>> rose:elcome to the brdcast. tonight a world renowned scientist a nobel laureate jas watson reflects on his life. >> legacy. >> don't underestimate yourself. go for it. there e big things an there are minor things. and i just like to stop disee. >> james watson, for the hour, next. >> funding f charlie ros has en provided b the following:. >> each y a billion pple won't find safe drinking water

captioningponsored by se communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie se. rose: james watson is here. hes as you know the godfather of genets in 1953 he and francis crick discoved the structure of dna. their achievement changed biology forever andearned them each a nobel prize during the 1980s watson too part in the huma genome project. in 2007e became the second peon to publish his fully sequenced genome on-line. he was also th direct are of t cold springs harbor laratorys from 1968 until 2003 when he became chanceor. he stepped dn from that role in 2007. i am pleased to have him

re on this progm one moreime, to explore whatever is on his mind. welcome. let's talk fir about cancer. you said my prima interest now is cancer. >> yeah. i think abt it in the middlef the nig. yoknow, we might finally crack it. >> re: really? >> yeah. largely now th we have the human gene project, you know done. we knows what's wro in cancer. it is a huned things but all cancers have one o their faces the sa. and th is volving ergy. you know, wn cancer is really bad, metstat anything you body -- they e very vulnerable to being attacked by the right drugs. >> rose: as we found with

ivek. >> yes. and that signal to divide t this is a sort of signal to live. i mean in thesense of you ve toave a lecule called atp, to make energy. and you'vegot to make l the building blos, so any time you go fromone two lls, you got to makenew body part and s they have a diffent mebolism from your liver your kidne or your brain. it's metabolisf a dividingell. and the firstha of this me whichack in 1924, in geany. it was said that cancers have arobic ycolosis, that is in the presence of oxen they eat up sugar.

and tt's glycolosis is glucose lys, so you can tell how ngerous a cancer is by how much lactic aci it is secreting. and it's still true, if you do a pet scan, lookat your body to see the cancer. those that light up are those that are high glycolosis. >> rose: so what do you think is possible? i think we shod fos, you know, weneed the things people are alrea developing. so i don't think there is going to be one mic bullet in the futureut i think we need one more werful sort of hit. >> rose: a what would that be? >> something which sps glycolosis. >> rose: so if we could fi that. how many pple are working on that as we speak? >> well, i doubt it's 1 percent of the cancer research community and in t verysuperbook by bob weinberg of m.i.t. it

me out three years ago f you look at the end text there is not one mention glycolosis,ot one mention of lactic aci and not one mention the greattto barber. >> rose: why is that, doou think. >>e's not thinking about it post people aren't. but i gave a course on ncer at hvard in 1959. it's the50th anniversary. so i don't think there i poibly anyone alive who gave a course on cancer before me. >> rose: why a you so terested in cancer? >> when i was 19 myfather's younger brother died of a malignantel aa and ther was just n treatment it meantetastatic, and tors came all overhis body. it waswful. and so i wanted tobe a biologist, why not cure canc. and then betwe them someone saidou can't do that until you fd out the genes, so i had to find dna. >> rose: syou found dna

and then we mped the human genomewhy has itaken so long? whats the hardest nut to crack? >> i don't know why it's ju, peoplon't -- give up what they are doing. they do something very well. they just like it. and but ther are, you know, there are someery good people who, younow, i'm just following these people. i'm going off to mat rid in ten daysor a meeting on the energy of cancer. so you kw, the energy and not t genets so the genetic phase is, you kw, always important. but th big things are about tobefinished. >> rose: what do you mn the big thing about to be finished? >> we'll be ab to sequence human cancefor a thousand hours very soon. >> rose: rht. the whole cancer. just like we could get your genomeor $1,000 the years from today. >> rose: so at can we get now, we wi be able to

what now? with caer genome. >> myenome was done two years o, it cost a million dollars. all rightand now it will cost $20,000. >>ose: so this is for your genome. >> fory genome. and so our loratory is going to be one the new machines where the cost are probably start with5,000 and soon down $1,000. that's incredible. >>ose: yeah. what have you learned om all the information y got from kwing yr genome? >> in my case, i learned two useful things. one is i confi my suspicioi shouldn't eat too ch ice cream because i don't digt lactose so i only have e of the t genes that you probably have which ts you enjoy ice cream. >> rose: what el did you len. >> i learned tt i don't digest balockers. so when i was --. >> rose: i'm surprisedhis is what u learned. was there any pdisposition

