Conversation so far:
Did Bruno Latour work in hte laboratory?
In the laboratory, Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar observed that a typical experiment produces only inconclusive data that is attributed to failure of the apparatus or experimental method.
What was Bruno Latour' book, Laboratory Life about?
Bruno Latour's Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts is about the field of science studies presents an anthropological study of Roger Guillemin's scientific laboratory at the Salk Institute.
Are there any other interesting aspects about Bruno Latour's Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts besides what it is about?
This early work argued that naïve descriptions of the scientific method, in which theories stand or fall on the outcome of a single experiment, are inconsistent with actual laboratory practice.
How was Bruno Latour's work in Laboratory Life received?
Some of Latour's position and findings in this era provoked vehement rebuttals.
Who was provoked with rebuttals about Latour's findings in Laboratory Life?
Gross and Leavitt argue that Latour's position becomes absurd when applied to non-scientific contexts:
Did Bruno Latour have a comeback for these rebuttals?
Was there anyone who had a rebuttal against Bruno Latour's work?
Philosopher John Searle argues that Latour's extreme social constructivist position is seriously flawed on several points, and furthermore has inadvertently comical results.

Question: What other things did he discover with his works in the laboratory?
Self-contained rewrite: What other things did Bruno Latour discover with his works in Laboratory Life?