This book draws from a wide range of disciplines to cherry pick little pieces that bolster the pre-existing points he wants to make. To anyone unfamiliar with the disciplines and research he bases his arguments on, the use of such a range of information gives the impression of intelligent argument, but the reality is that he nearly universally misrepresents the viewpoints of those he disagrees with, and gives carefully chosen specific examples from a field of thought, as though that represents the agreed upon thinking in that field. There are more straw men built and torn down in this book than in any I can recall reading.
This would be a good book for one thing only, and that is to use in a course teaching logic and the deconstructing of arguments.