The Nobel Prize is regarded by many in academia as the most coveted award for one’s achievements. After a long life of dedication to a field, specialists of physiology or medicine, literature, physics, economics, peace and chemistry hope to be recognized by the Nobel Prize Committee and catapulted into the annals of history. Worldwide recognition, mainstream admiration and substantial prize money naturally follow. So does courting from leading research institutions across the world, with Stanford as no exception. With 17 Nobel laureates on faculty, the Stanford community greatly appreciates having so many distinguished persons contributing to University education. We should, however, show serious reservations if such laureates misapply their legitimacy to advance reprehensible opinions.

Consider the following remarks:

On obesity: “Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you’re not going to hire them.”

On genetically engineering beauty: “People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great.”

On race: “[I am] inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa...all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours — whereas all the testing says not really.”

All of these comments were made by James Watson, co-winner of the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for the discovery of the structure of DNA. The last remark, on race, was made about two weeks ago, fueling a scandal that has sent the scientific community fleeing from his cause. Invitations to book promotions and lectures have been rescinded. Most recently, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a research institution in New York, suspended Watson’s directorship, leading Watson to resign yesterday.

All of this backlash is completely justified. His discovery, which is probably one of the most important advancements of our time in the field of biology, does not license him to spew offensive comments in public settings without presenting conclusive evidence for his claims.

Such outlandish comments from an otherwise revered scientist may seem quite surprising. Watson himself is surprised at his comments, later apologizing for being so unambiguously racist. “I can certainly understand why people, reading those words, have reacted in the ways they have,” he said. “To all those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly.” His ensuing clarification, however, puts into question the “unreserved” nature of his apology:

“We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things...This is not a discussion about superiority or inferiority, it is about seeking to understand differences, about why some of us are great musicians and others great engineers.”

The lackluster apology does not help Watson’s track record. Isolated admissions of guilt do not rectify repeated offenses. As a high profile individual and a well-respected scientist, it may be easier for him to denounce his mistakes and move forward successfully. Such a turn of events would be tragic and would tarnish the dignity of the scientific community at large. It is important, then, that we steadfastly admonish even Nobel laureates when such rebukes are due.

Remaining steadfast can be difficult, however, when the one to be reprimanded is from your own community. William Shockley, professor of engineering at Stanford from 1963 to 1975, came under fire for comments very similar to the ones recently made by Watson. This co-recipient of the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics was snubbed by fellow laureates, the National Academy of Sciences and especially his own students for his theories regarding eugenics. At a time when the civil rights movement was in full swing, members of the Stanford community thought it was important to stand up in opposition of bigotry. In a contemporary context, the hope is that a similar moral obligation can be fostered against prejudice no matter how prestigious the perpetrator.