To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I would like to commend your reporter for his summary, in the issue of March 27, of my article on genetic intervention. One point, however, seems worth correcting, since a Polyannish attitude clearly would undermine the credibility of my effort to develop a realistic appraisal of our prospects. I did not argue that "by the time it is possible to change human personality by changing genes, society will have developed methods of preventing abuse of science." On the contrary, I am deeply pessimistic about our tolerance for self-destruction and our limited capacity for focussing on long-range consequences of our actions; but I do not see that impairing the flow of new scientific knowledge will help us to acquire social wisdom.

My article states that "... we shall have to struggle, in a crowded and unsettled world, to prevent a horrifying misuse of science and to preserve and promote the ideal of universal human dignity. If we succeed in developing suitable controls [of techniques available now or in the near future] we can expect to apply them to any later developments in genetics. If we fail-as we may-limitations on the progress of genetics will not help."