in; 11 iol loy A nzolecidar geneticist reflect@ on two general historical questions: I (1) Iflat does it mean to say a discovery is 'ahead of its time"? (2) Are scientific creations any less unique than artistic creatiO 71 S.P by Gunther S. Stent lie fantasticall rapid progress of y molecular genetics in the past 25 Tyears now obliges merely middle- a.ged participants in its early develop- inent to look back on their early work from a depth of historical perspective that for scientifics'pecialties flowering in y after all the wit- earlier times came on] nesses of the first blossoming were'long dead. It is as if the late@-18tli-century colleagues of Joseph Priestley and An- toine Lavoisier bad still been active in chemical research and teachina, in the 1930's, after atomic structure and the nature of the cliemica 'I bond had been revealed. This somewhat depressing personal vantage provides a singular op- portunity to assay the'evolution ol a scientific field. In reflectina on the his- 0 tory. of molecular genetics from the viewpoint of my @wn experierice I have found that two of its niost famous inel- dents-0swald Avery's identification of DNA as the active principle in bacterial tr,,insformation and hence as genetic ma- terial, and Jaines Watson and Francis CricVs discovery of the DNA double be- lix-illurnhiate two general problems of cultural histo.ty. The ease of Avery throws liolit oil the question of whether it is meLmingful or merely tautologous to sa% that a discovery is "abead of its tinic," or preinaturc. Atid the case of Watson wid Crick can be used, and in fact JILIN beell used, to discuss the ques- tion. of whether there is anything unique ill a scientific discovery, ill view of the likelihood thut if Dr. A had not discov- ercd Fact X today, Dr. B would have discovcred it tomorrow. origins. In that historical account I men- tioned neither Avery's name nor DNA- mediated bacterial transformation. My essay elicited a letter to the editor by a microbiologist, who complained: "It is a sad and surprising omission that... Stent makes no mention of the definitive proof of DNA as the basic beredi tary substance by 0. T. Avery, C. M. Mac- Leod and Maclyn McCarty. The growth of [molecular genetics) rests upon this experimental proof... I am old enough to remember the excitement and en- tbusiasm induced by the publication of the paper by Avery, MacLeod and Mc- Carty. Avery, an effective bacteriologist, was a quiet, self-effacing, non-disputa- tious gentleman. These characteristics of personality should not [cause) the gen- eral scientifle public ... to let his name go unrecognized." I was taken aback by this letter and replied that I should indeed have men- tioned Avery's 1944 proof that DNA is the hereditary substance. I went on to say, however, that in rny opinion it is not true that the growth of molecular genetics rests on Avery's proof. For many years tbat proof actually had little impact on geneticists. The reason for the delay was not that Averys work was un- known to or mistrusted by geneticists but that it was "premature." My prinia facie reason for saying Avery's discovery was premature is that it was not appreciated in its day. fly lack of appreciation I do not mean that Avery's discovery went unnoticed, or even that it was not considered impor- tant. What I do mean is that geneticists did not seein to be able to do much This statement can be readily sup- ported by an examination of the scien" tific literature. For example, a Convinc- --4 ing demonstration of the lack of appre ciation of Avery's discovery is provided by the'1950 golden jubilee of genetics symposium "Genetics in the 20th Cen. tury." lit the proceedings of that sym- posium some of the most eminent ge. neticists published essays that surveyed the progress of the first 50 years of ge. netics and assessed its status at that time. Only one of the 20 essavists &aw fit to make more than a passing refer- ence to Averys discovery, then six years old. He was a colleague of Averys at @_-A the Rockefeller Institute, aiid lie ex. pressed soine' doubt tbaL the active transforming principle was really pure DNA. The then leading philosopher of the gene, H. J. Muller of Indiana Uid- versity, contributed an essay on the ])a- ture of the gene that mentions neither Avery nor DNA. So why was Avery's discovery not ap- preciated in its day? Because it was "Premature:' But is this really In ex- planation or is it merely -,in ciykpty tau- tology? In other words, Lq there n %vaV of providiskr a criterion of the prem 11- turity of a discovery other than its fail- ure to make an impact? Yes, there is such a criterion: A discovery is preina- ture if its implications cannot be con- nected by a series of simple logical steps to canonical, or generally accepted, knowledge. Why could Avery's discovery not be connected with canonical knowledge? Ever since DNA had been discovered in the cell nucleus by Friedrich Miescher ive, vc@lrs nlg@o I published a brief ret-' with it or build on it. That is, in its day in 1869 it had been suspected of exert- rosl;eCt've essa oil 111041#1111''R*01 Aveg' V [IRD006.607B@, ftftma(mus proc rictics, with Va Oftvpit,46 r A Nd es. VAMPK_ im simnIVIAn lnonivif- Ornwre 84 in the 1920's, . when it was found that DINA is a major component of the chro- 1nosomApPWVadtEQI1 MAU% molecular nature of DNA, however, made it well-nigh inconceivable that DNA could be the carrier of hereditary information. First, until well into the 1930's DNA was generally thought to he inerely a tetranucleotide composed qf one unit each of adenylic, guanylic, thyaddylic and cytidylic acids. Second, even when it was finally realized by the iarly 194 S tba V19, $'. the tetrnziucleotide hypothesis required, it was still widely believed tbe tetrailu- cleotide. was the basic repeating unit of the large DNA polymer in which the four units mentioned recur in regular sequence. DNA was therefore viewed as a uniforin macromolecule that, like other monotonous polymers gucli as stai--h or ciullulose, is always the sarne, cal %ource. 