I think I can lay a logical frame over some of the author’s points here. The author draws on a logical fallacy sometimes called “affirming the consequent” or the “converse error.” Put another way, the author is trying to tell us that A implies B does NOT mean B implies A. The author suggested that all diseases (A) may be biological (B), but not all things biological are diseases. The bigger example is not to confuse performance and ability. I can reword that to say low ability may lead to low performance, but low performance does not necessarily reflect low ability. My book, The Power of Context, highlights this point of logic in helping readers not to read too much into academic performance outcomes, at-work behavior, nonverbal expressions, and even word choices. As the author points out, low performance (like other observable actions) can be caused by multiple potential factors, including many from an external context.