Wilhelm Reich was a psychiatrist of sorts who taught for a short while in New York’s The New School (a university; the John Dewey of our current education system was one of its creators). From my reading so far, he appears to be a progressive who was in-line with at least some of our society’s current thought process. Even though this is a fringe view, Wikipedia states that his views of sex literally permeated everything (one of his influences was Sigmund Freud):
He argued that humankind had previously split its knowledge of orgone [a supposed primordial version of Freud’s libido] in two: “ether” for its mechanistic, physical aspects, and God for the spiritual, the subjective. He wrote that, “God-Father is the basic cosmic energy from which all being stems, and which streams through (the) body as through anything else in existence.”
It is funny that I just finished a book about Isaac Newton. He had conducted an experiment to disprove the existance of ether, which is supposed to cause the effects of gravity by exerting external force on an object. That experiment involved a simple clock pendulum. Newton was brilliant.
I came across this quote of Philip Rieff today in a discussion about Wilhelm Reich:
Set into the context of Reich’s attach on the family as the nucleus of all authoritative institutions, his repeated calls for a do-it-yourself adolescent sex education acquires political significance. Sex education becomes the main weapon in an ideological war against the family; its aim was to divest the parents of their moral authority.
I used to say quite often that there is more to life than sex. Some days I feel like I have been drawn into the “sex is everything” craze with some of the books that I read and in how I track society. It is annoying. On Sunday night I visited a church where the pastor preached against gossip as strongly as against lust. That was quite refreshing.
All the same, our society does have a strong focus on sex. Please be aware that, as the quote above explains, the modern sexual exploration and explanations are purposefully designed to break the family.
Comments
Submitted by Sarah on
Absolutely right no, Chris!!! Absolutely the family break down is necessary. Henry Ford said it. Plato said. Pavlov said it. Dewey said it.
If the goal of school was just to educate, why would we feel the need to take them away from the family all day? Our grandparents did not buy into social security plans overnight. There’s been a war going on for our minds for a long time, and the illicit sex movement is just one of the many signs.
Submitted by netwiz on
Sex is a major focus of all human existence. Yeah, without birth control society had to have other mechanisms to deal with people who were out of control about it, but I don’t think we’re any more focused on it than before—other than we’ve changed how it can be pursued and what the consequences are (AIDS vs. pregnancy). I laud you intentionality in trying to make a conscious decision about what factor it is in your life…but I am hesitant in characterizing it as something new to the human race.
Submitted by netwiz on
Per my other comment today on an older post, I’m interested in where you attribute the Henry Ford family breakdown endorsement (I’d expect it to be interpreted from sayings of the others, even Dewey), but I’d be interested in if you would back up the Henry Ford one.
I don’t get the connection: “If the goal of school was just to educate” doesn’t connect for me to “why would we feel the need to take them away from the family all day”. That’s how “people” think you do things efficiently: group people that need the same thing together (there’s many challenges to that line of thought, but it’s people’s first instinct). Why is it your reason versus mine?
Obviously the Designer of the family didn’t agree with the human “efficiency” instinct (I feel I get good at one stage of my children’s lives only to run out of children that need parenting at that stage).
I agree with your overall point, the war’s been going on since the first battle in the Garden of Eden. The man tear I’ve been on today is that I don’t think there’s a whole not new under the sun here.
Submitted by Chris on
No, sex is not a new focus. There were cities in millenia past where most of the women would gather together once a month to drink a special brew that was supposed to make them infertile. Archeologists have also found old wells outside of temples that were filled with the skeletons of newborn infants—those of the temple prostitutes.
I’ve lived in a culture that did not speak English (didn’t you spend some time overseas as well?) and have also worked with other cultures in our own country. Among other things, these other languages are a very good way to learn that our culture is not the only one where duplicate meanings abound. Quite often they are less than noble.
There was a phrase during the middle ages that the poorest pauper lived as richly as the king in bed. Some men in our culture today consider a trip to the store with their wife to be sexual in nature because it is the little things that add up for the wife.
I understand the historical significance and even that none of us would be here without sex, but I think that there has to be something to carry a marriage through when one spouse is sick. There has to be a purpose in life that the kids can see. There is more to life.
No, our culture is not really worse than those that have come before it. We still ought to know better.
Submitted by netwiz on
I figure you’re not fishing for what the purpose of our existence is here, the challenge is finding a way to elevate the excitement about it in our hearts so that the gaudy, temporal, debilitating distractions don’t overwhelm it.
I guess the thing I don’t want to discard is that sex is a good thing, a God designed and provided thing. We need to be careful not to say “zero” and “all” but always strive for the balance.
Submitted by Chris on
Sex is definitely a good thing. I have been known to lecture on the Song of Solomon even though I am single. It should be looked forward to before marriage and enjoyed during.
After that clarification, I agree.
Submitted by garrettw on
“... the challenge is finding a way to elevate the excitement about it in our hearts so that the gaudy, temporal, debilitating distractions don’t overwhelm it.”
amen!