9 '6ft*V09' "C"0111i ous presence of DNA in the chromosomes was therefore generally explained in purely physiological or structural terms. It was usually to the chromosomal protein that the infornia- tional role of the.genes had bCell as- signed, since the great differences in the specificity of structure that exist be- tween various proteins in the same or- 85 PICASSO'S -LES DESMOISELLES WAVIO-NON." painted in Par. iqted, it would never have been painted), whereas works of scien Is In 1907, is often cited by art historians as the first major Cubist tific creation are Inevitable (in the sense that if Dr. A had not dis Painting and a milestone in lite development of modern art. It is covered Fact X today,Dr. R would discover it tonsorrow). The va reproduced here as an archetype of the proposition that works of lidity of the proposilion is diziputed by the author, The painting artio,tic creation are un1qaegnlhq_,enfb,@gdJCM1h@Me CIAIRbp4M*o7VViqMo()CB&0064&.&Neiv York. Approv or me gailism, orAb,,&k, lglp,, J 0' 4*0) V 0qrga-`t mole- s e. 1W I RprOW-A 7@1# S,q gft# bs@T I d K S diff 6itK i ' nt . lee po , , ciated since the beginningsociated with of view, of the cen- the name of however, Gregor Men- was irreconcilable tury. The conceptual difficultydel, whose discovery with Polanyi's of as- of the gene basic in 1865 assumption of the signing the genetic role bad to wait mutual to DNA had not 35 years before independence it was "redis- of individual gas escaped Avery. In the covered" at molecules conclusion of his the turn of in the the century. adsorption process. It paper lie sta@cd: "If Mendel's discovery was only the results of the made no immediate in the 1930's, after a new the- . impact, it can ory of present study of the transformingbe argued, cohesive prin- because the molecular forces based ciple are confirmed, thenconcept of discrete oil quantum-meclianical, nucleic acids hereditary resonance units must b 'e regarded as could not be er than possessing biolog,1- connected with oil electrostatic canonical attraction cal specificity the chemicalknowledge of beef] developed, basis of anatomy and that it physiology became con- 7 which is a% yet undetermined."in the middle ceivable of the 19th gas molecules century- Fur-. could behave in By 1950, however, the thermore, the the way tetranucleo- statistical Polanyi's methodology experiments indicated tide hypothesis had been by means of they were overthrown, which Mendel actually interpreted behaving. Meanwhile thanks largely to the the results Poh@nyi*% work of Erwin of his pea-breeding theory e\peli- had been consigned so Chargaff of the Columbia ments was entirely authoritatively University foreign to to the the way ashcan of crackpot College of Physicians of thinking ideas that and Surgeons. lie of contemporary it was biologists. rediscovered only fit the showed that, contrary ty the end of 1950s. to the demands the 19th century, how- of that hypothesis, the ever, chromosomes four nucleotides and the chrome- are not necessarily presentsome-dividing till, call in DNA in processes of the notion mitosis and of prematurity be S equal proportions. He meiosis had said to found, further- been discovered be a useful a,A Me,- historical concept? more, that the exact nucleotidedel's results First of compo- could no%v all, is be accounted prematurity for tile only pos- sition of DNA differs in terms of sible explanation according to its structures for tile visible in lack of' the mi- -con- biological source, suggestingcroscope. Moreover, temporary that DNA by then the appreciation appli- of a discover)M. might not be a monotonouscation of statistics Evidently polymer to biology not. For had be- example, my micro. after all. And so when come commonplace. biologist two years later, Nonetheless, critic in suggested that it was the 4 in 1952, Alfred Hershey some respects "quiet, and Martha Averys discovery self-effacing, is a non-disputatious" Chase of the Carnegie more dramatic personality Institution's lab- example of of Avery prematurity that was the cause 7@ oratory in Cold Spring than Mendel's. of the Harbor, N.Y., Whereas Mendel's failure dis- of his contribution to be showed that on infection covery seems recogm, of the host bac- hardly to have ilzed. been men- Furthermore, in an essay terium by a bacterial tioned by anyone oil the virms at least 80 until its rediscovery, history of DNA. research Cbargaff percent of the viral DNA Avery's discovery supports enters the cell was widely tile idea discussed that personal modesty and at least 80 percent and yet it could and aversion of the viral pro- not be appreciated to self-advertisement for ac- tein remains outs.ide, eight years. count for it was possible to the lack of contemporary sci. connect their conclusion Cases of delayedpreciationentific that DNA is ap of a appreciation. He attributes the the genetic material withdiscovery existhe physical75-year canonical also in t sci- lag between Mieschees discov- knowledge. Avery's "as ences. One example ery of yet undeter- (as well as DNA and all ex- the general apprecta- mined chemical basis oftheplanation of tion of biological its circumstances its importance in terms to Miescher's be- specificity of nucleic of the concept ing "One acids" could now to which I of the refer here quiet as in the land," who be seen as the precise prematurity) lived when sequence of the has been provided "the giant by publicity ma- four nucleotides