

26) CwS pp230

27) CwS pp238

28) CwS pp242

29) Southgate, L. (2018) http://orgonecontinuum.org/theorgonecontinuum.html

30) Reich, W. Reich Speaks of Freud.

31) Reich, W. (1956), Re-emergence of Freud’s ‘Death instinct as ‘DOR energy’, Orgonomic Medicine, Vol II, Num 1 pp11

32) Kung, H. (1996) Does God Exist? SCM Press.(translated from the German, Existiert Gott? R. Piper & Co Verlag 1978)

33) Southgate, L. (2018) http://www.psychorgone.com/orgone-biophysics/implications-of-orgone-for-consciousness-research-part-1 See Also Part 2 of this paper and the essays at http://www.orgonecontinuum.org on consciousness (orgone continuum and good and evil).