Fact Checking

 

New Ink Art / Alfred Freddy Krupa/ Reductivism & Minimalism "en plein air" (below zero °C)

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes

Juvenal

I am supposing that my current little foray into the occult and steampunk style mechanisms are a symptom of a larger problem.  I really am having a lot of trouble not questioning just about everything that comes across my field of vision as to whether or not it actually is the way that it is being portrayed.  

Now, this doesn’t apply to everything, I feel that the ideas that my sink contains a couple too many dishes that need a washin’ and that the wind chimes are telling me that things are happening outside can be trusted as valid.  My sense organs, despite the protestations of Mr. Schopenhauer seem to be pretty reliable.

But it seems that the farther away in space and time the information that I am privy to, the less reliable the “truth” of those statements.  There is also the problem of scoring “information” along the axis of objective to subjective when it is delivered to me.  While the wind chimes tell me that the weather is flexible, and I feel that the temperatures given to me over the internet for places far away (current temperature in blenheim sc = 52℉ and don’t ask why that popped up when I started typing “current temperature” into Google!!).  But when I hear about oncoming snowpocalypse and other things I start getting a little leery.  When the descriptions of the problem have demands for federal compensation attached, I feel that there may be cause for doubt.

Things get even worse in the political arena.  Edward Bernay’s children are assiduous in their studies.  The truth presented by those descendents have been polished to a fine luster, but bear little relation to the complexity of the truths that out there in the real world.

Where this is going is the science that is being bandied about in today’s world may well be similarly tainted.  

Folks brought up Einstein’s dismissal of Reich’s work and seemed to think that settled the issue.  After all, wasn’t Einstein the smartest person ever?  So if Saint Albert of nuclear weapons thought it was wrong and dismissed it, who are we to challenge?  Plus the fact the psychology professors of the day all said the idea was balderdash.

I am mostly thinking about this because I am curious.  What I am curious about (damn you John Michael) is how hardcore materialists went about doing their measurements to “disprove” the theory.  If orgone is a separate type of “stuff”, how are you measuring it?  It seems like there is an assumption of a relationship between the object being studied (orgone) and the metrology available to the researcher.  The old saw “if all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail” comes to mind.

So right now I have to read enough and try to understand enough to see if this is even a do-able project.  I am not a huge fan of indirect measurements, because as soon as that starts occurring, you fall back into the problems stated in the first part of this piece.