along Michael Polanyi chines, the polynucleo- on the basis which of his own today accompany even' tide chain. The general experience. the smallest impact of the In the years move oil 1914-1916 tile cliess-board of J Hershey-Cliase experimentPolany! published nature was imme- a theory of with enormous the ad- fanfares, were not diate and dramatic. DNA sorption of yet in was suddenly gases on solids Place." which @as- Indeed, the 35-yearbiatus in and protein was out, sumed that the as far as think- force attracting a gas inc, about the nature molecule to of the gene was a solid surface depends only concerned. Within a few on the position POLYSACCHARIDE months there of the molecule, PNEUMOCOCCV and not CAPSULE arose the first speculations on the presence BACTERIA about the ge- of other molecules, in netic code, and Watson the force field. and Crick were In spite of tile fact that inspired to set out to Polanyi was discover the struc- able to provide strong ex- ture of DNA. perimental evidence in favor of his the- Of course, Avery's discoveryory, it was Lysis is only generally rejected. -Not only one of many premature was the theory discoveries in rejected, it was 'also coll- the history of science. sidered so ridiculous I have presented by the leading au- it here for considerationthorities of mainly because the time that Polanyi be- of my own failure to appreciatelieves continued it when defense of ' his theory I joined Max Delbrtick would have ended s bacterial virus his professional ca- group at the California reer if lie Institute of had not managed to publish Technolog in 1948. Since work on more then I have palatable ideas. cly The rea- often wondered what my soft for the S STRAIN later career general rejection of Polanyi's would have been like if adsorption theory I had only been was that at EXPEWMENT tile very OF 1941 with %vivich Oswald astute enough to appreciatetime lie put Avery correctly Avery's dis- it forward identified tile role of the ebemical cle na- covery and infer from trical forces tilre of it four years be- in the architecture the genetic of matter material is regarded fore 11crshey and Chase had just been by the that DNA must discovered. author Hence there as a cluqzik eXlkniple of a pre- also be tlieAppftwetd-ilgetcRe4ei3see2lO(MiOW2,6(~()C[AuRMPS*uOO797tROO0,2000-800"-&I~, --rimental orclanism. Lion of gases normal, e must also involve or S-type, xpe an clec- pneuniococcui, a bacteri- AA in the appreciation of Mendel'sthese experiments even- discov- tboug interested gh it is 'n Roberte proposed experi- cry ispften attxiluagd 1UV 14j,was un- I& k6i e a& l I k d a -OU l3 M! gli %W t1ff@V!iS1j!_" Wle b V t RR ~ a een a m or c ne Mon e oi ving in an erwou r ilig ry o iiyvo c ai in to be a scien- y g out-of-the-way constitute a fact of capitaltist even to discuss Moravian importance. such rubbish. How monastery. llen@e The lack of interest of could an intellica)ent the neuropbysiolo. fellow such as Rob- notion of prematurity pro- vides gists in the macromolecularerts entertain the possibility an theory of of pbenom- alternative to the invocation- in memory can be accounted ena totally irreconcilable my for by recog- with the most opinion an inappropriate one for the nizing that the theory, elementary physical laws? instances whether true or Moreover, a mentioned here-of the lack false, is clearly premature.phenomenon that is manifest of There is no only to publicity as an explanation for delayed chain of reasonable inferencesspecially endowed subjects, appreciation. by means as claimed More of which our present, by "parapsychologists" important, albeit highly !in- to be the case does the prematurity concept perfect, view of the functionalfor ESP, is outside the pertain organiza- proper realm of only to retrospective judgments tion of the brain can science, which must deal made be reconciled with with pbenom- with the wisdom of hindsight? the possibility of its ena accessible to every No. acquiring, storing observer. -Rob- I think it can be used also to and retrieving nervous erts replied that far judge information by from him being un- the present.- Some recent dis- coveries encoding such informationscientific, it - was are in molecules Luria whose bigoted still premature at t1iis very time. of nucleic acid or protein.attitude toward the unknown One Accordingly was un- example of here-and-now pre- maturity for the community of neuropbysiologistsworthy of a true scientist. is The fact that the alleged finding that ex- perientia.1 information there is no point in devotingnot everyone has ESP received by an time to only means that animal can be stored in checking on experiments it is an. elusive phenomenon, nucleic acids or whose results, similar to other macromolecules. even if they were true musical genius. And just as alleged, could because a phe- Some 10 years ago there not be connected with nomenon cannot be reconciled began to ap- canonical knowl- with pear reports by experimentaledge. what we now know, we psycholo- need not shut d@,' gists purporting to Ile concept of here-and-nowour eyes to it. On the have shown that the prema- contrary, it is the engram, or memory trace, turity can be applied duty of the scientist of a task also to the trouble- to try to devise ex- learned by a trained animalsome subject of ESP, or periments designed to can be extrasensory probe its truth transferred to a na1ve animalperception.' In the summeror falsity. by inject- of. 1948 1 7 Ing or feeding the recipienthappened to bear a heatedIt seemed to me then with an ex- argument at that both Luria tract made from the tissuesCold Spring Harbor betweenand Roberts were right, of the donor.. two future and in the in- At that time the central mandarins of molecular