from your geme, did you find yourself hing anything that wod indice you are predisposed or susceptible to som serious >> n with age your blo pressure rise. so the docto, saw mine ing up. >> rose: you take drugs. >> you take drugs and they are veryffective drug a beta blocker. sogave me one a within a week was fall asleep in the middle of the afternoon. you know, middle of a py or something. it wasjust grim. and then they gave me another beta bcker. i fell asleep again. anthen the doctor, on to an ace inhibityer didt seem t work. >> ros so they said we can't useeta blockers with jim watson. >> then craig ventu's group looked aty genome and compared it with his. and foun that i have two copies of an asian variant which mean lyzeseta blockers at only 10% the rate tt most caucasns.

>> rose: that ishe problem. that we do not have a large ough sample of human genomes so that we can look at tm and make some really smart analys, right or wrong. >> well, --. >> rose: wrong? in this case beta blockers we almost do. but cerinly withi ten year thosene will go into, you know get a beta blocker withoutheir looking at the dna first. >> re: my point, isn't that the point that we do not have enough human genome mappg of individuals to be able to ve some nse of the comparisons. >> n i could form a company tomoow. >>ose: yes. >> and jt do cytochrome p450, the genes at code foreig zymes by degrade drugs, okay. dhen we would essentially tell. we could tell you whether you, a betalocker will work. you mit have ten copies of the gown andhey won't work at all because you will t

an lyze e drug in an hour instead of 4 hos. other peoe are me, i am a real slow met anlyzer. so --. >> re: but you can see that in your genetics. >> yes. and looking, the whole genome tt say big thing. but you cajust look at these set genes and ge it. so someone is going to form a company. and it will cut the cost of, u know, health insurance because you won't be taking the wrongmedicine. >> rose: now what about alzheimer? alzheimer, i said i didn'tant to know. i t on e web, my wol genome except thne f -- the protein e which the four variant predisses to you alzheimer. >> rose: you didn'want to know. >> no, my grandmother h alzheimer that would meant i had a one infour chance ohaving the gene. my mothe died too sn to know wther she would have had the gene.

and so i didn' want to know because i can't do anying about it. so i just go unr the assumption i'm to the goin to get alzheimer. and if i do, then, you know, i will react in a speedy fashion. >> rose: one of the her thingse have found out, i your case it is particulay appropriatbecause of schizophrenia, is how much ofhat we call, thought of as psychogical disorders have a bra ience connection. >> schizophrenias probably entirely genetic. >>ose: right. >> and as is bipor. but it is going to be complicad like cancer, u know. you said at theeginning. therare hundreds of genes whichan predispose yo to cancer. anthere will be hundreds of difrent genes which predispose us to schizophrenia. the hope is that, but we know that a these gen are connected with the functiong of the brain. they'rnot concerned with the functioningf your kidney. really brainpecific.

and sohopefully just like in cance, even thoh there are hundreds o genes they ar interrelated pathways. they are real sort of signal points, u know, whe everything comesinto. and ifou block that yo really, that is the one you go at. and we have goto do that much better than w can. almostll our drugs start out with trying to attach to the dopamin d-2 receptor, whh is in a part of the brain. and sizophrenia you have too much dopane inrt of your brain. so you cut it down an tn you are better of there is no, been big improvemenin the treatment of schizophrea f 45 years. there arew drugs. they marginly improve it but i have a son w has schizophrenia and i can say he is sll aiting a n medicine. >> rose: you also haveaid thoughhat we know things now at would have changed

your attitud about schizophrenia or thepublic attitude about schizorenia. >> wl, the only -- yes, i think, you know, thinking in terms of molecul, you can cure schizophrenia through drugs. you will never cure it by talking to someone. >> rose: yh. but you have ao said that the 21st century will be marked by the conrgence, by the convergence o biology an psychology. >> yes. >> rose: what did you mean? >> that psyclogy will become a science. >> rose: exactly. okay so other words, psychogy becomes a science, that's easy. and we'll understand how the brai works. you know, a sse we, you know understandshow the chrosome works. >> rose: that is happeng rapidly. no, not really. >> rose: weo know it science based. we do know that it is brain science is at the co soph many disses we didn' understand >> yeah. and we he done wonderful things at the level of how synapses work. buwe still don't know how the inteation of,ou

