The Curious Incident of Crick in the Night-Time and Other Asilomar Enigmas

In 1971, Paul Berg asked Francis Crick about his views on a controversial proposed experiment involving recombinant DNA; to Berg's surprise, Crick had no comment to make. This article first describes the multiple reasons why Crick did not respond to Berg, including psychological factors that affected Crick at the time, the limits of his unstated reflexively positivist approach to social issues, and his reluctance to pursue social or political issues when challenged. Crick's lack of involvement in discussions about recombinant DNA, including in the Asilomar process, is then used to explore two other notable absences from Asilomar: the immunologist Niels Jerne, who was invited to be on the organizing committee but was not involved for reasons that are unclear; and molecular biologist and biological weapons campaigner Matthew Meselson, whose presence would have added a layer of understanding to the discussions, particularly regarding the threat of bioweapons. These enigmatic absences raise questions about the representativeness of Asilomar and suggest future investigations as to how the legacy of Asilomar was shaped both by those who were present-and by those who were not.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the History of Biology
Published
2025-02-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-025-09805-y
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Science Education and Perceptions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
13.78
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Curious Incident of Crick in the Night-Time and Other Asilomar Enigmas

Matthew Cobb
4 citations
Journal of the History of Biology
Science Education and Perceptions
13.78
article

The Curious Incident of Crick in the Night-Time and Other Asilomar Enigmas

Matthew Cobb
article en
4 citations

Abstract

In 1971, Paul Berg asked Francis Crick about his views on a controversial proposed experiment involving recombinant DNA; to Berg's surprise, Crick had no comment to make. This article first describes the multiple reasons why Crick did not respond to Berg, including psychological factors that affected Crick at the time, the limits of his unstated reflexively positivist approach to social issues, and his reluctance to pursue social or political issues when challenged. Crick's lack of involvement in discussions about recombinant DNA, including in the Asilomar process, is then used to explore two other notable absences from Asilomar: the immunologist Niels Jerne, who was invited to be on the organizing committee but was not involved for reasons that are unclear; and molecular biologist and biological weapons campaigner Matthew Meselson, whose presence would have added a layer of understanding to the discussions, particularly regarding the threat of bioweapons. These enigmatic absences raise questions about the representativeness of Asilomar and suggest future investigations as to how the legacy of Asilomar was shaped both by those who were present-and by those who were not.

Journal of the History of BiologyVol. 58(1)
University of Manchester (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Science Education and Perceptions
13.78
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.