Jamary 21, 1953

Dr. Harold F. Blua
Department of Biology
Princeton University
Princeton, Wid.

Dear Lr. Bium:

Thank you for your message of January 16. 1 regret. the misunderstan—
ding thet may have developed. The citations. 6.g. to your book, mean that
the problem in question is discussed in the reference, not necessarily
that a particular viewpoint is represented. Youwwill note the same proce~
Gur@ ony @.8., Pp. 423, line 3: most of the authors cited are not holists
by any means. I shall be very sorry if this cordensation Jeads te further
misrapresentations. Perhaps it was unwise not to have ineludad a note to
this effect.

No one wili disagree concerning the improbability of protein neogsnesis.
The problem is to rurnich a sutficientiy detailed pieture of the trensition
from chemicas to biological evolution. as best as J ean recall your text,
you developed this quastion rather thoroughly, but primarily in ite energetig
aspects. The most prevalent fallacy, to my mind. is the asaumption that
newbilogenssia was a unique event in history. i can see no refutation of the
suggestion that the individual steps are continually recurrent, even today,
but that competition from existing organisms makes it virtually certain
that new forms will have any perceptible role in future evolution.

f am hoping sometime to collect my thoughts on the origin of life, from
the genetacist's viewpoint, in somewhat more coherent and satisfactory
fashion than the recent review. i would count it a considerable favor if
you could send me reprints of your papers on the subject, or failing these,
specific references to publications or the pages in your book that most em-
phaticaily reflect your own contributions to this subject.

Yours sincerely,

Joshua Lederberg