know --. >> ros how we absorb infoation. >>eah, anything about it. so people s you know we haven't found theouble helix of the bra yet. >> rose: right. and you say that's tru >> yeah, i think it' true. >> rose: so wh is -- we want to know most of alis how the brain wks. how does itork in a healthy way, how doe it abso information? how does it translate inrmation into all kinds of things? >> yea >> rose: am i rit or wrong or halfway there. >> of course we want to know. but as a father of a child with a serious mental diseas, i want him better. so i want for us to d for e mental disease what w have been doing f cancer over t last 20years, very effeively. you know, we kn -- works, we don know. >> rose: but that was one gene. >> that was one. >> rose: so glibec waable to attackne gene, the

beuse we know the gene caes leukemia. >> younly have really one bad ing wrong, you didn' have fou or five. >> rose: right. >> most matu canrs have four or five. and so we just arttacking one or two. and weave to tack four or five really to, you know, get it in realhape. but for the bin, we ne a commitment to understd the ges that go wrong in schizophrenia, bi polar diseas serious depressi, autism and so we need a real big program. 're going to probably ha to may even ok at 100,000 genoms. >> rose: but shouldn't this be like a -- >> it's anoth billion dollar pject. >> rose: but so? >> it is not much money. >> re: in the great scheme of things and wt we are talking about tod. no, what we need i

cancer research is to go to war again. and we need a genel. what we need in mental disease is mon. you know, we just have to get the facts. we have be spending moy onancer, i think vy effectively. we now have just a wonderful collecti of knowledge which i thinks more complete than a lot of other peopleo. so i think we'll see it there. mental disea, we hav't started. we know about four genes and prably none of them, you know, are major culprits. we're justt the beginning. and so. >> rose: is ther something to this idea, that if we try to understand when something goes wrong, when sething goes wrong withells in the brain and then maybe we can say en what if it went the other way, then we can get at what happens when things go rite. >> yes. so what we said in cancer, we understand the cancer

cell, uerstanding the normal cell. then we can really go to war agnst cancer. until we know whait is, u know, don dlare war when you don'tnow the odds of winning. >> rose: but you think the odds of winingre pretty good. >> iould say, i would define it as now 600,000 people, americandie each yearf cancer. all the treatments that we now have if we didn't have any medicine, 700,000. that's bause in many cases, we treat it but you know we don't cure some ofhe disease instead of dying after o yearshey die after ten. the disease is stil tre. we cod cure pancreatic cancer,lung cancer,. >> rose: wel they think they will be able to do lung cancer, i think. >> i don'tnow. >> rose: that is the harde one. >> that is a real hard one.

becausit is generally diagnosed late. it i not diagnosed like in leukemia where it' simple. >> rose: athat's why most people d within a year. >> yes, ah. it's diagnosed very te. so that is theroblem. and. >> rose: wt about breast cancer. >> breascancer is one of the few cancers where we are curing. so we made progress really - >> rose: why dide make progress in breas cancer d not make progress in lung cancer. >> it is detected earlier. >> rose: so -- okay. let mealk about your life. why did yobecome a scientis >> because i w rl curis about life. i nted to know what life was. and even earlie thanthat, i was fascinate with birds. you know, about the e of x i was given my first bird boo and my father was an

obssive bird-watcher. and by the time i was ten, you ow, my legs were long off so could go real bird walks with him. and so and then i wanted t be questioned what isife. you know, it was a physical world and th livi world. there was aeligious explanation. but early on in life iort decided not to gowith religion. so wanted something els >>ose: how do you feel aboutreligion today? >> it hasmany functions, so you ow, ion't want to stop people from being ligious. i'm not out to --. >> rose: you like the music and you likehe ble. >> some parts it. >> ros right. >> not the beginning b --. >> rose: rightright. >> as you ge in mor towards the jesus portion, i like it better. >> rose: tell me this.

when -- do you think the fact that you d franc crick discovered the structurof a mainly because you had superior inlligenceuperior information, or superior personalualities tt lead to your pursuit? >> i think it was a combation of all three. >> rose: howould you balance them,intelligence, information, drive. >> most importantly is drive. >> rose: really. yeah. i really wanted to find the structure of dna. franklin a wilkins whore physicis, it was an interestinproblem. but it wa, you know, morris s always more interested in stoppin war. nuear weaps. you know, i was obsessed with wanting to know at life was. so francis wasn't thinking about dnahen a rifed in

cambridge. but he had read the little book whatis life. wilkinson read it. and francis, you ow, added extreme intelligencto our si. and i hav the drive. and --. >> ros could you measure whether you or francis was the most intelligent. >> oh, he was more intelligent. >> rose: how would you measure that, though? it is not the ca passit ot take tests. how would yo measure it? >> no, no no. he thought so fast. >> rose: he thought st. >> i was young than he, was older. he was traed in physics, a technique we reallneeded to get at t structure of dna. so oh, anyon met francis, he --. >> rose: he is smarter than jim. >>eah, yeah.

