Older Than Dirt or (ashes to ashes and…)


Recently I heard an older man (although younger than I) make the above statement in describing himself. Yet we are all the product of dust/dirt, whether through Adam or through indirectly, mediately living organisms that have been grown in dirt or eaten that which was grown in it. and which innate intelligence created innate matter from it.

Be Sociable, Share!
Posted in: Thinking Straight

This article has 22 comments

  1. Alan Lichter 09/13/2017, 3:52 pm:

    Older than dirt may be the better comment. “We are stardust we are golden” to capture a phrase from CSNY. All the material that makes up our Earth come from stellar material, literally from the explosion of stars. so truly “older than dirt and an expression of the Major Premise: A Universal Intelligence is in all matter and continually gives to it all its properties and actions, thus maintaining it in existence.

    • Joe Strauss 09/13/2017, 4:31 pm:

      Alan, I missed that event. When did it occur and who witnessed it and told you?

      • David Suskin 09/13/2017, 4:49 pm:

        The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life

        The term “evolution” usually refers to the biological evolution of living things. But the processes by which planets, stars, galaxies, and the universe form and change over time are also types of “evolution.” In all of these cases there is change over time, although the processes involved are quite different.
        In the late 1920s the American astronomer Edwin Hubble made a very interesting and important discovery. Hubble made observations that he interpreted as showing that distant stars and galaxies are receding from Earth in every direction. Moreover, the velocities of recession increase in proportion with distance, a discovery that has been confirmed by numerous and repeated measurements since Hubble’s time. The implication of these findings is that the universe is expanding.
        Hubble’s hypothesis of an expanding universe leads to certain deductions. One is that the universe was more condensed at a previous time. From this deduction came the suggestion that all the currently observed matter and energy in the universe were initially condensed in a very small and infinitely hot mass. A huge explosion, known as the Big Bang, then sent matter and energy expanding in all directions.

        Page 4
        Suggested Citation:”The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life.” National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6024.×

        This Big Bang hypothesis led to more testable deductions. One such deduction was that the temperature in deep space today should be several degrees above absolute zero. Observations showed this deduction to be correct. In fact, the Cosmic Microwave Background Explorer (COBE) satellite launched in 1991 confirmed that the background radiation field has exactly the spectrum predicted by a Big Bang origin for the universe.
        As the universe expanded, according to current scientific understanding, matter collected into clouds that began to condense and rotate, forming the forerunners of galaxies. Within galaxies, including our own Milky Way galaxy, changes in pressure caused gas and dust to form distinct clouds. In some of these clouds, where there was sufficient mass and the right forces, gravitational attraction caused the cloud to collapse. If the mass of material in the cloud was sufficiently compressed, nuclear reactions began and a star was born.
        Some proportion of stars, including our sun, formed in the middle of a flattened spinning disk of material. In the case of our sun, the gas and dust within this disk collided and aggregated into small grains, and the grains formed into larger bodies called planetesimals (“very small planets”), some of which reached diameters of several hundred kilometers. In successive stages these planetesimals coalesced into the nine planets and their numerous satellites. The rocky planets, including Earth, were near the sun, and the gaseous planets were in more distant orbits.
        The ages of the universe, our galaxy, the solar system, and Earth can be estimated using modem scientific methods. The age of the universe can be derived from the observed relationship between the velocities of and the distances separating the galaxies. The velocities of distant galaxies can be measured very accurately, but the measurement of distances is more uncertain. Over the past few decades, measurements of the Hubble expansion have led to estimated ages for the universe of between 7 billion and 20 billion years, with the most recent and best measurements within the range of 10 billion to 15 billion years.

        A disk of dust and gas, appearing as a dark band in this Hubble Space Telescope photograph, bisects a glowing nebula around a very young star in the constellation Taurus. Similar disks can be seen around other nearby stars and are thought to provide the raw material for planets.
        The age of the Milky Way galaxy has been calculated in two ways. One involves studying the observed stages of evolution of different-sized stars in globular clusters. Globular clusters occur in a faint halo surrounding the center of the Galaxy, with each cluster containing from a hundred thousand to a million stars. The very low amounts of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium in these stars indicate that they must have formed early in the history of the Galaxy, before large amounts of heavy elements were created inside the initial generations of stars and later distributed into the interstellar medium through supernova explosions (the Big Bang itself created primarily hydrogen and helium atoms). Estimates of the ages of the stars in globular clusters fall within the range of 11 billion to 16 billion years.
        A second method for estimating the age of our galaxy is based on the present abundances of several long-lived radioactive elements in the solar system. Their abundances are set by their rates of production and distribution through exploding
        Page 5
        Suggested Citation:”The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life.” National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6024. ×

