Blog #8

I explored the obituary of one of the leading minds in biology during the twentieth century, Francis Crick. Within this passage, I gained a small glimpse into Crick’s lifetime through the eyes of Charles F. Stevens, who collaborated with Crick on a plethora of projects within the Salk Institute. In explaining Crick’s discovery of not only DNA’s helical structure, but also of the role of RNA and amino acids in the process, Stevens reveals small yet significant details of Crick’s virtues as a scientist. In particular, he elaborates the atmosphere of the scientific community of the 1950s by noting that interests were primarily stemming from obtaining goods, which made science “fun” as it was not driven by funding (Stevens 846). Stevens paints Crick’s persona as a determined and logical individual, who was not afraid to ask the stir the pot and invite controversy and discussion in the field. This attribute is a significant practice, as I believe it contributes towards his success as a scientist.

Furthermore, his obituary drew many parallels to others within this field, most notably the information gleaned from both Franklin and Darwin. Like both of these scientists, Stevens also reveals the influence of religion–in this case, the lack thereof–it had on Crick’s approach towards his research. In the discovery of DNA, Crick also had a motive that stretched beyond making a contribution to the natural sciences; he wanted to ensure that these phenomena could be purely justified using chemistry/physical reasoning, consequently supporting his atheist viewpoint. This perspective is significant as this researcher strived to combine his personal views with his research; this is a stark contrast from what we have gleaned from Darwin’s autobiography, as he slowly but surely made a split from his religious orthodox beliefs to purely focus and dedicate his life to science. I believe that Crick’s unique perspective offers an explanation for his scientific virtues as well. Within this passage, he strives to provide logical reasoning towards his studies, and in the process illustrates his virtues of openness and sympathy. In his research, he strived to include and educate other researchers in the process, which was his way of making a contribution.  Within this passage, Stevens notes how Crick waited for other members of his team to show and observe his DNA model before he proceed on to the next step. As mentioned in Chapter 3 of Pennock’s book, actions encouraging openness and honesty illustrated by scientists further depict the implementation of these dispositions in practice.

Furthermore, while reading this obituary, I grew to realize certain aspects highlighted of Crick’s life mirrors practices of Nichomachean ethics. As an outsider peering into a brief synopsis of a scientist’s life, I strongly believe that Crick’s work within this field illustrated how well he flourished or accomplished “eudaimonia” during his life. This level of achievement is clearly depicted in the determination and other previously mentioned “ergons” or characteristic activities that Crick displayed, all while piecing together what would be the blueprint for all life forms.