but thatdidn't --. >> ros francis alone would not have done it. >> no, he wouldt have done it. rose: and you alone wouldn't have do it. >> i wouldn't haveeen capable of doing it. there was a key fac we call space gup, that francis uerstood from the data. that, and we did knowt. and we learned it two weeks before we got the answer. and we didn't use it to build the model b it confirmed it. so the day we w the -- and id this leads to this sort of structure, we knew it s confirmed by the data so that is why we could be so, you know, joyously hap within two hours. because it meant a confmation. and francisnderstood it. ross lind franknidn't under -- ross a landrank lynn didn't derstand it. she knew there was thi thing bu she didn't use . if she had used i and she onctried to find out what it meant but tn i think because personal

problems, she a the english -- uldn't talk to each other. and dorothy cld have told -- anyways, that meeting failed. and rosin never came to frans and askedyou know, he me. >> re: yeah. so --. >> rose:ecause you know ople think that she doesn't get enoughcredit. ere have beenilms, documearies about it. >> oh, yes. and afterwards she beca quite cle to francis and she was a woman of high intelligence. she wasn't i the league with francis. francis was just,ou know, a phenomena. and but e didn't kno enough. and she didn't get help. and so she sort of wasted her time. >> rose: was thereny part of youho looks at your life now, at yo age now, and says you know, i did this extraordinary ing, e of the great discoverys

in science, at 25, ght, 25. >>es. >> rose: ando you know at is the rest of my lif been about. i made thgreat discovery. i could never topthat. >> it didn't matter. asong as there were other great thin to do. you know --. >> ros but you didn't worry about that, damn i've do this big thing and i will never bable to do anything le that again. now, y know so many people want to be photographed. whh is just, just be photographed. >> rose:e were just her and someone who well-known and very popular author wantedou to sign a book. yeah. >> rose: for their -- >> because dna is important i sort o jokingly say, you know, i amhe only famous scienti sll alive. >> rose:o shall did -- no -- >> dna and madame curry. >> rose: it true, stephen hawkings could be condered in certain way >> yeah, yeah, but yeah, if

you are in england. but the fame doesn' matter. you know, won'--. >> rose: it does matr. it does matter. well, it lets me have other -- ion't be hpy untiwe cure cancer. i mean you know,hat's what i want to do. >> re: but here i-- you have been all er the ple. i mean supposeafter the 25, ter the structure of dna, you d francisaid all right, let's set off and get the next big challenge. and the next big challenge is cance les you and i go after it you were the mostfamous scientist inhe world. you could have amassed huge amounts of research money a that te. >> no. >> rose: wrong? >> yeah, well we didn know how to do it. we had to find out how dna goes to rna,oes to protein. and i made the plunge in 68 when i went to haor and said the main purpose will be done to understand cancer. said we have to understand it before we cure it.

and soon afterwds president nixon declared a war on cancer. ani was please cept that i didt think vicry was going to come ry soon. and but i was happily put on the first presidential committee. and weoved after two years becae i don't see victo. i went to m.i.t. and iot into deep trouble when said were -- m.i.t. is really, this is a very good use of a fedal money. we are bringing e cancer problem tobrains, not to the patient you know, the idea was take cancerhospitals do sence the, i said it is bette done at m.i.t. now it should go bk to the hospital. i want it in the hospital. >> rose:ut you have gotten in troubleith what you s, and what you write more than- and i don't know whether simplyecause are you e most candid person alive or whether you have no edit fction in your brain.

>> i'm constantly -- because you know, i thi out oud. you know,ometimes its inappropriatand i'm teibly embarrassed and i write letters and i try and hope people will forgive me. >> rose: beg for forgiveness. >> and you kw, i apologise. i oh, i said some,ou know, about people o stood in my way. you know. they wanted to regulate dna it was complete lunacy. -- -- came to be a regulator, she my enemy. it was very inapprriate wz did you think they mig -- go aad. someone hadto come out, you know, say oga, obama has finally t, you know -- s

whatt is. finay go after your opnent. because if yon't, you know, go after them, th are gog to kil you. >> rose: so that is your message tohim today. he needs to get toughith his oppones. >> yeah. >> rose: is your point. >> yeah. >> rose: his critics. >> yesyou know, i just thin, you know, there are some enemies who won't go away. no matter what y do. all ese people want to keep medicine expensive. >> re: ah. so it is aut that. >> yes, yeah >> rose: these are surance companies and --edical establishment or- >> temp is, you know, you know, they want to keep auliffe asong as possible because en you disappear there is no more mey comi in fromyou. >> rose: so the is too much -- too much servis in the last year an too my thieves to be gaed in the last yr. >> yh, i mean. rose: that's it in a

nuhell. >> yeah,e should all die cheaply. >> ros how do we die cheaply by not havg the advantage all the modern chines. yes and it not appropriate for is program. you know, i don't wantto -- ofnd people. bu i'm jussort of saying you know, there are lifend-death decisions. and you ke your own decision as tohether you want to go ahead when your heart is n beating ver ll and your dney is failing and you know, ese arthe sortf personal things. but you know t is a very parate issue. about i mean, we've t to reduce, you know, not only do we have t cure cancer but we have to do itheaply. you know, we can't --. >> rose: can we do it cheaply, though? >> a couple the drugs i think will beery cheap. you know, so --. rose: but glibek was alreadthere, the drug, what he did, was understandinthe gene and kning there was a drug for the ne. >> yeah.

but we can' spend 50% of ourdp on health care. >>ose: right. so --. >> rose:t is not 50 yet, is it. >> no, but 18%,ow going to, and every me we, you know -- subdivide cancernd find out subdivi it even more,. >> rose: here ishat i -- >> thenly thing i have donethey told me ihad low-grade proate cancer. and i dided to do nothing. you know, at cost $1,000 which, you know, probably, i have nonexistent psa. and so -- syou know, i did my own thing. but iust don't want to worry about it, you know. i want toorry about curin cancer. i n't want to worry abo dying om it. u can jus woy all your life or youan be, you know positive and you know, you should never do something less you think you c win. >> rose: yeah. >> so you know. rose: you should never do

anythingnless you think u can win. >> s, i don't ink that's true, jim. yo should -- i mean u can't be guanteed that are you going to win. i meanou should go t there and -- >> what i mean . >> rose: a lot of people -- go ahe. >> whai am saying is you thin you have a probability. when i was in cambridge i alwayshought, you know, maybe i have a 30% chancef winning. >>ose: exactly. >>o that was big enough. rose: 30% chance that is enough. >> what i am saying, don't go for one or two pcent. >>ose: yeah. in other words, -- >> and so what i am sing. >> rose: spend your energy where there a likelihood that you can find and put togeer a-- sure. >> rose: forcethat would le to a positive result. >> yes. and if it is really big and important objective and it only 20%, go,ecause s obje sieve so good that you will tak the chance. and at my age, you know,ou could say that is a great advante. your reputatn, i don't have to do anythg.

but itust, i -- have been in cancer research foro long and i'm so excited that i think isinally come together. d that wasn't true five ars ago. >> rose:here has been that much change in five years. >>h, yes. >> rose: tell us one mr time wt the change is in fi years other tha understanding the genetic basis of cancer. >> i cantell you. you could say the e enzymes involved,roteins involved in owth signals which glivec is blockining one of those phways. and other enzymes just involving, i making your amino ads and digesting whate cal intermediary metabolism, all e small molecules floating around. smal flat molules, et cetera. and then they go t build ur body. >> right >> s whatwe want to go at ishis metabolism.

and it is a new thi. i'm going to spain, a meeting on metabolism. >> are you convinceare you the right track. >> y, and there are other ople on it. so it's not i'm the only e. but you kn, the marity of people are quite happy, -- in cambridge, i couldn believe it, 400 people. not one ofhem thinking of metabosm. i thought th're jerks. (laughter) >> 400 you know, all --. >> rose: you probly told themoo. >> no, no, of course n. i had to be ry polite and gave a talk later in the day in which said, younow, but it was justyou know, you should diversify, you try thisyou true i that. but you know, i get into trouble because i wan to succeed. you know, i have song --. >> rose: you get into trouble becausyou can't control yourse. busometimes we don't know, just take the race stuff in africand europe. you have apologid