tervening years I often lesson of mo- biology, Salva- thought about lecular genetics-that nucleledor Luria of Indiana Universitythis puzzling disagreement, acids and and unable to proteins are informational R. E. Roberts of the Carnegieresolve it in ray own macromole- InsLitu- mind.,Finally six. &ules tion's laboratory in Washington.. -bad just gained wide currency,Roberts years ago I read a review of a book on and the facile equation wag then interested in ESP by my Berkeley colleague of nervous in- ESP, and be felt C. West formation with genetic informationit bad not been given ChurchTpan, and I began soon fair consideration to see my way led to the proposal that by the scientific community.toward a resolution. macromole- As I re- Churchman stated RNA or. protein-store call, he thought that that there are three one might be able different possible memory. As it happens, the to set up experiments scientiflc approaches experiments with molecular to ESP. The first of on which the macromolecularbeams that could provide these is that the truth theory of more defini- or falsity of ESP, memory is based have been tive data on the possibilitylike the. truth or falsity difficult to of mind-. 'of the existence' repeat, and the results induced departures from of God or of the immortality claimed for them random dis- oftbe soul, may indeed not be true at tributions than J. B. is totally independent all. It is none- Rhine's then much of either the 7 theless'significant that discussed card-guessing methods or diefindings few neurophysi- procedures. of empirical sci- ologists have even botheredLuria declared that not ence. Thus the problem to check only was he not of ESP is de- W) Z-1 PRECIPITATION CELL DEBRIS um That causes pneumonia in mammals, is enclosed in a smooth (hence S) polysaccharide capsule that protects the bacterium from the ordinary defense mechanisms of the infected animal. The avir. ulent mutant, or R-type (R for rough), strain has lost the genetic capacity to form this protective capsule and hence is comparatively harmless. IWI,enAppr6ve*ForiRclionsed2GlD$~M26 R STRAIN S donor bacteria was added to mutant R recipient bacteria, some of the mutants were found to regain the genetic capacity to form the capsule and thus were transformed back into the normal, vir. ulent S type. Avery purified the transforming principle and sue. ceeded in showing that it is DNA. The significance of Avery's dia. ~Cv*A-RDP96PBO;76'AROONBONGO*44tiI 1952- 87 fined out of existence. I irnggin that t" e. t 416 AW&N()OW015"e, as Luria L Lwfk i t. J!! R w as A4V ra M%d rftfoll W @ S @6W MONO Been pTove@ "tot e It claimed, they would not be "sciene' Churchman's but because any positive second approach evidence I is to no other set of hypotheses in psychology reformulate might have found in favor the ESP phenomenon of ESP woul in has received the degree of critical scru- terms of currently have been, and would acceptable still be, prern scientific - tiny that has been given to ESP experi- notions, such ture. That isju as unconscious 11til it is possible perception to ccir ments. Moreover, many other phenom- or conscious nect ESP with canonical fraud. Hence, knowledge C' rather than ena have been accepted on much less defining ESP say, electromagnetic out of existence, radiation and ne; it is triv- statistical evidence than what is offered ialized. The ropbysiology no demonstration second approach of i probably for JESP. The reason Churchman ad- would have occurrence coulld be been acceptable appreciated. to Luria vances for the futility of a strictly evi- too, but not . Is the lack of appreciation to Roberts. of prem dential approach to ESP is that in the The third approach ture discoveries merely is to take attributable the absence of a hypothesis of how ESP proposition the intellectuil shortcoming of ESP literally or inna and to at- could work it is not possible to decide tempt to examine conservatism of scientists in all seriousness who, if th, the' whether any set of relevant observations evidence for were only more perceptive its validity. or mo That was more can be accounted for only by ESP to the or less Roberts' open-minded, would give position. immedia As Churchman exclusion of alternative explanations. points out, recognition to anywell-documented however, this sl approach is not, After reading Churchman's review I likely to lead entific proposition? to satisfactory rolanyl is not of th results. realized that Roberts would have been Parapsychologists oplmon_@ Reflecting on can maintain the cruel fate with ill-advised to proceed with his ESP ex- his th@ory half a centui after first a le declarecj@ "This misci vancing GUANINE CYTOSINE riage of the scientific method. could n ' have been avoided. ...LPere must be a t all times a predominandy accepted s, entific view of the nature of things, the light of which research is joini conducted by members of the comm nity of scientists. A strong presumptii that any evidence which contradi( this view is invalid must prevail. Su T, PHOSPHATE evidence has to be disregarded, even it cannot be accounted for, in the bo SUGAR SUGAR ' that it will eventually turn out to . false or irrelevant." That is a view of the operation of s, ence rather different from the one coi monly held, under which \ acceptance authority is seen as something to PHOSPHATE avoided at all costs. PHO,9 The good scient PHOSPHATE is seen as an unprejudiced man with open mind who is ready, to embrace a new idea supported by the facts. T history of science shows, however, tl its practitioners do not appear to , according to that popul ar vie ive years ago Chargaff wrote one of @@`ZHOSPHATE Fthe many reviews of The Double Helix, Watson's autobiographical ac: count of his and Cric)es discovery of the 4 structure of DNA. In his review Char A 9aff observes that scientific autobiog aT phy is "a most awkward literary genre.'