The nature of the book necessitates gross generalizations. It literally could not be anything else.
It's like saying you don't like Expanse because you don't like sci-fi... Okay, but why did you read it if you know you hate sci-fi?
It's like saying you don't like Expanse because you don't like sci-fi... Okay, but why did you read it if you know you hate sci-fi?
If you say so.
I don't think that's a shield against criticism. His treatment of humanism is asinine. In addition to engaging in gross generalizations on the topic, he is - to use your words - "really wrong." Getting the history of modern ideas right seems like it ought to be the easy part with a book like this, particularly if you're content with generalizations.