I'm very surprised that people continue to give credence to Kahneman and his work. Is it not widely known at this point that he is a first-rate bullshit artist?
It isn't because he is not. One line of research he endorsed, priming, has failed to stand up to rigorous attempts at replication. Nearly every other aspect of behavioral economics he brought to the forefront remains intact and important.
If there are any counter points or widely known objections to his work, I’d be interested to learn more. Which body of work were you thinking of? Not being snarky, genuinely curious.
For what it is worth, priming isn't really K's work. System 1 and System 2 isn't even unique to him.
See also, httpp://www.decisionsciencenews.com/2012/10/05/kahneman-on-the-storm-of-doubts-surrounding-social-priming-research/