@. Most such works, he says, "give the im- ssion of having been written for the, pre reachinj remainder tables of bookstores, THYMINE ADENINE them almost before they are publisbed."i The reasons for this, according to Char-' OLD VIEW of The chemical structure of DNA, -widely held until well into the 1930's, saw gaff, are not far to seek: scientists 'lead the molecule as being merely a tetranucleotide composed of one unit each of adenylic, gus- monotonous and uneventful lives and. ...' nylic, tbymidylic and cytiayiic acids. This hypothesis demanded that the molecular _'Ye'gbt besides often do not know how to writcl"r of DNA be little more than 1,000 and that the four nucleotide bases (adenine, guanine, tbymine and cytosine) .occur in exactly equal proportions. Even when itwas finally realized Moreover, "there may also be profound-@ in the 1940's that the molecular weight of DNA is much higher (in the millions or bil. er rea .sons for the general triteness of lions), it was still widely believed that the tetranucleoiide was theb scien 1fi Timon of. large DN UAWM"a ;Xeen writterip be n1 t o a acceptance of the idea that DNAjs the genetic material. 'Les Desmoiselles cl'Avignon' not li-ave,4. port, bem 0 C7 cILLT tant achi. 11aill the surl sL aid hav OUANIN@,p 268YO6, prove D, V PRESENT VIEW of the chemical structure of DNA sees the mole. cale as a long chain in which the four nucleotide bases can bear- ranged In any arbitrary order. Although the proportion of ade. nine is always equal to that of thymme and the proportion of gua. nine is always equal to that of cytoolne, the ratio of adenine-thy. at -i. in ly u. an Is :!h if 2e be ni. -n- of Ie -ist loy .%e aat act of 21C ic- he kr- ,a. he cig I." qr- ad of of n, rc mine to guanine-cytosine can vary over a large range, depending on the biological source of the DNA. With the elaboration of this single-strand structure it became possible to envision that genetic Information is encoded in the DNA molecule as a specific a& quence of the four nueltotide bases (see Wustration on next page). been painted, had Shakespearethe arts and sciences fabulous monkey typists and Pi. in regard to the complete their cassO not existed. But uniqueness of their creations.random work at the British of. how many Museum. scientific achievements Before discussing the And so both creations are can this be proposition of from, that claimed? One could almostdifferential uniqueness point of view unique. We say that, with of creation it is are not really very few exceptions, it necessary to make an concerned, however, with is not the men explicit statement the exact that make science, it of the meaning of "art" word sequence. We are concerned is science that and of "science." with makes the men. What A My understanding of thesethe contetit. Thus we admit does today, B terms is that people or C or D could surely based on the view that other than Watson and Crick do tornorrow." both the arts would 'I On reading this passage,and the sciences are eventually have described I found my- activities that en- a satisfactory -self in full agreement deavor to discover and molecular structure for on the general lack communicate DNA. But, then of literary skills among truths about the world. the character of Timon men of science. The domain to and the story of I was surprised, however, to f which the artist addresseshis trials and tribulation ind an himself is the ot o;ly might s n eminent scientist embracinginner, subjective world have been written without historicism of the emotions. Shakespeare (the theory championed Artistic statements thereforebut also were written without by Hegel and pertain him. Marx holding that historymainly to relations betweenShakespeare merely reworked is determined. private the story -by immutable forces ratherevents of affective significance.of Tivwn be bad read in than by hu- The do- William Paint- man agency) as an explanationmain of the scientist, ees collection of classic for the in contrast, is the tales, The Palace evolution of science whileouter, objective world of Pleasure, published at the same of physical phe- 40 years earlier,. time professing belief nomena. Scientific statementsand Painter in turn had in the libertarian therefore used as his . 0 great mae view of historypertain mainly to relationssources Plutarch and Lucian. for the evo- between or But then lution of art. Since it among public events. we do not really care about had not occurred Thus the transmis- Timon's, to me that anyone could sion of information and story; what counts are hold such con- the perception the deep insights tradictory, and to me of meaning in that informationinto human emotions that obviously false, consti- Shakespeare Views concerning these tute the central contentprovides in his play. He 'two most im- of both the arts shows us here portant domaini. of humanand the sciences. A creativehow a man may make his creation, I act on the response to ' began to ask scientific part of either an artistthe injuries of life, how friends and or a 'scientist be may turn col- leagues whether they too,would mean his formulationfrom lighthearted benevolence by any of a new to pas- chance, thought there meaningful stdtement sionate hatred toward his was an impur- about the world, fellow men. tant qualitative differencean addition to the accumulatedCan one be sure, bo,.ve'vtr, between the capital that Tinion Reltievements of art and of wbat is sometimes is unique from this bare-bones of science, called "our cul- stand- namely that the former tural heritage." Let point of the worVs artistic are unique' and us therefore examine