Truly, if the universe were altogether a clockwork, a mechanism as contemporary science approaches it, then the semantics could be modeled by syntax universally, including living systems. That which is analyzed can be synthesized, etc.
But life isn't and cannot be modeled that way. The dead rabbit we broke apart earlier cannot be put together again.
Organization which must be addressed as a "thing" in itself plays no role in the Newtonian approach which partitions "the ambience into systems and environments, phases and forces, states and dynamical laws." (quoting Rosen "Life Itself" pg 117)
LeGrande's objection in his reply to yours is the same, it approaches the subject as if it were a mechanism, a clockwork; the efficient cause of a clockwork is a clockmaker which is necessarily outside the clockwork itself.
The material cause, LeGrande, is not at issue.
The final cause of the clock is to keep time. In life the final cause is the organism or subordinately, the function within the organism.
Life avoids (external) efficient causation (e.g. maintenance and repair) because of its circular organization.
Me trying to understand what "a spirit is" the above comment makes me wonder, "Is a spirit a mechanism?".. It is possible that "the/A spirit" may Not be be a mechanism at all.. like a human body is.. Then what is it?.. a spirit/Spirit....
Even a human body is a mechanism.. as well all other life forms I know of.. I grew up thinking of life forms as mechanism's.. from a microbe, or carrot to my own body..
What "a spirit is", may not be a mechanism.. But what?.. I'm not sure I can even bridge the mechanism gap.. considering "LIFE"..
You and Boopy makes my mind go to new places.. I like that..