        supernovas. According to these calculations, the age of our galaxy is between 9 billion and 16 billion years. Thus, both ways of estimating the age of the Milky Way galaxy agree with each other, and they also are consistent with the independently derived estimate for the age of the universe.
        Radioactive elements occurring naturally in rocks and minerals also provide a means of estimating the age of the solar system and Earth. Several of these elements decay with half lives between 700 million and more than 100 billion years (the half life of an element is the time it takes for half of the element to decay radioactively into another element). Using these time-keepers, it is calculated that meteorites, which are fragments of asteroids, formed between 4.53 billion and 4.58 billion years ago (asteroids are small “planetoids” that revolve around the sun and are remnants of the solar nebula that gave rise to the sun and planets). The same radioactive time-keepers applied to the three oldest lunar samples returned to Earth by the Apollo astronauts yield ages between 4.4 billion and 4.5 billion years, providing minimum estimates for the time since the formation of the moon.
        The oldest known rocks on Earth occur in northwestern Canada (3.96 billion years), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in other parts of the world. In Western Australia, zircon crystals encased within younger rocks have ages as old as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials so far found on Earth.
        The best estimates of Earth’s age are obtained by calculating the time required for development of the observed lead isotopes in Earth’s oldest lead ores. These estimates yield 4.54 billion years as the age of Earth and of meteorites, and hence of the solar system.
        The origins of life cannot be dated as precisely, but there is evidence that bacteria-like organisms lived on Earth 3.5 billion years ago, and they may have existed even earlier, when the first solid crust formed, almost 4 billion years ago. These early organisms must have been simpler than the organisms living today. Furthermore, before the earliest organisms there must have been structures that one would not call “alive” but that are now components of living things. Today, all living organisms store and transmit hereditary information using two kinds of molecules: DNA and RNA. Each of these molecules is in turn composed of four kinds of subunits known as nucleotides. The sequences of nucleotides in particular lengths of DNA or RNA, known as genes, direct the construction of molecules known as proteins, which in turn catalyze biochemical reactions, provide structural components for organisms, and perform many of the other functions on which life depends. Proteins consist of chains of subunits known as amino acids. The sequence of nucleotides in DNA and RNA therefore determines the sequence of amino acids in proteins; this is a central mechanism in all of biology.
        Experiments conducted under conditions intended to resemble those present on primitive Earth have resulted in the production of some of the chemical components of proteins, DNA, and RNA. Some of these molecules also have been detected in meteorites from outer space and in interstellar space by astronomers using radio-telescopes. Scientists have concluded that the “building blocks of life” could have been available early in Earth’s history.
        Page 6
        Suggested Citation:”The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life.” National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6024. ×

        An important new research avenue has opened with the discovery that certain molecules made of RNA, called ribozymes, can act as catalysts in modem cells. It previously had been thought that only proteins could serve as the catalysts required to carry out specific biochemical functions. Thus, in the early prebiotic world, RNA molecules could have been “autocatalytic”—that is, they could have replicated themselves well before there were any protein catalysts (called enzymes).

        Laboratory experiments demonstrate that replicating autocatalytic RNA molecules undergo spontaneous changes and that the variants of RNA molecules with the greatest autocatalytic activity come to prevail in their environments. Some scientists favor the hypothesis that there was an early “RNA world,” and they are testing models that lead from RNA to the synthesis of simple DNA and protein molecules. These assemblages of molecules eventually could have become packaged within membranes, thus making up “protocells”—early versions of very simple cells.
        For those who are studying the origin of life, the question is no longer whether life could have originated by chemical processes involving nonbiological components. The question instead has become which of many pathways might have been followed to produce the first cells.
        Will we ever be able to identify the path of chemical evolution that succeeded in initiating life on Earth? Scientists are designing experiments and speculating about how early Earth could have provided a hospitable site for the segregation of
        Page 7
        Suggested Citation:”The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life.” National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6024. ×

