The statement that there is an invisible hand that organizes the market activities in a modern society is an idea proposed by the 18th-century Scottish economist and philosopher Adam Smith. He used the metaphor of the invisible hand to describe how the self-interested actions of individuals can produce beneficial social and economic outcomes, without any central planning or intervention.
The validity of this theory is a matter of debate among economists and other social scientists. Some argue that the invisible hand theory is a valid explanation of how free markets can achieve efficiency, innovation, and growth, by allowing the price system to coordinate the supply and demand of goods and services.
Others contend that the invisible hand theory is not valid, because it ignores the role of institutions, regulations, externalities, inequalities, and other factors that can DISTORT or DISRUPT the market outcomes, and that sometimes require government intervention or correction.
It is a matter of debate as how valid is the statement depending upon one’s perspective, assumptions, and values, as well as the empirical evidence and historical context of different market situations. There is no definitive answer to this question, but rather different arguments and viewpoints that can be evaluated and compared. 

One of the main challenges to the free market and the invisible hand theory is the existence of monopolies, which are firms that have exclusive or dominant control over a market or a product, and face little or no competition. Monopolies can DISTORT the market by setting prices above the marginal cost, reducing output and consumer surplus, and creating deadweight loss. Monopolies can also stifle innovation, exploit consumers, and influence politics.
There are different views on how monopolies are formed and how they can be prevented or regulated. Some argue that monopolies are the result of natural market forces, such as economies of scale, network effects, or product differentiation, and that they can be challenged by potential entrants or substitutes. Others contend that monopolies are the product of artificial barriers to entry, such as patents, licenses, tariffs, or subsidies, and that they can only be controlled by antitrust laws or public ownership.
The question of whether the free market and the invisible hand can ever be attained in any real economy is ultimately an empirical one, that requires testing the hypothesis proposed by Adam Smith against the evidence from history and reality. However, this is not an easy task, as there are many factors that can affect the performance and outcomes of markets, such as institutions, culture, technology, and politics9. Moreover, there are different criteria and indicators that can be used to measure the efficiency, equity, and welfare of markets, such as GDP, income distribution, poverty, happiness, and environmental quality.
Therefore, the answer to this question may depend on the perspective and values of the observer, as well as the context and time period of the analysis. Some may argue that the free market and the invisible hand are ideal models that can never be fully realized, but can serve as useful benchmarks and guides for policy and reform. Others may claim that the free market and the invisible hand are unrealistic and harmful assumptions that ignore the complexity and diversity of human behavior and society, and that require alternative and more holistic approaches to economics and development.