Thanks for providing references.

Entropy, however, originates from hard science, where the world or situation under study is well-known and bound. It is applied to soft science, where the real world is far more complicated than what is seen. It's like with psychology: it's mainly common sense or popular beliefs that work some times, and a lot of subjectivity of what is working.

When you say "that every living system inevitably moves ..." this is presumptuous. We have difficulties to define what is life, so defining concepts upon it is not hard science.

My problem with your argumentation is that being open on what science is is a real danger because of all the gurus who uses false science as an argument for their theories.