profely and you saidi'm sorry. i didn't mean t i'm whatever, you have done everything that i know a man c do. question still isow could someone as smart as you are say what you d. oh, i was sayg somethg to a gir i never thoughof her as a reporter. she lived in our houseor a year. >>ose: that doesn't make any difference, you said it. >> i wasreating her like a daught. >> rose: but tt doesn't make a difference. did you think the though >> sure, i though the thght, whether it was right or wrong, i didn't think it appropriate er to say it in public. and someoad sent steve pinker and i a book a so i just looked at theook. and there werehese facts. the girl, she lived with us n years ago. she had lid in africa a few years ago. i haveeen to africa a number of time and liked . and we started taing about africa. that is l. so you know, i -- it was just ful. and. >> rose: you recogzed it was awfu >> oh, go yes, stantly.

i saw -- you kw this is worse trouble than ever in my life. >> rose:t was. >> becauset hurt people and i didn't intend to hurt peop. d it implied that some people i work with i have poor imprsions of. i don't. i don'tave people around me that i don't he high impressions of. and you know -- so i -- i didn't want toet into trouble itas not myain interest. i don't think about it, you know, 1 percent o the time. i hado reason to -- and i not an expert ont. when i talko you about cancer. >> rose: you know someing. >> i just re a book and me other people said it. and so i can't -- i've never measur iq in my life i did take a course on it. >> rose: i d't want you to get into deeper trouble here. >> no, no, b i'm saying i took a course on iq at the iversity of chicago in 1947. >> rose: yeah. >> becse i was interested in why i had a low iq. >> re: you have a low iq

>> yeah. >> rose: you do. yeah, i'mast but --. >> ros what does that mean, i mean what -- >> i don't know. but i'm around 120. anyou know there are all ese supergeniuss, you hear. >> rose: right, 180 and 200. >> and all that. so you know,as just out good enough to get into a good school. >> rose: yeah. >> so you know there was no reason to ck it out and sthat ishy --. rose: are you interested in what kes intelligent? >> yeah, it aeal hard problem. >> ros i know it is. >> verhard. and attempts so far to find genes totly faed. and you know, i won't go into --. >> rose: we cannot fin a gene that erm doe intel ainst. >> yeah. >> rose: you say tha but that ithe issue, isn'tt? >> yeah, t somemes you know, yeah, the is a lot we don't kw, yeah. so you kw, until u find genes, and --.

>> rose: stefen pker's argument as you welknow, these problemswewill never answerhese problem. >> that some of this stuff about the braiis just too huge for -- >> well scientists never want to see that. soou know, i all i will say is over the next 20 years, younow, i wouldn't necessarily put my career on it. you know -- >> y know, that i isot someing that we are going to get dinitive answers over the nexcouple of years. so it's ve cplicated issue. and but want to say you know, we h a meeting and it was my 80th birthy. can we make our brai work better. asou get old your brain doesn't work. so i was all f -- was

alfor, you know, brain improvement. unfortunately, you know, i didn, you know what they say is lead an activ life. >> rose: exercise mo and all that. >> and i do tt. and so butou know, these arvery hard qstions to answer. and i just --. >>ose: but you believe we will know th answer, we'll know the answer consciousnesand will and -- mind. >> yeah, iort of think we wi. but you know, i wouldn't, you know, francis crick spent e last 25 years of his life trying to think what the brain was. and focusin on consciousns. it was justoo hard. you know, he was treed. he didt have too, make another great discover in our li so head a lot of -- we had a lot of fun. but frais and i are difficul maybe it'secause i came

from more, you know, less privileged envirment. i n't want to do anying less i think i am going to succeed. >> rose: you saidhat. and francisnew that he might not succeed. >> oh, sure. >>ose: but he had the same,. >> he had fun. >> rose: he lived in la jolla. >> and he was very inspirational to the people at the salk institute, whi is, you kw, the salk institute and harbor were sort of competitive >> rose: you have liked being jim watson. >> yes. yeah, no, i don't dislike myself >> rose: no, n yourself but ji watson is beyond yourself. iean it is differt because of what you di a when you did it and how much it celebrated. look, how many timesn this ogram have scientists put what you achieved he top rank of scientific achievement. you are way uphere in the p ten of everything. >> yeah, wl, younow, dna

