ABSTRACT
Carlson and Widaman by no means come across as antagonists of Eysenck. Their few criticisms and the many questions they raise seem to me to be a highly judicious and thoughtful selection of the issues that would arise from a critical discussion of Eysenck's work on intelligence by any group of technically qualified and scientifically motivated scholars. It is good commentary in that it provokes thoughtful reaction and appreciation of the need for further clarification or theoretical and empirical development of Eysenck's ideas about intelligence and its many manifestations. In this respect, some of the points made by Carlson and Widaman seem to me much more central than others. I will here try to indicate briefly what seem to me to be the least crucial issues and the most important issues they raise.
