The only equality in life occurs at birth when we are all born with 100% innate intelligence and 0% educated intelligence. After that the former stays the same, the latter increases unequally, making us no longer equal.
The only equality in life occurs at birth when we are all born with 100% innate intelligence and 0% educated intelligence. After that the former stays the same, the latter increases unequally, making us no longer equal.
Various degrees of LOM’s present themselves at birth. Doesn’t that equate to inequality in life at birth?
Sure, there are a lot of inequalities at birth, David, in the expression of intelligence through matter. I just listed two equalities and only one lasts a lifetime. In fact, I would suggest other than the two I mentioned at birth, there are no other areas in which we are equal. The founders concern was that citizens would be equal under the law, hence the blindfold.
How about the inequality of birthing? How many are delivered without iatrogenic subluxations?
Steve, that’s a function of the matter. A baby born with or”without iatrogenic subluxations”, retarded or genius, has 100% innate intelligence, the same as an amoeba or an elephant, unless they are “stillborn” in which case they have 0% ii. It always is a limitation of the matter and its ability to express the inborn intelligence, never the ii, which is an absolute. BJ seemed to indicate that we all were born with genius matter in us, the problem is that the LOM created by vs is keeping genius from being expressed in some. IMO, that is a factor but not the only one.
Ok, I understand your point. Of course the ‘at birth’ being the accurate starting place, for educated intelligence set at 0%, might be questionable, but that is a moot point.
The premise of our equality, under the law, actually stemming from innate intelligence being 100% in ALL, is interesting.
However, p22. The Amount of Innate intelligence – There is 100% of Innate Intelligence in every “living thing,” the requisite amount, proportional to its organization, to me, throws a curve into this equality issue,
I understand us All having 100% innate intelligence. I understand that the matter from one individual to another IS different in amount and/or kind (LOM), etc. We may all have 100% innate intelligence, and that fact might make us all equal at that point, but then what would distinguish us from let’s say another animal, that has 100% innate intelligence. I suggest that the equality, under the law, something that designates the equality between man, humans has something to do with theological or identity/moral issues. The chiropractic philosophy while it is ADIO, I’m not sure that these legal, equality issues are in entirety, coming from this notion, you are presenting. Understand? (hope I’ve made myself clear – yikes) 😉
This is my attempt to interpret Stephenson: 100% is perfect, complete, no more or less than its necessary (requisite) amount, in relation to its need and the need for any living thing (amoeba or elephant) it is the same,100%. How much gravity does a baseball or a bowling ball need to hit the ground. Both need 100%, no more, no less. In that sense a baseball and a bowling ball are equal in their gravitational needs, despite the fact that one weighs 20 times as much and is much larger in size. If you can interpret it (P.22) differently, I am open to a different interpretation.