        molecules in units that might have been the first living systems. The recent speculation includes the possibility that the first living cells might have arisen on Mars, seeding Earth via the many meteorites that are known to travel from Mars to our planet.
        Of course, even if a living cell were to be made in the laboratory, it would not prove that nature followed the same pathway billions of years ago. But it is the job of science to provide plausible natural explanations for natural phenomena. The study of the origin of life is a very active research area in which important progress is being made, although the consensus among scientists is that none of the current hypotheses has thus far been confirmed. The history of science shows that seemingly intractable problems like this one may become amenable to solution later, as a result of advances in theory, instrumentation, or the discovery of new facts.
        Creationist Views of the Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life
        Many religious persons, including many scientists, hold that God created the universe and the various processes driving physical and biological evolution and that these processes then resulted in the creation of galaxies, our solar system, and life on Earth. This belief, which sometimes is termed “theistic evolution,” is not in disagreement with scientific explanations of evolution. Indeed, it reflects the remarkable and inspiring character of the physical universe revealed by cosmology, paleontology, molecular biology, and many other scientific disciplines.
        The advocates of “creation science” hold a variety of viewpoints. Some claim that Earth and the universe are relatively young, perhaps only 6,000 to 10,000 years old. These individuals often believe that the present physical form of Earth can be explained by “catastrophism,” including a worldwide flood, and that all living things (including humans) were created miraculously, essentially in the forms we now find them.
        Other advocates of creation science are willing to accept that Earth, the planets, and the stars may have existed for millions of years. But they argue that the various types of organisms, and especially humans, could only have come about with supernatural intervention, because they show “intelligent design.”
        In this booklet, both these “Young Earth” and “Old Earth” views are referred to as “creationism” or “special creation.”
        There are no valid scientific data or calculations to substantiate the belief that Earth was created just a few thousand years ago. This document has summarized the vast amount of evidence for the great age of the universe, our galaxy, the solar system, and Earth from astronomy, astrophysics, nuclear physics, geology, geochemistry, and geophysics. Independent scientific methods consistently give an age for Earth and the solar system of about 5 billion years, and an age for our galaxy and the universe that is two to three times greater. These conclusions make the origin of the universe as a whole intelligible, lend coherence to many different branches of science, and form the core conclusions of a remarkable body of knowledge about the origins and behavior of the physical world.
        Page 8
        Suggested Citation:”The Origin of the Universe, Earth, and Life.” National Academy of Sciences. 1999. Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences, Second Edition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6024. ×

        Nor is there any evidence that the entire geological record, with its orderly succession of fossils, is the product of a single universal flood that occurred a few thousand years ago, lasted a little longer than a year, and covered the highest mountains to a depth of several meters. On the contrary, intertidal and terrestrial deposits demonstrate that at no recorded time in the past has the entire planet been under water. Moreover, a universal flood of sufficient magnitude to form the sedimentary rocks seen today, which together are many kilometers thick, would require a volume of water far greater than has ever existed on and in Earth, at least since the formation of the first known solid crust about 4 billion years ago. The belief that Earth’s sediments, with their fossils, were deposited in an orderly sequence in a year’s time defies all geological observations and physical principles concerning sedimentation rates and possible quantities of suspended solid matter.
        Geologists have constructed a detailed history of sediment deposition that links particular bodies of rock in the crust of Earth to particular environments and processes. If petroleum geologists could find more oil and gas by interpreting the record of sedimentary rocks as having resulted from a single flood, they would certainly favor the idea of such a flood, but they do not. Instead, these practical workers agree with academic geologists about the nature of depositional environments and geological time. Petroleum geologists have been pioneers in the recognition of fossil deposits that were formed over millions of years in such environments as meandering rivers, deltas, sandy barrier beaches, and coral reefs.
        The example of petroleum geology demonstrates one of the great strengths of science. By using knowledge of the natural world to predict the consequences of our actions, science makes it possible to solve problems and create opportunities using technology. The detailed knowledge required to sustain our civilization could only have been derived through scientific investigation.
        The arguments of creationists are not driven by evidence that can be observed in the natural world. Special creation or supernatural intervention is not subjectable to meaningful tests, which require predicting plausible results and then checking these results through observation and experimentation. Indeed, claims of “special creation” reverse the scientific process. The explanation is seen as unalterable, and evidence is sought only to support a particular conclusion by whatever means possible.

