[I use a number of terms in this post which I have described in other Substack posts; I would recommend scrolling down and looking for those posts, or you could ask me in the comments section.
Certainly, they are both functions of streaming. I see work as being very close to or similar to love. And for some of us, knowledge is very close to love, the pursuit of knowledge. I know it is for me.
It’s sort of a question to me in a sense, which is more important: love or work. Work is so vital. It defines us in so many ways. And I think it’s fair to say that a strong love life is difficult to have without at least some decent foundation in one’s work life.
Reich made the point that work is a function that is not primarily about making a living. He considered it a biological need independent of the need to make a living. I suppose one could say that in that sense there’s a parallel about sex, since Reich saw sexuality as not being primarily about procreation, that sexuality had a function independent of procreation that is more primary.
I think the discussion of love in an orgonomic context is certainly an interesting one. It’s clear that when Reich spoke of sex, he was really talking about “genital love.” I like to point out that he said that “love, work and knowledge are the wellspring of life,” not “sex, work, and knowledge are the wellsprings of life.“ So in the presence of genitality, sex is an aspect of love, an expression of love.
And what is frightening is love. Sex without love is not particularly frightening. It’s mechanical. But genital love is extraordinarily deep. That is what we are so terrified of losing.
In regards to knowledge, Reich wrote that thinking is exciting and pleasurable:
“Thought is a function of plasmatic life, a unique manifestation of our organ sensations. We do not think with our brain, but with our whole body system.…when he [DH: the average person] resists knowledge, he degenerates into a strange monster which senses what it is unwilling to experience and strikes out at it…. Right thinking goes with strong, pleasurable organ sensations, and often with a shudder of delight. There is an ecstatic feeling of well-being that comes with true insight. Man does not resist correct thinking because he is ‘stupid’ or ‘bad,’ but for the simple reason that he is frightened of contact with things, and above all, because he is afraid of bodily pleasure….he fears everything, without exception, that moves forward in the stream of the living. He sets himself against it, he besmirches it, misconstrues it….People do not want to think correctly, they are afraid of the consequences of thinking…. thinking [is]…an autonomous manifestation of life which insists on understanding itself and on existing at all costs. Understanding is as essential to it as breathing is to life.” Reich, W. Fall 1990. Wrong Thinking Kills. Orgonomic Functionalism Vol. Two. Rangeley, Maine: The Wilhelm Reich Infant Trust, pages 34-43.
So, once again, this is essentially a description of streaming. Thought, the quest for knowledge, is a function of streaming as is love and work.
So work must is a function of streaming, and I think work is inseparable from knowledge; to do something as a job you have to have some kind of understanding of it. Even how to shovel a ditch correctly. And also, of course it helps if you love your work, as I do. So ideally the relationship with work is a love relationship! And the product of one’s work is something that you give to others, so obviously work is an inherently social activity, and it is inherently genital in the sense that genitality involves the capacity to give. And this is true of knowledge also; we learned something partly so that we can pass it on to others.
So love, work, and knowledge are all genital functions.
As a working scientist, I find the discovery process pleasurable. Sometimes a problem is a like weight that a scientist carries around as an interesting question for a long time. And then suddenly the reasonable solution to the problem comes to mine. That is experienced as a burst of pleasure like a Eureka moment.
Why do some colleagues, when presented with an abundance of evidence that a certain substance, such as a widely used pesticide, is causing negative health impacts seem to want to dismiss such concerns? It is like they do not want to know.
Reich, W. (1949). Character Analysis, 3rd ed. Translated by Theodore P. Wolfe, M.D. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
“The genital character follows the development of a work process in an active manner. The work process is left to take its own course. The interest is essentially directed toward the work process itself; the result of the work comes about without any special effort, since it results spontaneously from the work process. The product resulting from the course of the work process is an essential characteristic of biological joy in work. These facts and considerations lead to a sharp criticism of all present methods of early upbringing in which the activity of the child is determined by an anticipated, ready-made work product. The anticipation of the product and the rigid determination of the work process chokes off the child’s own imagination, that is, his productivity. Biological joy in work goes with the ability to develop enthusiasm. Compulsive moralism does not tolerate genuine enthusiasm, It tolerates only mystical ecstasy. A child which must build an already given house with given blocks in a given manner cannot utilize his imagination and therefore cannot develop any enthusiasm. It is not difficult to understand that this basic trait of authoritarian education owes its existence to the pleasure anxiety of the adults; it always strangles the child’s joy in work. The genital character guides the work achievement of others by his example, and not by dictating the product and work methods. This presupposes vegetative motility and the ability to let oneself go.“ (Page 261)
Love for another human and love for nature do seem to have much in common.
