What do you think?
Rate this book
Of Molecules and Men
Book by Crick, Francis
114 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 2004
3 people are currently reading
319 people want to read
About the author
Francis Crick
13 books122 followersFrancis Harry Compton Crick OM FRS (8 June 1916 – 28 July 2004), was a British molecular biologist, physicist, and neuroscientist, and most noted for being one of the co-discoverers of the structure of the DNA molecule in 1953. He, James D. Watson and Maurice Wilkins were jointly awarded the 1962 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material" .
Crick is widely known for use of the term "central dogma" to summarize an idea that genetic information flow in cells is essentially one-way, from DNA to RNA to protein. Crick was an important theoretical molecular biologist and played an important role in research related to revealing the genetic code.
During the remainder of his career, he held the post of J.W. Kieckhefer Distinguished Research Professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. His later research centered on theoretical neurobiology and attempts to advance the scientific study of human consciousness. He remained in this post until his death; "he was editing a manuscript on his death bed, a scientist until the bitter end" said Christof Koch.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_...
Crick is widely known for use of the term "central dogma" to summarize an idea that genetic information flow in cells is essentially one-way, from DNA to RNA to protein. Crick was an important theoretical molecular biologist and played an important role in research related to revealing the genetic code.
During the remainder of his career, he held the post of J.W. Kieckhefer Distinguished Research Professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. His later research centered on theoretical neurobiology and attempts to advance the scientific study of human consciousness. He remained in this post until his death; "he was editing a manuscript on his death bed, a scientist until the bitter end" said Christof Koch.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
February 23, 2019
When looking at other reviews of this little book, based on Crick's 1966 John Danz Lectures at the University of Washington, I was amused to see that one reviewer expressed the belief that this book was "dated", "opinionated", and therefore not worth reading. Well, to the "opinionated" accusation, I must assume that this esteemed reader is in fact religious and took umbrage with Crick's anti-vitalism stance, with his humanism, and with his complaint that the educated men of English Universities such as his alma mater, Cambridge, still forced the antiquated compulsory religious education upon its students. I have nothing to say about this that Messrs. Dawkins and Hitchens have not already, and quite thoroughly stated.
As for the issue of being "dated" and thus not worth reading, well, yes, it is dated. 1966 was in fact quite a long time ago. Scientific knowledge has expanded exponentially and has moved beyond many of the questions Crick posed in these lectures, though not all. There have been great advances in genetics and molecular biology (including the Human Genome Project and the rise of discipline known as Evo-Devo), neurobiology (although not so much in understanding consciousness), computer science (What would Crick have made of IBM's Watson...sorry, I couldn't resist!) while there hasn't been as much advance in other areas, such as understanding the origin of life. There is no use arguing that this is a "dated" work. That's the way science works, to build upon past knowledge, thus making much of what came before obsolete. This is, to go back to the other complaint, a significant difference between science and religion. The book of life always has something new to teach us while the books of the bible just say the same thing over and over again. So, I cannot help but to wonder if the reviewer considers this book from 1966 to be "dated" and not worth reading, then what of the christian bible, of almost 2000 years ago, giver or take a few rewrites and edits? Of the works of Shakespeare, aged approx. 400 years? Or Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility, from 1811? Are these not somewhat comparably dated? Would they not be, therefore, not worth reading? Of course not, that would be silly in the extreme. One must read them, as one must read this, for what it is; an historical document that gives the modern reader a peek into the past which might help understand the present and perhaps the future. This little book does that. It shows us that Crick was a very creative and enthusiastic "blue sky" thinker who could both focus on the narrow problems in order to answer questions in highly specialized areas of science, and tackle broader ranging ideas spread across the varied scientific disciplines. So, ignore the naysayers and read this little book, or any of the hundreds of thousands of science books from the past, with one eye out for where science has progressed and the other out for where science still has room to expand and grow.
As for the issue of being "dated" and thus not worth reading, well, yes, it is dated. 1966 was in fact quite a long time ago. Scientific knowledge has expanded exponentially and has moved beyond many of the questions Crick posed in these lectures, though not all. There have been great advances in genetics and molecular biology (including the Human Genome Project and the rise of discipline known as Evo-Devo), neurobiology (although not so much in understanding consciousness), computer science (What would Crick have made of IBM's Watson...sorry, I couldn't resist!) while there hasn't been as much advance in other areas, such as understanding the origin of life. There is no use arguing that this is a "dated" work. That's the way science works, to build upon past knowledge, thus making much of what came before obsolete. This is, to go back to the other complaint, a significant difference between science and religion. The book of life always has something new to teach us while the books of the bible just say the same thing over and over again. So, I cannot help but to wonder if the reviewer considers this book from 1966 to be "dated" and not worth reading, then what of the christian bible, of almost 2000 years ago, giver or take a few rewrites and edits? Of the works of Shakespeare, aged approx. 400 years? Or Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility, from 1811? Are these not somewhat comparably dated? Would they not be, therefore, not worth reading? Of course not, that would be silly in the extreme. One must read them, as one must read this, for what it is; an historical document that gives the modern reader a peek into the past which might help understand the present and perhaps the future. This little book does that. It shows us that Crick was a very creative and enthusiastic "blue sky" thinker who could both focus on the narrow problems in order to answer questions in highly specialized areas of science, and tackle broader ranging ideas spread across the varied scientific disciplines. So, ignore the naysayers and read this little book, or any of the hundreds of thousands of science books from the past, with one eye out for where science has progressed and the other out for where science still has room to expand and grow.
July 4, 2015
Even though the knowledge presented here is a bit dated, it is well worth the read as an example of clear scientific writing. Additionally, it might be worth reading in order to get a clearer understanding of the scientific zeitgeist of that time.
It's also much shorter than most modern popular science books, so you won't be investing too much time into it. All in all, just read it!
It's also much shorter than most modern popular science books, so you won't be investing too much time into it. All in all, just read it!
June 28, 2022
This book is a joy to read for many reasons.
Crick anticipates the rise of computing, including specific use cases. He anticipates his own later research into consciousness and draws an interesting parallel with vitalism. The overview of the field of fundamental biology as it was in 1965 or so is interesting for non-specialists, with Crick pointing out areas of "recent" development and giving high-level explanations of how new knowledge has been asserted.
Crick anticipates the rise of computing, including specific use cases. He anticipates his own later research into consciousness and draws an interesting parallel with vitalism. The overview of the field of fundamental biology as it was in 1965 or so is interesting for non-specialists, with Crick pointing out areas of "recent" development and giving high-level explanations of how new knowledge has been asserted.
June 6, 2023
Ahead of its time, but boring in most parts.
3.2/5
3.2/5
December 29, 2008
Typical vacation reading. Again, dollar rack from Strand.
January 3, 2015
Dated, poorly written, and opinionated. Don't waste your time reading this.
February 22, 2017
There's no price you can put to excellence. Francis Crick, If only I could marry you.
April 8, 2014
An insight into 1966 thinking about science written by Francis Crick. I particularly loved part 3's discussion on computers, AI and religion. A truly brilliant mind.
November 15, 2014
a work of genius
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews