The Double Helix Research Paper
The History of the Double Helix
In our study of the sociology of science, reading James Watson's account of the discovery of the structure of DNA in The Double Helix gives us an insight into how science works as a "collective activity." To illustrate how the norms of science work through this description of events I chose specifically to look at the system of hierarchy among the scientists, how the scientists share information between labs, and how credit is allocated when the findings are published. By looking at these three topics and also comparing them to Robert Merton's Ethos of Science, I will be showing the inner trappings of how the society of scientists functions. In the scientific community during the 1950's, there was a definite hierarchical system of power and prestige …show more content…
Because Watson and Crick were the ones who lead the research to answer the DNA problem, they were awarded credit for the discovery even though there were many other scientists who contributed their skills and findings to the discovery. After Maurice and Rosalind Franklin, another scientist at Maurice's lab, read the paper that was to be sent to Nature, they objected that a scientist in their lab, referred to as Fraser, needed to be referenced because he "had considered hydrogen-bonded bases prior to [their] work." (128) Even if a scientist did not get equal credit for a discovery, they were given credit as far as the information that they contributed goes. A big exception in the case of giving out due recognition in the history of The Double Helix is that Rosalind's contribution to the discovery was not acknowledged nearly as much as it should have been, most likely because of the fact that she was a woman and science was a boy's club at the
In our study of the sociology of science, reading James Watson's account of the discovery of the structure of DNA in The Double Helix gives us an insight into how science works as a "collective activity." To illustrate how the norms of science work through this description of events I chose specifically to look at the system of hierarchy among the scientists, how the scientists share information between labs, and how credit is allocated when the findings are published. By looking at these three topics and also comparing them to Robert Merton's Ethos of Science, I will be showing the inner trappings of how the society of scientists functions. In the scientific community during the 1950's, there was a definite hierarchical system of power and prestige …show more content…
Because Watson and Crick were the ones who lead the research to answer the DNA problem, they were awarded credit for the discovery even though there were many other scientists who contributed their skills and findings to the discovery. After Maurice and Rosalind Franklin, another scientist at Maurice's lab, read the paper that was to be sent to Nature, they objected that a scientist in their lab, referred to as Fraser, needed to be referenced because he "had considered hydrogen-bonded bases prior to [their] work." (128) Even if a scientist did not get equal credit for a discovery, they were given credit as far as the information that they contributed goes. A big exception in the case of giving out due recognition in the history of The Double Helix is that Rosalind's contribution to the discovery was not acknowledged nearly as much as it should have been, most likely because of the fact that she was a woman and science was a boy's club at the