Perhaps you will in another post write about the meaning "work" and "knowledge" as those words were used by Reich.
Certainly, they are both functions of streaming. I see work as being very close to or similar to love. And for some of us, knowledge is very close to love, the pursuit of knowledge. I know it is for me.
It’s sort of a question to me in a sense, which is more important: love or work. Work is so vital. It defines us in so many ways. And I think it’s fair to say that a strong love life is difficult to have without at least some decent foundation in one’s work life.
Reich made the point that work is a function that is not primarily about making a living. He considered it a biological need independent of the need to make a living. I suppose one could say that in that sense there’s a parallel about sex, since Reich saw sexuality as not being primarily about procreation, that sexuality had a function independent of procreation that is more primary.
I think the discussion of love in an orgonomic context is certainly an interesting one. It’s clear that when Reich spoke of sex, he was really talking about “genital love.” I like to point out that he said that “love, work and knowledge are the wellspring of life,” not “sex, work, and knowledge are the wellsprings of life.“ So in the presence of genitality, sex is an aspect of love, an expression of love.
And what is frightening is love. Sex without love is not particularly frightening. It’s mechanical. But genital love is extraordinarily deep. That is what we are so terrified of losing.
In regards to knowledge, Reich wrote that thinking is exciting and pleasurable:
“Thought is a function of plasmatic life, a unique manifestation of our organ sensations. We do not think with our brain, but with our whole body system.…when he [DH: the average person] resists knowledge, he degenerates into a strange monster which senses what it is unwilling to experience and strikes out at it…. Right thinking goes with strong, pleasurable organ sensations, and often with a shudder of delight. There is an ecstatic feeling of well-being that comes with true insight. Man does not resist correct thinking because he is ‘stupid’ or ‘bad,’ but for the simple reason that he is frightened of contact with things, and above all, because he is afraid of bodily pleasure….he fears everything, without exception, that moves forward in the stream of the living. He sets himself against it, he besmirches it, misconstrues it….People do not want to think correctly, they are afraid of the consequences of thinking…. thinking [is]…an autonomous manifestation of life which insists on understanding itself and on existing at all costs. Understanding is as essential to it as breathing is to life.” Reich, W. Fall 1990. Wrong Thinking Kills. Orgonomic Functionalism Vol. Two. Rangeley, Maine: The Wilhelm Reich Infant Trust, pages 34-43.
So, once again, this is essentially a description of streaming. Thought, the quest for knowledge, is a function of streaming as is love and work.
So work must is a function of streaming, and I think work is inseparable from knowledge; to do something as a job you have to have some kind of understanding of it. Even how to shovel a ditch correctly. And also, of course it helps if you love your work, as I do. So ideally the relationship with work is a love relationship! And the product of one’s work is something that you give to others, so obviously work is an inherently social activity, and it is inherently genital in the sense that genitality involves the capacity to give. And this is true of knowledge also; we learned something partly so that we can pass it on to others.
So love, work, and knowledge are all genital functions.
As a working scientist, I find the discovery process pleasurable. Sometimes a problem is a like weight that a scientist carries around as an interesting question for a long time. And then suddenly the reasonable solution to the problem comes to mine. That is experienced as a burst of pleasure like a Eureka moment.
Why do some colleagues, when presented with an abundance of evidence that a certain substance, such as a widely used pesticide, is causing negative health impacts seem to want to dismiss such concerns? It is like they do not want to know.
Reich on the work function and education
Reich, W. (1949). Character Analysis, 3rd ed. Translated by Theodore P. Wolfe, M.D. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
“The genital character follows the development of a work process in an active manner. The work process is left to take its own course. The interest is essentially directed toward the work process itself; the result of the work comes about without any special effort, since it results spontaneously from the work process. The product resulting from the course of the work process is an essential characteristic of biological joy in work. These facts and considerations lead to a sharp criticism of all present methods of early upbringing in which the activity of the child is determined by an anticipated, ready-made work product. The anticipation of the product and the rigid determination of the work process chokes off the child’s own imagination, that is, his productivity. Biological joy in work goes with the ability to develop enthusiasm. Compulsive moralism does not tolerate genuine enthusiasm, It tolerates only mystical ecstasy. A child which must build an already given house with given blocks in a given manner cannot utilize his imagination and therefore cannot develop any enthusiasm. It is not difficult to understand that this basic trait of authoritarian education owes its existence to the pleasure anxiety of the adults; it always strangles the child’s joy in work. The genital character guides the work achievement of others by his example, and not by dictating the product and work methods. This presupposes vegetative motility and the ability to let oneself go.“ (Page 261)