OCT 61964

 

CABLE ADDRESS "MOTA"
IN YOUR REPLY PLEASE QUOTE
FILE NO. oa eecseeconeecoenesoeseeeees
ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED
BIOLOGY AND HEALTH PHYSICS DIVISION CHALK RIVER, ONTARIO

29 September 1964

Prof. Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics
Stanford University
Medical Center

Palo Alto, California

Dear Joshua:

I was delighted to get copies of your reprint from
Nature and of your letter to Dr. Hayward concerning the Institute for
Cybercultural Research. You have said clearly something that needed
to be said, in emphasizing that ''the most revolutionary application of
science has been and will be the alteration of man himself".

Your question, however, (i.e., What are our goals?)
might perhaps be preceded by two others: 1) What information do we need
in order to choose specific goals wisely? and 2) By what machinery
might agreement be reached concerning the information that is most
needed?

These questions arise because even in some familiar
areas there is little agreement as to the answers. For example, selection
pressures are known to be altering man now, and we are in turn altering
selection, albeit unconsciously. Presumably this is important, but there
is no general agreement concerning a) the urgency of the matter (if any),
b) what might be accomplished if we knew more, c) what we need to know
in order to decide what would constitute an "improvement", or d) how to
achieve some effective uniformity of opinion even on measures required
in order to get information of the strictly relevant kinds.

Committees tend to bog down all too readily when they
attempt to achieve a measure of agreement over questions that are tricky
and that involve a wide range of personal opinions. The only exceptions I
know of are committees whose work has been continued over many years,
Prof. Joshua Lederberg 29 September 1964

 

who have the backing of rather large bodies of people who want to know
the answers, and who have the services of paid scientific secretaries
to keep the ball rolling and to provide technical drafts for further
discussion.

Do you feel that we are now at a stage at which it
would perhaps be possible, and worthwhile, to study in such an expensive
manner the question you pose, and those questions which might precede
it? If so, I wonder if there are some concrete proposals regarding ways
and means that might be put forward.

Sincerely,

f

HBN/r H.B. Newcombe
Head, Biology Branch