        • Joe Strauss 09/14/2017, 1:24 pm:

          I apparently missed the empirical evidence of the Big Bang also! Science has also postulated that germs cause disease. Chiropractic posits a different world and life viewpoint. A conclusion based on a theory is inductive thinking which necessitates a degree of faith/authority. When the moon landing astronauts landed they expected to sink into the surface accumulated by 5 billion years of “cosmic dust”. Instead only a few inches were there. I choose to put my faith/authority in Someone who was around 5 billion + years.

          • David Suskin 09/14/2017, 4:11 pm:

            But notice, in the article it states the usage of deduction to arrive at various conclusions or ideas, with the origination of these premises using induction (Hubble telescopic observations plus more.
            The moon is not made of cheese. Stars are NOT pinholes letting light come in thru some dark background. Planets that were called planets are now not called planets because of science, observation, facts lining up with other facts (eg. pluto).
            There is no way a theological context (book), could or would have described information that was way beyond mans experiences back 5000 years or even 1000 years.
            There were no telescopes, no magnifiers, no (I’m sure i don’t have to keep going on).
            Science has come up with lots and lots and lots of information.
            All the information should pretty much line up in order to be logical.
            Chiropractic Philosophy does the same thing.
            Why is the development of a universe, it’s progression in time, developing starts, planets, life forms, etc. such an impossible thing to put in context with Religious text (written for human factual knowledge 2000 + years ago?

  2. David Suskin 09/13/2017, 4:26 pm:

    I like it:
    Well, I came upon a child of God
    He was walking along the road
    And I asked him, Tell me, where are you going
    This he told me
    Said, I’m going down to Yasgur’s Farm
    Gonna join in a rock and roll band
    Got to get back to the land and set my soul free
    We are stardust, we are golden
    We are billion year old carbon
    And we got to get ourselves back to the garden
    Well, then can I roam beside you?
    I have come to lose the smog,
    And I feel myself a cog in somethin’ turning
    And maybe it’s the time of year
    Yes and maybe it’s the time of man
    And I don’t know who I am
    But life is for learning
    We are stardust, we are golden
    We are billion year old carbon
    And we got to get ourselves back to the garden
    We are stardust, we are golden
    We are billion year old carbon
    And we got to get ourselves back to the garden
    By the time we got to Woodstock
    We were half a million strong
    And everywhere was a song and a celebration
    And I dreamed I saw the bomber death planes
    Riding shotgun in the sky,
    Turning into butterflies
    Above our nation
    We are stardust, we are golden
    We are caught in the devils bargain
    And we got to get ourselves back to the garden
    Songwriter: Joni Mitchell

    • Claude Lessard 09/14/2017, 2:53 pm:

      Chiropractic is SEPARATE and DISTINCT from EVERYTHING ELSE and INCLUSIVE of EVERYONE… REGARDLESS of beliefs, creed, culture, gender, race, etc… –

      – This thread discussion is way beyond the realm of chiropractic. Based on the authority of the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science, chiropractic does NOT deal with WHEN, WHY, or HOW the universe came to be. NO!!! The start point of chiropractic is the major premise and its end point is the chiropractic objective. Beyond that is anybody’s beliefs. –

      – WHY y’all choose to argue about personal beliefs that has no benefits whatsoever to chiropractic? Seriously 😉 –

      – BTW, innate intelligence adapts universal forces and universal e/matter (pri23). Innate intelligence DOES NOT CREATE anything.

      • David Suskin 09/14/2017, 4:16 pm:

        But universal intelligence does! >>universal force. (Physical Laws)
        Where is the logic that ui does and ii does not, both of them being intelligence. It’s an abstraction that has been given legs by Syntactical Explanations using Language.
        ADIO places wisdom above man
        OIBU places wisdom from man
        Congruent viewpoints depend on fluent understanding and evaluation of premises that do or do not hold water,

        • Claude Lessard 09/14/2017, 11:02 pm:


          Innate intelligence is NOT universal intelligence. UNiversal intelligence creates metaphysical universal forces (pri8) and innate intelligence adapts universal forces and e/matter (pri23).