essence? No, the latter inevitable. the proposition that because who is to say that To my even greater only Shakespeare if Shake- surprise, 1 found that could have formulated speare had not existed most of them the' semantic no other drama- seemed to agree with Chargaff.structures represented tist would have provided Yes, they by Timon, where- for us the -said, it is quite true as people other than same insights? Another that we would not Watson and Crick dramatist would have bad Timon of Athens might have made the communicationsurely have used an entirely or "Les Des- different Inoiselles cl'Avignon" represented by their story (as Shakespeare himself if Shakespeare paper, "A Structure did in his and Picasso had not existed,for Deoxyribonuclelo much more successful King but if Wat- Acid," published Lear) to sort and Crick had not in Nature in the spring treat the same theme and existed, we would of 1953. he might have have had the DNA d bl li h ou First, it is evident succeeded in pulling it e that the exact word off. The reason e x any- Avay. Therefore, contrarysequence that Watson no, one seems to have done to my first im- and Crick pub- it since is Pression, it does not lished in Nature would that Shakespeare bad already seem to be all that not have been done it Obvious that this propositionwritten if the authors in 1607, just as no one has little had not existed, discovered the Philosophical or historicalany more than the exact structure of DNA after merit. Hence word sequence Watson and 1. shall now attempt to of Timon would have beenCrick had already discovered show that there written with- it in 1953. is -no such profo d differenc u4 Waaftr_tto as- roved p 89 OyTosg@or eIN'N' 1,26 :r DP661-MA 7 6016 0 0 8 Ofttf 16(ft ease Approved For Release%W01103 126: CIA-RDP96-00787RQ020.0080054'5 HYDROGEN BONDS sertinal that Timon is uniquely- Shake; speards, because no other dramatist, al, though he might have brought us mo rq or less the same insights. would have done it in quite the same exquisite way" as Shakespeare. But here we must n4. shortchange Watson and Crick and take for granted that those other people who eve ntually would have found the struc.@ ture of DNA would have found it in iust. the same way and produced the same revolutionary effect on contemporary bi: ology. On the basis of ray acquaintance with the personalities then engaged in trying to uncover the structure of DNAi' I believe that if 'Watson and Crick bad not existed, the insights they provided In one single package would have come out much more gradually over a period of many months. or years. Dr. B might have seen that DNA is a double-strand helix, and Dr. C might later.have rec ognized the hydrogen bonding betweeirt the strands, Dr. D later yot might have proposed a complementary purine-py, rimidine bonding, with Dr. E in a sub4l 'he sped sequent paper proposing t adenina-thymine and guanine-cytosin@@ nucleotide pairs. Finally, we might have, had to wait for Dr. G to p se thk ropo replication mechanism of DNA based ori the complementary nature of the tw@ strands. All the while Drs. H, 1. 1, K an4 L would have been confusing the issue by publishing incorrect structures an4 proposals., Thus I fully agree with the judgment offered by Sir Peter Medawa;' in his review of The Double Helix. "The great thing about [Watson and Cricksl discovery was its. completeness, its air of finality. If Watson and Crick had been seen groping toward an answer, they'had published a partly right solu@ tion and had been obliged to follow it up with corrections and glosses, some. of them made by other people; if the solution bad coma out piecemeal instead of in a blaze of understanding; then it would still have been a great episode in biological history; but something more in the common run of things; something splendidly well done, but not in the grand romantic manner.7 Why is it that so many scientists aP_ parently fail to see that it can be said of both art and science that where- as 'what A does today, B or C or J9 could surely do tomorrow," B or C or D might nevertheless not do it as well as. A. in the same "grand romantic man@ ner." I think a variety of reasons can be Approved For Release 2001/03/26 CIA-RDP96-00787ffl0#240N00:6*Fpr this strange, myopia. The first of them is simply that WATSON-CRICK MODEL of the structure of DNA, the discovery of which was announced most scientists are not familiar with the :@Jt, cal literature. In contrast, picture the modern the artisCs act of creation in Iolly%vood: Cornel Wilde wr"- , composer the terms of 1 or painter still needs tl the role of A4*FQY*Ghf ar6Re4easp-2910,UG3k26ooCA*4RDP69& _ in 7 works of Shakespeare, f @; Bach or Leonar- @- hd ...-Chdpin gazing fondly at Merle Oberon -ristress do, which, so it is thought, Ccorge have not been Sand Us his muse and n .@,,.and superseded at all. In then spite of the seeming sitting down at 'the Fleyel pi- 1@1,anoforte truth of this proposition, to it must be said compose his "Preludes." As ascientists that art is no less cumulative know than scl- full well, science is done quite ence, in that artists differently: no more work in a Dozens of stereotyped. tand traditionless vacuum ambitious than scientists do. researchers are slaving away Artists also build on in the work of their as many identical laboratories, all predecessors; they start trying with and later to make similar discoveries, all improve on the styles using and insights that more or less the same knowl- edge have been handed down and to them from techniques, some of them suc- ceeding their teachers, just and as scientists do. To some not. Artists, on the other stay with our main example, hand. Shake- tend to conceive of the sci- un- entific are's Thnon has its roots