Those that comment believe Hacking has done a good job. Extremists, he says, are rare in either camp. Similarly the illustrative quotes chosen here are merely those the complete review subjectively believes represent the tenor and judgment of the review as a whole. I want a better understanding of how they disagree, and why, perhaps, the twain shall never meet. Hacking properly focusses on definitions, a source of many of the problems underlying the arguments regarding constructionism.
Various authors make various claims, using a variety of premises, definitions, and methods.
Andrew Pickering's seminal 1984 text, Constructing Quarks , serves as an excellent example of the misunderstandings prevalent in the debate. Hacking argues that aspects of the notion of social construction are obviously valid. Historical and cultural settings have an obvious effect on what is discovered, how it is discovered, as well as the interpretation of subjects, for example. However, Hacking also emphasizes that underlying scientific truths do exist. Having laid down the theoretical groundwork, Hacking then presents several examples of the application of the idea of social construction.