is in the top teand i was st born in the right year. no, i was. if hibeen born three years bere or three years afterward. >>ose: you would not have done it. >> i would not have done it and no one would ever have heard of me and i would probably be --. >> rose: we woul't care about althese things you have writt and said. >> no i -- i kw i would have got inrouble wherever i was because you know, i -- i want progress. that is all. it's just not, you kn, i never pick on, you know, unportant people. it's important people who, you know, i don't -- you knowi tnk you know, fairly christian sense of -- you know, i don't want to hit ose who are down. >> rose: you don'tick on the we. you pick on the strong >> yeah, i pick on the strong. >> rose: those are iyour way in terms of what you think is the right coursto take. >> yeah, it's just comes

from, i think i'm part - i've been successl because m very impatient. >> rose: well sa. >> younow,that's how mi. imtient. i just can't wait until we, youknow, -- yeah, i want to test the drugs out. i'm really excited. >> rose: it's a wondful quality. its a wonrful quaty. >> so you know, scientists a wonderfulhing. -- sciencis aonderful thg. i gave a -- i was at e 7 5th annersary of the shown fountion. anbecause of my age i was the only one there whoas at t 25th niversary, you know, 50 years. i was the youngest perso there, probabl in 1959. and dwitisenhower came and gave talk and his title of his talk science, theandmadeen of freedom.

the tit of t symposium was ience, e handmadeen of iustry. eisenhower extended the freedom and he sd we won't be freenless we have very high qualitycience. and we should nurture our science and made an announcement that he w going to recommend the $100 miion be spent on t linear acceleratt standford. and hi speech was woerful. eisenhoweras a great prident. you know, no present loved science more than eisenwer. or sawit advancing freedom. and i keep saying freom is ry important. you can't have freedom thout knowledge. >> rose: legacy.

>> jt --don't unrestimate yourself. just go for it. you know there are big things and there are minor thgs. anyou know, i just like to stopisease. >> rose: were yoborn with this or did you -- >> probably, i think so. >>t's in your genes. >> rose: yeah. >>t's a behavioral characteristic but it's your genes, behior is in genes. >> yeah, yeah, u know, i'm probab a mutnt. >> re: a mut ant. >> yh, i suspect you know, somehow th impatiencer methingwasn't present. i am a, you know, a dista cousin o or son wls, his grandmother was watson. so you kw, my father's uncle helped raise or son.

so i heard abt him. but must have been impatient. >> rose: carly was impaent. >> he wa declared a genius at 18 months. >> rose: is that right. >> yes. whereas i tnk people thought i wa a again sus when -- i was ol i wa20. yoknow. at 20 my teachers like me because i was rely --. >> rose: did thethink of you a genius en you were 20? >>hat i might do something. >> rose: they d. >> tt i --. >>ose: they thought you haa spark of intelligenc and ll a impatience. >> yes, impatience. and you know that i was-- in hurry. and you know, you know, just --. >> ros has impatience ever caused you tohave conflt about actions y took? >> in other words, -- >> oh sure. >> rose: in other wos, you

ght trample over something or somebody in order -- >> ion't think ever ruined someo else's carr by my impatience, you know. >> rose:hat might you have done? >> well, y know, y could put graduate student on oblem that has a lo probabily of success. but if ituceded it would be what i needed so i nev risked anyone else f my impatience. you risk yourself. >> ros you have paid a price for your impatiee? >> on very few committees. >> rose: i will agree wi that, absolutely >> okay. >> rose: absutely. >> so but i ha se wonderl frids and nderful wife. the harbor is wonderful place to live,and cambridge is just unbelievably

beautiful and of high quity. so you kw, i he seen the world at its best. anyou know, so you know, presidenobama and i are both south side of chigo people. you know. >> rose: and youtarted at the university of chicago. >> y. great education. and. >> rose: how about the humanities or you kn, this argumentetween the bridge beeen science and the humanities that cp sn spoke . >> there is a big gaput i love -- in the sense of art an music and literare. and science is vy much part of our cultures well as,ou know, it's a y o inking and getng knowledge. i spend lot of time reading london riew books, new york review boo,

ju -- i don't spend as mu time reading the books. i try and g the guts of the bock becau they give you ideas. >> dyou like muss snick. >> yes, i have no talent whatsoever. >> but you like it,. >> i lovit, virtuoso. >>here is -- >> you kw, i thk some muss sicko complicat you need aost a mathmaticians mindo put together -- for somethg like this. so but y know, my pents likeusic and i went to children's concerts in chicago sympho. so you know, i was our hse was filled withooks. and you know, we didn't have money to gto the cubs games. you listenedon the radio, virtually ever game but your money w spent on books. my father s a cubs fan. >> rose: so you became a cubs fan

