Here is the conclusion from the recent Science paper I mentioned:
In either case, our results identify unexpected similarities in tissue organization between two groups of distantly related organisms that were thought to have independently evolved multicellularity, and thus reveal molecular factors and organizational principles that may have contributed to the early evolution and diversification of animals.
“Molecular factors” and “organizational principles” that “contributed” the emergence of animals. This description nicely maps to the way in which I described front-loading in the context of social engineering about a year ago.
The manner in which the various pieces and parts of life were hooked up would represent the architecture of life and this, in turn, would amount to a logic that would help guide and facilitate subsequent evolution. The actual pieces and parts of life would represent the composition of life and this, in turn, would amount to various preadaptations that would favor certain evolutionary trajectories over others.
Compare the two paragraphs. The “architecture of life” is the same as “organizational principles” and the “the composition of life” is the same as “molecular factors.” The Science paper speaks of molecular factors and organizational principles that contribute to the early evolution of animals and I spoke of the architecture and composition of life that would favor certain evolutionary trajectories over others.