Fabrefactum publishes works that reveal the means by which social factors contribute to the production of scientific facts and technological artifacts. Multidisciplinary in its outlook, Fabrefactum welcomes works from a broad range of disciplines such as sociology, philosophy, history, anthropology, political science, economics, psychology and education.

Studies of scientific controversies and of the social construction of technology describe the day-to-day work of ‘doing’ science and technology in laboratories and companies. They also shed light on the abilities and knowledge of scientists, technicians and users who build and sustain scientific facts and artifacts. Social studies of science and technology challenge the canonical models of science and technology that neglect the empirical knowledge and practical skills of the social actors, experience-based intuitions, tacit knowledge and the value judgments implicit in any human achievement.

 “Scientific truths” and “technological benchmarks” are always created in a social context: what works is always judged in relation to the needs of a particular group or community and may seem quite different when judged from another perspective. In a scientific or technological controversy, ‘closure’ is only achieved when the victorious group is able to stabilize both the natural and the social worlds and impose a dominant paradigm. Studies of how such controversies are “closed” illustrate how once contingent knowledge and practice become reified as the inevitable outcome of scientific and technological progress. In this respect, at least, there are no crucial differences between the production of scientific facts in social sciences and in natural sciences.

Fabrefactum publications examine how knowledge is agreed, disputed, modified, and transmitted. The production of new knowledge is the production of new social agreements with regard to what should be considered as “right” or “wrong”. This means acknowledging the cognitive and subjective aspects of scientific practice, and the tacit knowledge of all social actors involved, be they scientists, technologists or citizens who possess specialized knowledge. The goal is to question the myths of science and technology without denying the importance of specialized knowledge.

Fabrefactum publications also address long-standing debates about the nature of human work and its replacement by machines, in particular the limits and possibilities of artificial intelligence and expert systems. In practical terms, they contribute to the project of activity-oriented technologies by showing the role of the human beings in making the routine use, updating and maintenance of technology possible. Socialization and immersion in “forms of life” become the main points in technology transfer and management of tacit knowledge.

Understanding the social nature of scientific and technological knowledge affects other realms of life. Demystifying science removes the authority and power coming from a supposed privileged access to absolute reality. Room is thus made for individuals who have “experience-based expertise”, but not necessarily academic qualifications, to contribute to the design of public policies. Public engagement in scientific and technological matters gains epistemic as well as political value. These changes give rise to a new challenge: how to define the criteria for inclusion, exclusion, and contribution of each social group – an even sharper problem when an unresolved controversy is concerned.

Finally, the works published by Fabrefactum aim at transforming science education and public understanding about science. Canonical science sustains itself on the myth of an infallible scientific method, teaching that “scientific truth” results from the application of an impersonal and objective scientific method which novices must learn to appreciate and apply. Whilst not denying the importance of this attitude as an aspiration, the social studies of science show that this is not a faithful description of how science and technology are produced. Teaching science to students can only be improved if traditional ideas are complemented by an understanding of the ways in which scientific and technological controversies emerge, are closed and reopened.

Understanding science and technology as social institutions – thus giving rise to alternative proposals – is an essential prerequisite for the development of an effective and critical dialogue among science, technology and society. Fabrefactum hopes, through its works, to contribute to this movement.