act in the works of spe creation in equally ILIrealistic of Aeschylus, Spphocles terms: and Euripides. Paul Muni in the role of the It was those authors one of Greek antiquity and only Louis Pasteur, who @@o who discovered tragedy while as a vehicle for burning the midnight oil in his :-,L@ communicating deep insights laboratory into af- has the inspiration to take @some. fects, and Shakespeare, bottles drawing on from the shelf, mix their a 114t%,contents many earlier sources, and finally develope thus discover the vaccine for that Creek discovery rabies. to its ultimate Artists, in turn, know that art ' is height. To some limited done extent, there- quite differently: Doz ens of stereotyped fore, the plays of the and Creek dramatists ambitious writers, painters have been superseded and by Shakespeare's. composers are slaving away Xin Why, then, have Shakespeare's as plays not many identical garrets, all trying -0to been superseded by the produce work of later, similar works, all using more _CP-or lesser dramatists? less the same knowledge and tech- Itniques, Here we final! do encounter some an im- succeeding y and some not. _0A portant difference between second the creations reason is that the belief in _(1@i, of art and of science, the namely the feasi- inevitability of scientific discoveries ILCa ppears to derive supportbility of paraphrase. from the The semantic con- dt_ ften-told tales of famoustent of an artistic work-a o cases in the play, a cantata Be@T or a painting-is critically history dependent on of science where the same dis- -tri@@ the exact manner of its covery realization; that was made independently two or meZr@ is@ the greater an artistic more work is, the times by different people. For in- ii]stance, more likely it is that the any omissions or independent invention of i'he rcalculus tra ro by changes from the original Leibniz de ct f ra and Newton or :t ;dthe its content.'In other independent words, to para- recognition of the role ifof phrase a great work of natural art-for*instance selection in evolution by Wal- I-lace to rewrite Timon-without and loss of artis- Darwin. As the study of such it"multiple tic quality requires discoveries" a genius equal to by Robert Merton OCof the genius of the original Columbia creator. Such University has shown, how- oweever, a successful paraphrase oii would, in fact, detailed examination they are dqrarely, constitute a great work if of art in its own ever, identical. The reason it they right. The semantic content.of are a great said to be multiple is simply that scientific paper, on in the other hand, al- spite of their differences one can i. though its impact at recognize the time of publi- a semantic overlap between gthem cation ma'y also be criticaRy that dependent is transformable into a con- gruent on the exact manner in set which it is pre- of ideas. The sented, can later be third, paraphrased with- and somewhat more pro- found, out serious loss of semantic reason content by is that whereas the curnu- lative lesser scientists. Thus character the simple state. of scientifle creation is at once ment "DNA is a double-strand, apparent self- to every scientist, the similarly complementary beW now cumulative suffices character to of artis- tic communicate the essence creation of Watson and is not. For instance, it is ob- vious Cricles great discovery, that whereas "A man no present-day working ge- Sneticist responds to the injuries has of life by turn- any need to read the origi- k@ ing from lighthearted nal benevolence to papers of Mendel, because they have been passionate hatred toward completely his feUow superseded by the work men" is merely a platitude of and not a the past century. Menders pa- tpers paraphrase of Timon. contain it took the writing no useful information that cannot of King Lear to paraphrase be (and im- better obtained from any A modern textIm S@rTV0*ff,k& adik-4600doo, -,,06VWduFCftt FWf8'2 dk 0787 5 RJR )CM 0 Gngqfi@ 0 0 fo $ 005 0 0 A nation wide service used by over 20,000 executive and pro- fessional men as a quick and convenient source of credit, either for immediate needs or a credit line futuremse. NO collateral.. . no embarrassing investigation. All details han- dled by personal mail in the privacy of your office. Refamneems The First National Bank of W(hineapolis Continental Illinois National Bank of Chicago Phone, toll frM 800-328-7n8 or write Mr. T. K. Lindblad Executive Loan Director Industrial Cmdft Plan, h7c. 271 Hamra B Win u' ff 102 St. Paul, Minnesota cow @over _"o, v Tat& k - MT Aw@ . handilits, f, .7- ^Ir -precislotv -5u. les@ 000th year of service to the World's finest craftsmen and technicians Send a FREE copy of the ne Flasher nam8 address 61ty state zip JAC., 1 0 1 r_%VVV1.UUU0UU04_3 91 0 mer 114s sUpersedreTRMY.Mel FqcBe&A-W,"ouawnapCtjk2 anthro 010 fftlb96@12001 AT6%000 Z5 once all 5 ht i th i th fl ti i h d k re. ec ramatic reperto uman tspearean r Sliq re on n . e oug - The fourth, there and probably is . Both materialism and deepest, nothing idealism t e, i to be found in the inner 0 reason for parent prevalenceworld, for granted that all the the ap and information gath4.. artistic creations are cut sim- anion he propositionply cred by our senses actually - scientists that from reaches our:@, of t whole cloth. Here B or C or D : could mind, materialism envisions artistic creations not that thari6,0 are unique possibly and-scien- find tomorrow what tific creations A to this information reality are not can found is mirrored ift- be attributed today, because what A. found to a contradictory had the mind, wbereas idealism, epistemological never envisionsji, at- been there. It is not altogether titude toward surprising, that thanks to this information the events of reality 13-N"i in the outer course, to find this split and the inner epistemological constructed by the mind. world. The attitude Structuralisrn,;t*',@-, outer world, toward the two which science worlds, on the other hand, has tries to fathom, since provided the in--oz is often of these two antithetical viewed from traditions sight that knowledge about the standpoint in the world-@-,`- of material- Westem - philosophical ism, according thought, j to which events materialism enters the mind not as and the is raw data but in S c' obviously an un- relations between satisfactory already highly abstracted them have approach form, namely,@@ an exis- to art and idealism tence independent an as structures. 