So do you, since your quote was from a book review in 1996 and mine was from a general statement about the whole topic which Shapiro professed in 1997. Moreover, "intelligent action by living organisms" is not the same thing as guiding intelligence at work in the origin of species in a debate between Creationists and Darwinists.
But that again is your red herring. You have now completely and sufficiently supported the contention made that DNA is similar to code and the cell a computer.
Having exemplars of physical objects endowed with computational and decision-making capabilities QED.
You continue to miss his point. He is saying plainly that intelligence can be purely mechanical and does not require any assumption of supernatural intervention.
Phillip Johnson reads Shapiro’s statement the same way I do:
“That sounds like a ringing endorsement of Behe’s scientific claims, but Shapiro nonetheless blasted Behe for arguing that those unexplained biochemical systems might be designed. Raising that possibility was “fighting the battles of the past rather than seeing the vision of the future.” That’s another illustration of how strong the hold of materialist philosophy is on the minds of contemporary biologists. If Behe’s science is accurate, why should the vision of the future exclude design?
Shapiro then proceeded from philosophical prejudice to a form of confusion we have seen before. What Behe failed to recognize, he wrote, was that we now have experience with computers. “Having exemplars of physical objects endowed with computational and decision-making capabilities shows that there is nothing mystical religious, or supernatural about discussing the potential for similarly intelligent action by living organisms.”
“James Shapiro, the University of Chicago, is working on pre-programmed adaptive capacity. And my friend, Paul Nelson, went and talked to him; they were on a panel – Shapiro said, “You know, I can’t make heads or tails of what you guys are talking about with intelligent design.” And Nelson went to talk to Shapiro and he said, “Look, you’re really into this idea of pre-programmed adaptive capacity as a kind of alternative to strict Darwinism. We think that’s a neat phenomenon. Let me ask you a question, Jim. Where does the programming come from in the first place?” And Shapiro apparently said to Nelson, “You know, I rarely think about that.”
http://www.discovery.org/a/3505
You are reading things into Shapiro that he doesn’t intend. Neither Shapiro nor Hubert Yockey believe that evolution requires supernatural or outside intervention.