I had high hopes for Incognito stemming from the introduction's daunting claim that this book would revolutionize readers' understanding of the human mind. It fails to fulfill its lofty promise, though. Instead of evidence sorely needed to support its thesis, Incognito relies on a nauseatingly vaudevillian writing style. Also, the evidence that is present is occasionally inaccurate. For instance, there's one part in the book where Eagleman confuses classical and operant conditioning – Psychology 101 material. If Eagleman proposes expertise his field, I'm not sure I can trust someone who gets such basic information wrong.
The book is a decent starting point for learning about the subconscious mind, but don't trust this secondary source to get it right. Go read Ramachandran and the other sources it references for yourself.