Consistently stupid thoughts from a world-class mind

Ladies and gentlemen, Dr. James D. Watson does it again!  I do not know whether to laugh or laugh (yes, I said that).  I do not think that I need to extensively introduce you to Watson, but I will remind you that he and Dr. Francis Crick came up with the structure of DNA.  This story is well-known and there is a lot of information out there if you are interested.

What I want to comment on is about his consistent paradoxical behavior, as illustrated by a sample of his verbal “oops” over the years.  His latest one touched upon autism…

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand it’s on…

At the most recent Allen Institute for Brain Science symposium “Open questions in neuroscience” he advocated for people to have kids while they are young to minimize the possibility of genetic mutations that may result in mental illness.  He said that if a mother “waits” to have children until she is older and has a kid with autism, she should blame herself.

Refrigerator mother, anyone?  I do know that this is not what he said, but that was the phrase that came into my mind immediately after reading this (look up this sad reference about the history of autism).

I do not think that I need to argue too much about the insensitivity of this comment. This is made worse by the fact that he has a son with mental illness who is incapable of living by himself.  You’d think that this would give Watson some degree of empathy, but alas, this is not the case.

Also, to anyone that knows a modicum about biology, these kind of generalizations about complex diseases betray a profound ignorance of the biomedical sciences.  This is, well, unbecoming of a scientist of such stature, but I digress.

The main point that I am trying to make in this post is about the contrast between Watson’s undeniable first-rate mind and the well, idiocy of his comments.  Oh, and this is not an isolated incident, not at all! I am aware of another autism-related comment of his, when he offhandedly commented that Dr. Rosalind Franklin, the chemist whose work gave Watson and Crick the key to decipher the structure of DNA was “partially autistic” (hint: he did not seem to have meant this as a compliment).  Incidentally, look up the Franklin-Watson-Crick affair, it is top-notch science gossip and certainly provides an alternate perspective on this important chapter in the history of science.

When doing research for this post, I found a Wikipedia listing of Watson’s “selected comments” over the years.  Some of them I knew about and some of them I did not.  He is an equal opportunity offender of people; overweight, black, Irish, Japanese, women, and the lists goes on.  I even read in one of his recent books an account of how he “fooled around” with the daughter of a fellow professor, he actually named her, first and last name (just like a true gentleman – not! Am I too old-fashioned? I think not…).

Anyway, he’s paid the price more than once for this kind of things though.  For example, he was forced to resign as president of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory based on comments that disparaged Africans.  Can you imagine how much do you have to screw up to be fired from a place that you helped grow in prestige over the years?  Also, some people say that he tends not be invited anymore to speak at most top scientific events because of the possibility of these kind of comments. This is plainly sad.

Also, do you think he is the way he is because he is 85, that all these comments can be ascribed to the rumblings of an oblivious elderly person who means well but does not know any better?

Think again.

In 1968 (when he was 40) Watson published “The double helix“, a one-sided account of the discovery.  In all fairness it  is a fascinating read, but it was not without controversy (here he wrote his first disparaging comments about Rosalind Franklin for example).  Even his co-Nobelists Crick and Wilkins seem to have considered the idea of suing Watson because some of the things he said in it, among other things.  Also in the 1960s while a professor at Harvard, Watson was one of the main instigators that argued that molecular biology was superior to the “old biology” which was considered “stamp collecting”.  Edward O. Wilson, one of the top biologists ever, considered Watson one of the most unpleasant people he ever met. You can see my take in this matter here.

Now, it is undeniable that however he did it, he was one of the scientists that made possible the early development of molecular biology and genetics (he did not make any real fundamental discoveries after the double helix, as opposed to Crick, who tackled the genetic code and later on consciousness itself).

The molecular sciences is an ongoing field that has contributed a lot of fundamental knowledge and is arguably beginning to bear fruit into actual medical benefits for humanity.  However, I think that it is really sad that his contributions to science are eclipsed by his faulty comment filter.  His “indiscretions” are much better known than all the science he ever did, and this is a true tragedy. All of this makes me wonder why he is the way he is.  I suspect that even though his DNA’s been sequenced, we’ll never know.

One thing is for sure, education is not equal to intelligence; heck, intelligence does not equal common sense, or even character…


If you want dare to know more (Warning: You may experience hypertension upon reading about Watson’s charming comments):


Picture credit:

Categories: Tags: , , , ,


  1. Ugh. Missed this one. Thanks for reminding me how Self-hatred manifests Itself in a blanketing spectrum of vile colors.


  2. Unfortunately, this sort of thing seems to be all too common — perhaps it’s a reminder that everyone has feet of clay. Well done for calling him out on it!


  3. I’m always surprised how the people who supposedly so smart can be so thoughtless.
    Off topic – I’ve sent you an e-mail a few days ago to the e-mail that’s attached to your profile, but I’m not sure it’s the address you actually use. Did you get it?


  4. Oh man, that is a tough question and I do not have the psychological degree required to answer it… but this kind of attitude is not uncommon on top-of-the-line scientists and even then, Watson seems to be more “in your face” than the average famous scientist. However, there are wonderful exceptions. I once met a Nobelist on neuroscience (my thing… (:-D)…) and he was just wonderful. I wrote the story here:

    Thanks for your comment!


  5. While, I’m somewhat unfamiliar with Watson, I’ve always been struck by the lack of humility he showed in his statements about the discovery of the double helix. Crick, I suppose, is also guilty of this, but not to the same degree. Do you think that belies a confidence in the success and explanatory power of their theory, or does it hint at Watson’s ego and lack of empathy?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s