This section only covers criticisms of Alexander’s character, his personality traits. For other criticisms see below.
Criticism of personality
Leonard Wolff wrote in his diary that ‘he [Alexander] was a quack but an honest and inspired quack.’
Ludovici in his Religions for Infidels (1961) reported on his first impression of Alexander:
Altogether, I thought him too reminiscent of a showman, and there and then decided to have nothing to do with him.
Neal Katz asserted that Alexander was a compulsive gambler:
F. M. Alexander was a brilliant genius and innovator; he was also a compulsive gambler and a racist. 
Criticism of Alexander not supporting projects
Alexander has been criticised for failing to support other people’s effort to scientific research into the Technique, the efforts to create a society of teachers, and other efforts to promote the Technique
Lulie Westfeldt relates how Alexander pulled out of Miss Lawrence’s project to buy a house in Cromwell Road for the Technique. She also relates Alexander’s objection to a society in which he could be outvoted.
F. P. Jones reported that:
. . . Dewey undertook to ﬁnd foundation support for a scientiﬁc investigation of the Technique. He succeeded in obtaining a commitment from the Rockefeller Foundation, but Alexander set up so many requirements for his own participation that the project fell through.
For criticisms of specific concepts and teachings, see respective individual entries on these.