Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many organisms have a stable superstructure within which controlled change is accommodated--the seasonal timing of reproduction, the outer protein coat of a virus, the plasticity of the brain. Ok for the seasonal change, but I don't think all change is controlled the way you say. Individuals grow and adapt to their changing environment, and for this process to be optimal, entropy is necessary. This contradict the i…
> optimal individual is fully deterministic The way out of your contradiction is to realize that full determinism is likely to lead to the death of the organism, which would not maximally propagate information. One view is that organisms allow change because the environment forces it upon them; another view is that the necessity for particular types of change has shaped organisms over time, until it becomes part of t…
If I understand your argument, one way to think of it is that if my genes allow a “little bit” of entropy now they have a better chance of lasting multiple generations, thus increasing _maximal_ information preservation over time. That is to say preserving 99% of my genes for 10,000 generations is “better” than preserving 100% of my genes for 100 generations.
The interesting ramification there then is that in this perspective the individual is the gene sequence (“my“ DNA) not the current expression of those genes (“me”).
Still too early in the morning for the full ramifications of this all to sink in with me, but definitely fascinating.