The paper challenges the view that the major theoretical and methodological issues in the social sciences have been resolved and that positivism provides the only sound basis for research in construction. By examining the relationship between specialist discourses and natural language and Weber's failure to provide a basis for objective causal explanations of social action, it is argued that the kind of theorising that Runeson advocates is at best premature and at worst preempts the achievement of a more rigorous and thorough understanding of construction processes. Reporting some empirical research on the design and construction of reinforced concrete structures, the paper seeks to demonstrate some theoretical methodological and practical implications of an interpretive style of research
