I've read the customer reviews of this book, and it seems that the underlying points of view (experiences, biases, assumptions, and some presumably objective evidence) largely color the assessment of the author's argument.
I don't fault these reviewers for their critiques one way or the other; they offer some supportive argument for their opinion and are clear in their elocution. But I'd ask, in the interest of balance, that each step into the other's shoes for a while, and try to gain some experience (rather than a mere presumption) of the other side of the mind/brain argument; in short, more rationalists need to meditate, and more meditators need to understand the basic concepts and some related vocabulary of the scientific method. Open minds here, gentlemen, or the effort is useless. And I'm not talking about a gedanken experiment.
But my bet is that people would rather keep their cherished opinions than test them in such a fashion. How convenient.