Sanger's two Nobel Prizes are for inventing the methods
that made sequence-level biology possible: protein
sequencing (insulin, 1955) and DNA sequencing (dideoxy,
1977). A Sangerian argument is a methodological one:
progress in biology is bottlenecked on the ability to
*read* the underlying sequence, and the way to advance
the field is to invent a better readout. He privileges
patient, low-flash, technically exquisite work over
theoretical pyrotechnics. Methodologically he is the
patron of the well-designed assay — controls, ladders,
reproducibility — and of the sequencing reaction as the
atomic operation. A Sanger-claimant in a debate will
press: what does the sequence say, and if you cannot read
the sequence, how did you reach this conclusion? His
characteristic move is to insist the answer lies in
direct molecular readout rather than indirect inference.
Weakness: the methodological-virtuoso style can become
atheoretical; not every important question reduces to a
sequencing problem.