          • David Suskin 09/14/2017, 11:22 pm:

            I understand this distinction Claude. What in the MP, from the MP clarifies this create process whether by a priori experience, inductive/empirical witnessing or leap of faith or…
            Are thoughts created or are they assembled?

  3. Claude Lessard 09/15/2017, 3:25 pm:


    – Thoughts are created by metaphysical universal intelligence and are purely metaphysical (pri1,8). The assembling of innate forces (information) in the innate brain is called the mental impulse and is both metaphysical and physical since the mental impulse is an adapted universal force and e/matter (pri23). I see that it is you WHO choose to still sit on the “FENCED” dock of the bay waisting time 🎷. 😉

    • Joe Strauss 09/15/2017, 5:43 pm:

      The mental impulse is a universal force invested with new character, making it constructive rather than destructive toward structural matter.A lighting bolt is a universal force which if adapted it may correct a VS (never checked a subluxated person before and after being struck so I cannot testify to that, although I have been adjusted by chiropractors and thought I was being struck by lightning)). It may be adapted and have no effect, or it may be unadapted and kill them.A chiropractic thrust is a universal force. It also may be adapted, invested with new character, becomes an innate force and creates an adjustment by the innate intelligence of the PM’s body. That educated universal force like the lightning bolt may be insufficient and so is adapted, too great and causes a negative reaction even to the point of death (especially if the person is subsequently seen by an md) or too light, having no effect. My approach was to start with a light force and then if there was no indication that the PM’s body had made the adjustment, I would slightly increase the force and then leave them alone until the next visit/day.

  4. David Suskin 09/15/2017, 4:26 pm:

    First of all Claude. You are really quite punny, I mean funny :).
    Interesting “pickup” on the force AND matter as a collection as per ii. Never saw it that way.
    You speak about these principles, as though they are etched in stone. That stone being your accepting them as Authority.
    I say how do we extract a “creation” process (ui creating uf)(P1), and you quote P1 without giving any explanation to the inductive or deductive process. It’s really quite something that one arrives at the mental impulse, as per p23 having started with such a “broad-reaching” apriori as stated in P1.
    I’ve been thinking. Uh Oh!
    We state that Chiropractic is Philosophy Science and Art. What dawned on me was that the (Applied) Science and the Art determine the Application of the Chiropractic Objective (LACVS). They act within the realm of UI and II and their application of force(s), expressed thru matter. The Philosophy and the (Basic) Science determine the viewpoint and context that Chiropractic operates in and from. It defines a Healthy, Truthful application of Educated Intelligence. It poses the viewpoint that the PM and the Chiropractor MUST have in order to offer Chiropractic as it was/is intended within its separate and unique position, realm.
    Without the Adj, Chiropractic is fractured, distorted. Without the Philosophy, Chiropractic is fractured, distorted.
    This is why ADIO viewpoint, full understanding of the Philosophy is imperative. In a way to Adjust the Educated Intelligence into receiving an adjusted outlook on all things Chiropractic.
    But a complimentary, healthy, etc. Educated Intelligence is a very personal (Normal) achievement to attain. A delicate balance of Fact,
    Thought (logic) and Experience. Perhaps my Educated Intelligence is being wasted (wasting time) but in a way I am finding that giving myself moments, to just BE, backing up and just chilling is the right pace versus being in a hurry to go nowhere

    • Joe Strauss 09/15/2017, 6:11 pm:

      David, while all matter has universal forces by virtue of its (atomic) existence, we only adjust living people or animals with an innate intelligence capable of making constructive Ifs. PS. Just “chilling” is always going somewhere. However it may be going nowhere in you professional life, if you are not applying that education. That is an issue only you can personally address.

  5. David Suskin 09/15/2017, 6:50 pm:

    Language describes a very complex process as suggests “adjust living people or animals with an innate intelligence capable of making constructive Ifs.”
    versus adjusting non living people with non constructive ifs 🙂
    Educated Intelligence that does not acknowledge the “A” in adio might have a thin, weak, or absent relationship to it (“A”).
    Getting into the right relationship with “A” (which leads into the “MP”), allows ii to stand on it’s own without educated intelligence dominating. Personal addressing issues, effectively, is applying “Normal” (respect) for ones self. That’s chilling, Backing Up to Being. That is where the WHO lives. That’s “Ease” (Living with Educated Intelligence.)

