Well, I dont actually read it as a dodge over the very specific declaimation contrary to simple systems as NOT being organized.
I think they just carry out the use of language a bit too far.
Try thinking of the difference of self-organization, self-regulation, and self-ordering. With choice one can have organizations at least partially ordered but without a contigent choice the regulation of any series so ordered would not occur by the same but from above or without. I do not have a problem seperating ordering and organization but there seems something suspect to me in the notion of prescribed information.
So then if my use language is just an attempt to get people to speak like me so that I can say that it was just a misunderstanding of my own views then I guess I fall out of agreement with you and Razd here. I do however feel that in the direct application to living things that Abel and Trevors have tried to use lingusitic insights out of the context that they extisted in. I do not suspect that deep structure can be allowed to cut language in any which way but loose.
I HAVE encounterd the emphasis towards prexistence of logic gates in somatic tissue functioning and I think THIS is what the redefintions are directed towards. There is nothing wrong with that, in my perspective. Sure one should not be held back from trying to construct universality in cellular automata etc but untill they have been demonstrated irrespective of the media the same kind of restraint towards these positions ought be the same for irreducible complexity in ID etc.