Why the distinction persists despite being scientifically outdated
The sheer number of known carbon compounds justifies treating organic chemistry as its own subfield, and organic compounds tend to share characteristic reaction types and lab techniques distinct from inorganic chemistry — practical reasons the split remains useful, even though the original vitalist justification for it was disproven long ago.
What Wöhler's experiment actually changed
Wöhler's urea synthesis is often described as instantly overturning vitalism, but historically it took decades of further organic compounds being synthesized in labs before the belief was fully abandoned by the scientific community — the experiment is better understood as the start of a gradual shift rather than an overnight revolution.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does "organic chemistry" have anything to do with "organic food"?
No, the two uses of the word are unrelated. Organic chemistry is a scientific field studying carbon-containing compounds broadly, present in every kind of food, synthetic or not. The 'organic' food label refers to a specific certified farming and production standard, and has nothing to do with carbon chemistry.
Are all carbon-containing compounds considered organic?
No — by long-standing chemistry convention, a handful of simple carbon compounds, including carbon dioxide, carbonates, cyanides, and carbides, are classified as inorganic despite containing carbon.