Chow tries to show that for the case of hard-core experimentation, the criticisms of NHST are not valid. Even if one is willing to adopt his epistemological ideology, several shortcomings of NHST remain. We argue for a flexible and thoughtful application of statistical tools (including significance tests) instead of a ritualized statistical catechism that relies on the magic of α.

Current evidence shows that “talent” is an unreliable concept, but the competing concept of “expertise” suffers from inadequacies too: its research designs are structurally incomplete (talent and training are confounded) and individual factors are largely ignored. The deliberate practice account should be advanced by investigating in more detail the motivational and individual determinants of successful practice.

Although the critique of disputable norms is largely legitimate in the cognitive realm, the role of social norms is a different one. Darley, Zimbardo, Milgram, and CNN have compellingly demonstrated that humans are not always humane. But the very cognitive ability to distinguish between “is” and “ought” shows that there is behavioral plasticity, and space for education, inoculation, and learning.