>> and you know, i had this sort of protestant catholic division. and i think the ite sox were the catholiceam. the cubs wer the north side which wasn't as catholic a the sthside. >> rose: life has given you most of e things at you would have wted. >> y. >> rose: has inot. >> yes. >> rose: it's ven you opportuny. 's given you fame. >>t's given you. >> family i love, yes. >> so but you know, there is a whole world people which don't have opportunity and -- >> depenng whe they were born, often, right. >> so ov the currenthing i uld gladly be taxed on my superior healt benefits in order to, you ow, that's one of issues that obamahould, should those wi really high quality health-care plans be leveled off with tho who don't get such heimanns, i

think we should. i think tre that sense, e fair treatment of all r citizens, i feel very strongly >> you know, whe"time" magazine did their millennium issue and the looked bk at a hundred ars and's saiwho has been the mos influential person, influentialhey cheinstein. but they chose einstein because of theower of scnce is why they chose him. d in particular, the enormous power of psics. physics was the queen >> it was the sciencof the th, first half of the 20th century. >> yes. >> and t last quarter of the 20th century, molecular biology. >> yes. >> what is it going tobe for the 21st century? >> i hop psychology. >> do you real from? >> yeah. >> psychology? >> yeah, because i would ve to be able to know enough so ny people wouldn't be depressed. i think we have to, you know, depression is an awful

thing. >> but it has a geneti basis. >>es, but you know, i would just like to, younow, understand the basis of it enough and you kno, we're raising mon for still anothe meeting -- >> the convergence of psycholo and science is coming togher. >> yes. >> b -- >> its really that we will derstand human beings better so we tre them better. a case inpoint i think is yoknow, understanding wha is now call high intelligent autis, as berg's syndrome where pele are socily ipt but whizs when you put them behind a computer. and have st of -- ought it was their fault, you know that they didn't seek hp. and you ow, sometimes they are socially inept and make

enemies. and now i think you -- see always thee ople, it is not theifault that they don't talk to you. this he e just sortf afraid to talk tyou. they d't know how to talk to you. anso you have to go out and really help them. sohat is a new group of people. and fortunately, u knoin the st they had noobs. but now they can dowork on the comput, a boy do we need them. so you know, sort of -- you know, when i was a boy mathmaticians re just odd pele. you know, that was someing, it was sort o common sse rema. just you know. >> rose: they were wir fferently. >> thewere wired differentland sohey ren't very soal. but you know, wther bill gates fits into this category, but he's made enorus contribution. >> rose: he is social. >> wel look, am just

sayi, i read things where people put him under this rub rick. >> rose: some people as they -- rubric. >> rose: some ople as they approach the 80s and especily if theknow that the end is near, began to want to reach o to people that they have had conflicts with. you, for examp, had a long-standg riftith theo wilson. >> but you guys. >> rose: a you great friends. >> great friends now. came back together >> i hen't had that many enies. >> rose: the question wa are there other people like wilson tt you at some point think out -- >> there are some pple ose politics domina their biology. and they generally have been opponents of ed wilson. they a opponts of me. i can't find anythin worthwhile about them. i don't wa to reachut it. >> we n't even name them. >> no,o, ofcourse. but i'm just ying that --

>> their politic does not allow scntific reasoning. >> well, you know, now i'm -- just wish there were me real republicans around. u know, i le them. but you know when was boy i didn't. i miss them because you just got a loof phoney republicans now. you ow,hey're not what, my father's family was >> rose: your father family werepublicans. >> solidly. myather was, you know the only son and he was a democrat. so i'm justrying to say that i am much re, you know, you know, i havereat a fiction for bill sapphire, well you know. he was a wonderful man. and you know, i would read s columns, boy th would make me mad. >> rose: hear you. >> but now realize maybe he was right.

many of the cases so you know, he was a great americ. so i think i that extent as you get older, you just seek out these so of petty things that divided you when you were young and so yea, i think i'm, you know, iill always have a few peoplethat i think still are standing in my way. but -- but you know, i like america. america is a wonderful country. and you know,nd i wasn't wn on multinationalis just becausee seem to be forgettingow wonderful our own cotry is. you know and weeally have to help americans. you know, it's notust -- the are a t of parts of amera which should have much better chance.

>> ros thank you for coming. thank you very much. >> ros james watson, for the hour. thank you for joining us. see you next time. captiong sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at bh access.wgborg