'in the of the human unsatisfactory preconscious proc-4 mind. approach to science. Hence the outer ess of converting the primary world and data of its scientific ' laws are simply t is only in the past our experfence step by there, and I 20 years or so@ step into struc-44 it is the @: job of the scientist more or less contemporaneouslytures, information is necessarily to find them. with lost, be-7,,- Thus going after scientific. the cause the creation of structures, discoveries growth or the is, like pick- of molecular biology, that a ing wild strawberries resolution recognition of patterns, in a public of is nothing elsa!@@. park: the age-old epistemologi- the berries cal than the selective destruction A does not conflict of infor.:", find today of .V B or C materialism v, idealism or D will surely was mation. Thus since the find tPmorrOW. found mind does not,-i@ At the In the form of Nvbat has come same time, to gain access to the full many scientists be set of data about-,---,. view the in- known as structuralism. Structur- ner world, alism the world, it can neither which art emerged mirror nor con-`,--;@l tries to fathom, simultaneously, Inde- from the standpoint pendently struct reality. Instead of idealism, and for ffie mind re 'al-@ ac- in different guises in sev- cording to eral ity is a set of structural which events diversd transforms of and relations fields of study, for extunple SCIENVA ists is idealizewdin C his scene from the 194 ,duction A Song to Remember. Fr6diric Chopin (played by Cornal fondly at his muse George Sand (Marla Ober wes his "Prel W" ow a, ny scient a differently. primary 1 transforn in that from "w4 tive.dest Of priml only aft( so transf gruent existing studies < process inamma that the ing to tl offer an those te Final vance c two PrI under , matuxit structu standin apprec: logican I- kno%vl-@dge. In the parlancebecause they all make ,,j;nary of stritew a given'set of data taken from the world. This i'ansformation ase.2,? t/tba?"efleA PpWwved&i=hR61e e out world ' " - l _0P e' tq hl g f ZAb* d 0*1 l l r .,A t re b structures stron s a are the set tron t, or ne o stronge preexisting on in t Jkom with which primary scientificmental structure. With "weaker" data are ref@rence to art, structures through selec- ' tive -abstrac- analytic psychology has destruction made congruent in the taught that of mental information. Any set of ' there is.a sameness in primary tion process. Hence datathe subconscious data that cannot be becomes meaningful only transformed into a structurelife of different individuals after congruent because an a series of such operations has so with canonical knowledgeinnate human archetype transformed-it are a dead causes them to that it has become con- gruent with a stronger end; in the last analysismake the same structural structure pre- they remain transforma- existing meaningless. That is, tions of the events of in they remain mean. the inner world. the mind. Neuropbysiological studies ingless until a way has 'And with reference to carried been shown to both art and sci- out in recent years on the process transform them into a ence structural linguistics of structure that is has taught visual perception in higher rnamrnals have not only congruent with the canon.that communication between shown directly different that the brain actually As far as uniqueness individuals is possible operates accord- of discovery is only because an ing to the tenets of structuralismconcerned, structuralisminnate human grammar causes but also leads to the them to offer an easily understoodrecognition that every transform a given set illustration of creative act in of semantic sym- those the arts and sciences bols into the same syntactic tenets.7 is both common- structure, Finally. we may consider place and unique. On On the other hand, every the rele- the one hand, it creative act Is vance of structuralist is commonplace In the unique in the sense that philosophy for the sense that there no two individ- two problems in the historyis an innate, or geneticallyuals are quite the same of science determined, and hence never under discussion here. correspondence in the perform exactly the same As far as pre- transformational transforma@ maturity of discovery is operations that differenttional operations on a cancemed@ individuals per- given set of pri- structuralism provides form on the same primarymary data. Although all us with an under- data. With creative acts in j@i @tanding of why a discoveryreference to science, both art and science are cannot be cognitive psychol- therefore both @:A appreciated until it ogy has taught that differentcommonplace and unique, can be connected individuals some may logically to contemporary recognize the same "chairnesi"nonetheless be more unique canonical of a chair than others.' ARTISTS, MISCONCEPTION of the scientific act of creation is vr e(jually i@ film Th Muni) has the sudden Inspiration to discover the vaccine for rabies, Art, its any artist knows, is done quite differently. Botb photo- Archiv-. 93