Persson's (2012a) article offers a timely contribution to the science of giftedness through questioning the validity of research emerging from within this paradigm. Using evidence from a number of disciplines he demonstrates that what is regarded as gifted behaviour in one culture could be regarded as quite ordinary within another. He therefore argues that theories and models of giftedness cannot easily be transported from one cultural domain and used in another without questions of validity arising. At the start of the article he notes two main obstacles researchers need to overcome in order to develop knowledge that takes into account cultural variation. These being: (1) epistemological stance; and (2) the emergence of an increasingly influential global economy that is insensitive to cultural variation. To these barriers the authors add a third, only implicitly discussed within the article, that of ignoring ontology. To respond to Persson's (2012a) excellent work on cultural bias the authors first outline their interpretation of his argument and contribution before briefly sketching an additional route to the development of giftedness research, that of taking ontology seriously.