It’s interesting that throughout history we have tended to characterize the behavior of biological systems in terms of the dominant technology of the time. At one point, it was mechanical automata. Then it was hydraulics. Then it was electrical circuits. Now it is computers.
It seems that some people have become overly attached to the computer code explanation of DNA, viewing it not just as a convenient analogy to current technology but as a fundamental truth. They will ask questions like “if DNA is code, then what corresponds to functions? or exceptions? or data structures?” and end up working backwards from the analogy instead of observing what DNA does and building a mental model from there.
(It doesn’t help that the code analogy is very flattering to the programmer’s ego.)
It seems that some people have become overly attached to the computer code explanation of DNA, viewing it not just as a convenient analogy to current technology but as a fundamental truth. They will ask questions like “if DNA is code, then what corresponds to functions? or exceptions? or data structures?” and end up working backwards from the analogy instead of observing what DNA does and building a mental model from there.
(It doesn’t help that the code analogy is very flattering to the programmer’s ego.)