How about "In the beginning?" I keep wondering we are made from "dust" if dust isn't capable of being alive.
Personally, I think matter has been given a bum rap, a baseless assumption that matter does not merge seamlessly with the spiritual (the spritual being our designation for what we currently don't understand).
"Dust" PLUS something else makes all systems in nature, living and non-living! Or so it seems to me.
Matter doesn't deserve a "bum rap." It, plus space and time, are the productions of the Big Bang. We like matter -- without it, nothing would exist. Its "spiritual complement," if I might put it that way, is what makes it to be the various given things of nature "in their serried ranks." And so I think matter does merge "seamlessly with the spiritual."
I note your remark that "spirit" is the name we give to that which we do not yet understand. I think that is a true insight, js1138. And so it seems to me that people who break out in a rash on the mere hearing of the word "spiritual" risk falling into a condition, not only of spiritual, but also of intellectual closure. This would not seem to portend much good for the evolution of science. JMHO FWIW.