I recently read The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race by Walter Isaacson, the bestselling author of Steve Jobs. The book started at the story of Jennifer Doudna and expanded onto the potential applications of gene editing and what that technology could potentially mean for the human race. I highly recommend the book.

My key take-aways are as follows:

---

Curiosity-driven motives lead to unusual discoveries

The word “curiosity” appeared more than 30 times in the book. It reminds me of the principle that I always think about, “If you don’t have passion, you cannot win.”

Groundbreaking success demands a pure motive to begin with. When driven by curiosity, a person usually does not know what his/her efforts might lead to. By not having a narrowly defined end goal, the person is more open to new ideas along the route. Naturally, such efforts are more likely to lead to new discoveries. So, curiosity-driven quests lead to real breakthroughs.

Without curiosity, a quest is usually driven by application, profits, or other forms of mundane motivations. In these cases, the end goal is pre-defined: “I want to build a popular smartphone app”; “I want to create a listed company”; “I want to be ridiculously rich”; etc. Application-driven motives are usually not deep; profits-driven motives usually do not last. Without being genuinely curious, without having a true passion, sooner or later the person will “burn out.” Even if he or she “makes it,” at the finish line, there will be less “true happiness” and more “burn-out feelings” waiting for him/her — the end result being that he/she does not “win” the game either.

If you don’t have passion, you cannot win.

---

Feeling (or being) alienated is ok

Isaacson pointed out in the book that creative people like Leonardo da Vinci and Albert Einstein “grew up feeling alienated from their surroundings.” From the perspective of nurturing an independent thinker, I argue that it is not only not a problem but maybe a “good” thing to have.

To be creative, it means you think differently. To think differently, it means you are not part of a herd. To be not part of a herd, it means you are sometimes alone or feeling lonely — it means you are alienated from your own environment.

Childhood experience is probably the most formative experience a person has. It strongly influences an adult’s behavior without the adult being even aware of it. That is why psychotherapists usually trace the cause of a patient’s contemporary behaviors to some specific early-life experience of that patient. In this regard, being alienated early in life has some unintended “benefits.” It means the person will grow up living a life feeling no urgency to conform to things and views that surround the person — which helps foster an independent thinker. By definition, those being alienated from a group are the minority. That is probably why independent thinkers are the “minority” and they are rare.

---

“Never do something that a thousand other people are doing.”

This is a guiding principle of Jack Szostak, Jennifer’s PhD advisor, who is also a Nobel Prize laureate. I cannot agree on this principle more. In life, doing something so many other people are doing is a sure path to a boring life. In investing, imitating other people is a sure path to mediocrity (and ironically, to keep the person’s job safe). For anyone who is thinking big and aiming high, they do not imitate.

---

Physical environment matters for stimulating creativity

This is another important point worth empathizing from this book. A beautiful environment fosters a beautiful mind. It is not a coincidence that many of the world’s best universities have many of the world’s best-looking campuses.

Isaacson mentioned in the book that Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory was founded “based on a belief in the magic of in-person meetings.” The laboratory sits at a picturesque locale with a nice bar. It is designed to offer a comfortable environment for scientists to interact.

To quote Isaacson:

“the beauty of nature and the joy that comes from unstructured human engagement is a powerful combination. Even when they don’t interact … people benefit from an atmosphere that is charged in a way that sparks creativity … new ideas are born out of serendipitous encounters.”

---

Gene editing and the moral debate

I understand that for many people, gene editing or even thinking about gene editing is scary enough, let alone some further discussions along the lines of germline editing and topics such as “shopping the Genetic Supermarket.”

Despite various apocalyptic predictions, I like to believe that gene editing in the long run could be widely accepted. Consider these facts:

• In vitro fertilization (IVF) provoked a storm of public backlash in the beginning but by now, it is widely accepted.
• Imagine that you traveled back 500 years and told people that one day in the then future, an average person can fly in a metal tube at 35,000 feet in the air and at 75% the speed of sound. I bet, most likely, everyone would call you nuts, and you run the risk of being locked up in an insane asylum.

There is usually a cognitive gap between the “fast” technology evolution that brings on new changes and the “slow” adaptation of people’s minds to these changes. History, however, has been highly encouraging, showing us time after time that we humans can come to terms with our own discoveries.

(END)