I actually saw a writer on “evolution” use this analogy, that since the DNA of fruit flies and humans is so similar, that the proteins really did act like virtual Legos, so that the end results of their actions only differ so much in appearance because different things have been built from them.
If we take the logic of Darwinism, you literally could build life from Legos. You would just have to add motion. They have to move, or no one formation could be more adaptive than another, but over some billions of years in a wind chamber–or water–of some sort not only would static structures be built, but living, moving ones.
To be clear, there is no more or less life in Legos than any other form of matter without spirit. You are, on their rendering, literally just the sum–the pile–of your molecules, none of which possess intelligence, or unique specialness individually or as systems.
I don’t think I have misrepresented this. I think this is literally and accurately the correct idea, applied to an unfamiliar context. I further think it shows, through exaggeration, the improbability that the DNA sequence is both necessary (clearly it is) and sufficient (which I do not believe).