Franklin's approach to the DNA problem was painstaking and methodical. She clearly eschewed guesswork. Watson and Crick, on the other hand, did no labor intensive experiments, ventured many guesses about the DNA structure based upon the results of other scientists, and finally triumphed because this informed speculation allowed them to build a model that uniquely conformed to all the known properties of the molecule. Is there anything inherently unethical or of questionable values in the less conventional approach of Watson and Crick?

Question

Drake Reeves

Biology

28 August, 14:55

Franklin's approach to the DNA problem was painstaking and methodical. She clearly eschewed guesswork. Watson and Crick, on the other hand, did no labor intensive experiments, ventured many guesses about the DNA structure based upon the results of other scientists, and finally triumphed because this informed speculation allowed them to build a model that uniquely conformed to all the known properties of the molecule. Is there anything inherently unethical or of questionable values in the less conventional approach of Watson and Crick?

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Edith Carney · Answer 1

Explanation:Yes, what Watson and Crick did was unethical as they did not cite Franklins work in their findings. Instead, they claimed this evidence as a product of their own experiments even though it was not. Also, they used rather devious means to obtain her work. Not only did they not ask her, but they obtained the work deceitfully by stealing it from the database at their institution. They stole her unpublished work without her consent.