I didn't see a rebuttal which substantially affected his argument. Most of it was the typical bandwagoning against his pop-style storytelling method. Very few

I didn't see a rebuttal which substantially affected his argument. Most of it was the typical bandwagoning against his pop-style storytelling method. Very few disputes of fact. If Gladwell is guilty of anything it is to place a finely tuned modernly biased reference frame onto past events that did not/could not exist at the time but do become increasingly visible with the benefit of hind sight in a way that helps readers connect today with lessons from the past. Call that inauthentic if you will, but I think there are valuable insights to be gained and am glad he reaches such a wide audience in spite of the intellectual backlashing.