Max Perutz was born in 1914 in Vienna to a family of textile manufacturers who made their fortune during the industrial revolution in the 19th century, through the introduction of mechanical spinning and weaving. They had Jewish roots but were Catholics. During his years in High-School, a perceptive teacher awakened his interest in chemistry. In 1932 he entered the University of Vienna, but in 1936, he decided to move to the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge. After Hitler’s invasion of Austria, the family business was expropriated, his parents became refugees and his natural choice was to continue his career in Cambridge.
Perutz and his co-workers managed to determine the structure of hemoglobin in 1959. The work was published in Nature in February 1960, and Perutz was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1962 together with John Kendrew, who had determined the structure of myoglobin.
In addition to his studies, Perutz pioneered the new research field of Molecular Biology and was instrumental in founding the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, UK. He was also involved in establishing the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) in Heidelberg, Germany. He was married and had two children. Max F. Perutz died in February 2002 in Cambridge.
Max Perutz had a broad vision on philosophy of science, as shown in a lecture given at Cambridge on ‘Living Molecules’ in 1994. Perutz explained that for Popper, scientists formulate hypotheses and then devise experiments to falsify them. Even if the experiments fail to falsify, they can never be proved since a future experiment might yet falsify them. He said: “Logically, this is true in principle but it rarely happens in practice.”
And for Kuhn, science is dominated by a succession of paradigms such as Newtonian celestial mechanics which were modified by relativity. Perutz explained: “While hypotheses in cosmology may be subject to revision, most of those in molecular biology are cast-iron. Nor did many of us begin with hypotheses.” He said that Fred Sanger, for example, won the Nobel prize for chemistry twice by inventing methods. “He had no hypotheses of what he was going to find, but once determined, his results were not subject to revision. They are final and the same is true for the bulk of scientific knowledge. If it were not, jet planes could not fly, computers would not work and atomic bombs would not explode.” [1]
Referring to Richard Dawkins who had written in 1993, in response to establishing a Lectureship in Theology and Natural Science at Cambridge University: “The achievements of theologians don’t do anything, don’t affect anything, don’t achieve anything, don’t even mean anything. What makes you think that ‘theology’ is a subject at all?”[2], Max Perutz replied the next day:
Dr Dawkins does a disservice to the public perception of scientists by picturing them as the demolition squad of religious beliefs. Isaac Newton and the other founders of modern science pursued their studies of nature in order to discover the nature of God.
Charles Darwin’s discrediting of the biblical story of creation did not prevent him from remaining a believing Christian. Michael Faraday was a devoted member of the Christian sect of the Sandemanians. Clerk Maxwell wrote on his death-bed: ‘What is called myself is, I feel, done by something greater than myself within me.’Albert Einstein believed the laws of physics that he discovered to be the work of a divine creator. Max Plank, the discoverer of the quantum, and many other of this century’s great scientists, were profoundly religious, which was a source of great moral strength to them. We should respect their beliefs, even if we do not share them.
I should have preferred the endowment of a chair in science and ethics as a counter to the increasingly prevailing law of the jungle in the scientific world, but failing that, a chair in science and theology is the next best thing.
Scientists may not believe in God, but they should be taught why they ought to behave as if they did.
Yours faithfully,
M. F. PERUTZ
Cambridge
21 March [3]
______________
[1] Kim Patel, Perutz rubbishes Popper and Kuhn, Times Higher Education, 25 November 1994
[2] Richard Dawkins, Letter: Scientific versus theological knowledge, The Independent, 20 March 1993
[3] Max F Perutz, Letter: Religion’s role in science, The Independent, 22 March 1993
Biographical Details: Max F. Perutz Laboratories https://www.mfpl.ac.at/about-us/the-mfpl/max-f-perutz.html, Wikipedia
(graphic above: from the early days of Science Meets Faith: 31 October 2012!)
Science meets Faith 