Unfortunately such comments have often been made by Watson and while I don’t agree with him, I certainly defend his freedom of expression. I also don’t think he has a special ‘responsibility’ being a Nobel Prize scientists to censor himself. It is unfortunate that a man with so much knowledge and experience is drawing such conclusions but sweeping his remarks under the rug doesn’t help people. The organizers of events across the country are sticking their heads in the sand. By canceling these talks and making the decision that we shouldn’t be subject to his perspectives, they have denied us the opportunity to see a great scientist and to question him on his views.
Do we discard the great contributions of scientists, politicians, artists, because of their views? Clearly we haven’t. Personally I admire the work of Marie Stopes, known for her contributions to palaeobotany and advancement of women’s issues, but often not remembered for her views on race and eugenics. Another big contributor to my field of work was Swiss-American zoologist and geologist, Louis Agassiz who is known in other circles for his perspectives on racism and eugenics. Sir Winston Churchill, a man who was once chancellor of my own university and also who lent his name to my secondary school, was very vocal about his views on sex, race and the mentally disabled.
Unfortunately, an easy scapegoat has been made of Watson. The man’s contributions to science are a different matter than his personal views. If you’re on facebook and feel strongly about this issue, The Ministry of Love (a reference to Orwell’s 1984), is a group formed in protest of canceling Watson’s lectures.
- World Science Festival And James Watson: "Biology Doesn't Need String Theory"
- Google, Facebook, Who's Leading In Orwellian Dystopias Of The 21st Century?
- Method Research: George Orwell Really Did Have A Stint In Jail As A Drunk Fish Porter
- If National Review Wants Scientists To Take Conservatives Seriously, Jettison The Discovery Institute