  6. Claude Lessard 09/15/2017, 10:44 pm:


    WHAT is the AUTHORITY of chiropractic if not the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science? DD? BJ? Reggie? Strauss? Oh… let’s not forget SUSKIN? 😉

  7. Claude Lessard 09/15/2017, 10:47 pm:

    … really what or who is the AUTHORITY of chiropractic according to you David?

  8. David Suskin 09/16/2017, 10:15 am:

    For me. Authority in general Is what Controls me or I let it control me, What exceeds my Free Will to change, to alter. It determines My values, my fears, my passions, my attractions, my reactions. And yet, I continue to believe in hope. The Authority of Everything including Chiropractic is Educated Intelligence. What your WHO does with it, how you ACT with it, Determines everything. It is The Double Edged Sword.
    We are born into this controlling world. It is a different circumstance for everyone. How you exercise your freedom to think, to feel, to change, to react, to love and hate, to learn, to believe, to reject, to hope, etc. determines what one sees as Authority. There is a Big Picture out there.
    As developing human beings we collect facts day after day, year after year. Putting them together into some whole. It does consist of truths and falsehoods. So ones Authority is a juxtaposition of this collection of so called facts and memories with that Big Grand Picture- viewpoint. A melding of AD with OI.
    Yes I acknowledge that I have sat on the Fence way to long. I lost control a long long time ago. I continue to hope to regain at least some of it, and I honestly have. “Telling the story”! It consists of Understanding and ACTION. In my personal and professional transformation with new character I hope to achieve a solid workable viewpoint that has an even better, healthier grasp of AUTHORITY. I know i am close. It is all about the WHO isn’t it? 😉

    • Claude Lessard 09/17/2017, 8:45 pm:

      Does anyone know when the 33 principles of chiropractic’s basic science
      were identified and ACKNOWLEDGED, to the profession, as the AUTHORITY of chiropractic?

      • Joe Strauss 09/19/2017, 1:49 pm:

        Principles/laws are always or should be the authority. Unfortunately we made the author of the principles (BJ), whose statements did not always reflect/state principle, the authority. He was brilliant but not perfect or infallible. When his or ours or RWS writings reflect principle they should be heeded/applied. Most of the time they did, sometimes they did not, especially when getting out of chiropractic and into another field like theology/religion or medicine and “getting sick people well.”

  9. Bryan Fall 09/18/2017, 3:22 pm:

    Book published in 1927. However they were gleaned and expounded from BJ’s and DD’s much earlier writings.
    If we make up our own rules for baseball, it is no longer baseball. If we make up our own rules to play by, make up your own game name! Something different than the 33 principles is not chiropractic. If you are attempting to practice a game and you have a disagreement with the rules, it will make for some internal conflict. Internal conflict comes out full of inconsistencies, confusion, and turmoil. Others will be confused by us as much as we are confused by our self-contradiction.

  10. Alan Lichter 09/18/2017, 4:21 pm:

    “Authority in general Is what Controls me or I let it control me, What exceeds my Free Will to change, to alter. It determines My values, my fears, my passions, my attractions, my reactions. … The Authority of Everything including Chiropractic is Educated Intelligence.”
    David, your beliefs determine your values, fears, passions, reactions not something outside of you. You choose, consciously or unconsciously, to accept an external “authority” based on your beliefs. Educated Intelligence is stored in Educated Brain defined by Stephen son as, “that part of the brain used by Innate as an organ for reason, memory, education, and the so-called voluntary functions…
    “It is supplied by mental impulses over nerves, as any other tissue…
    “We must never conceive it as a Power which create (sic) thoughts or as a thing that can govern the body.
    “It is used by Innate, by virtue of experience and training, stored within it, as an organ to so ‘tincture’ impulses that they are consciously guided-called voluntary function. Voluntary pertains to the will.”
    You always have a choice. You have chosen your authorities that you accept based on your belief in their validity. So-called, “hard science” changes as we expand our understanding of reality. Not everything can be explained by what science has validated to date. The founders of our profession were men out of their own time. They attempted to explain a reality they experienced with the knowledge and science available to them. Science continues to catch up to what they knew empirically. Being open to other possibilities and other choices it what allows us to grow as human beings and to advance the science you appear to value above all else.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *