[.ca] The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate ... (ISBN 074324785X)

From Amazon.com:
Of course we can never really answer the question of whether God exists. And of course it would have been highly unlikely for Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis to discuss this question in person, considering that they were born in different countries and a generation apart. Nonetheless, The Question of God allows readers to listen in on one of the most articulate debates possible by creating a virtual meeting of Freud and Lewis. For the past 25 years, Armand M. Nicholi has taught a similar course at Harvard, where he compares Freud's atheist-based reasoning against the atheist-turned-believer C.S. Lewis. Both men were considered brilliant, highly educated thinkers who profoundly influenced 20th-century thought. And both men presented compelling arguments for and against the existence of God. At the core is Freud's assertion that God is a figment of the imagination (more accurately, God is an outcome of our deep-seated need for protection, stemming from the helplessness of early childhood). Lewis, on the other hand, did not see the belief in a higher power as a childish need for comfort. In fact, he wrote, "rendering back one's will which we have so long claimed for our own, is, in itself, extremely painful. To surrender a self-will inflamed and swollen with years of usurpation is a kind of death." Nicholi never take sides. Instead he gives both men a chance to eloquently answer the big questions of humanity: why is there suffering? What should be our guiding belief? How do we form a moral compass? Surprisingly, this debate turns out to be a fascinating page-turner, with most of the credit going to Nicholi. Because he understands these men's arguments so well and respects their beliefs so thoroughly, believers could begin to have doubts and atheists could start to wonder. Regardless of where you ultimately land on the question of God, this stellar book will deeply enrich your understanding of humanity. --Gail Hudson

Not an introduction to Freud:
This book might give the misleading impression that Sigmund Freud wrote a great deal about religious questions. In truth, apart from a single volume - "The Future of an Illusion," which directly attacks religious belief - Freud's few references to religion are off-hand and of secondary importance to the books in which they appear. This creates a real weakness in Nicholi's approach, because Freud provides much less 'ammo' for a religious debate than Lewis does. Freud might have produced much stronger arguments if he had taken the question of God directly in hand more often. Lewis provides not only fuller arguments, but more delicately shaded arguments. If this is your only exposure to Freud, by the way, don't permit yourself to believe that you've 'read Freud'. This does not constitute an introduction to Freudian ideas. Freud's achievement lies in another field, and I'm surprised that he's evoked so often in religious contexts.

Not a Good Balance:
I am a devout Christian disciple and a huge fan of C.S. Lewis; in fact, I might call him my idol. However, I have to say that the composition of this book, while entertaining, immediately seems unbalanced. If this book were taken as truth, one would HAVE to be persuaded in Lewis's direction. The problem I had with this book though is rooted in the obviously fragmented image of Freud and the real-life Freud. Now understand that I have had no prior knowledge of Freud before this book. How could the painted picture of Freud by Nicholi be representative of the man who changed modern psychology? If the man Nicholi portrays is to be believed, you would immediately have to discredit everything Freud stood for. History, Science, and Medicine have all credited Freud with novel breakthroughs and while knowing nothing about him I would have to say that based on these sources, his accomplishments must have been valid. That isn't to say that he didn't have his flaws. Unfortunately, this book points out ALL of Freud's flaws while making Lewis to be the innocent saint. While Lewis is my idol and I look up to him in almost every aspect of life, I must remind myself that he was human too and that his writings did not portray his faults. Anybody with a fleck of intelligence will see that this book is not balanced. As one of the reviewers noted, Freud did not concentrate his focus on religion which leaves Lewis with more ammunition. But for anyone who has read Lewis, you will already know that he even speaks about this with regards to himself and Freud. To paraphrase, Lewis says "I do not claim any professionalism as far as the psychoanalyst and leave their work to them; I am only a layman in the matter. So too should those such as Freud stick to what they do best: psychoanalyze, and leave the theology to those who specialize in it." Which apparently is what Freud did anyway.m

Fascinating Reading:
Armand Nicholi teaches a college course comparing the philosphies of C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud--their approaches to God, love, etc., all as revealed in the title of this wonderfully interesting book. Professor Nicholi has taken the course and turned it into this very readable book. Although they probably never met, Nicholi has constructed a dialogue or debate--Lewis v. Freud. I will tell you straight out, Lewis clearly has the upper hand in this book, but that is probably more of a function of his surviving Freud and respoding to his writings, and Nicholi's own biases. That does not detract at all from this fascinating book. I think anyone interested in the question of God and the importance of religion in contemporary society will find this book interesting and compelling reading. Much of the background material may be repetitive to those who know much of the lives of these two men, but for anyone even mildly curious about these two men, this book should be a great place to start.

Enjoyable Read:
I enjoyed the format of this book. Nicholi sets up a number of big issues (God, ethics: objective or subjective?, sex, love, etc...) and lays out the views of Freud and Lewis, respectively. Freud is the ultimate materialist, reductionist, etc.. and Lewis is a theist and so it is an interesting contrast. The author sides with Lewis and this is evident at certain points in the text. So, it's not completely balanced but I felt like Freud got a fair hearing (and I am an atheist). I think that there is truth in both positions and that there can be a naturalistic, non theistic, synthesis. Lewis might actually win this debate, as far as I am concerned, but that doesn't make me a theist since I think that the non theis position can get a better representation than by Freud. Anyways, the stuff on sex, love, the existence of God, and the background information on each of these intersting figures life was a fun read. It's not especially deep or comprehensive but it's a good starting point for some big issues. Greg Feirman (...)

Bias in the Eye of the Beholder:
I find it interesting to see such a wide assortment of takes on Nicholi's alleged bias in this book. I am of the non-believer persuasion and I thought Nicholi did a great job of keeping things very balanced, but an atheist colleague of mine, to whom I recommended the book, said he came away from the book feeling that Freud had the stronger voice in the book. So I guess what one must keep in mind is that on such a powerful topic, it is hard for any of us, whether writer or reader, to keep a straight face. Our experiences and our own opinions necessarily taint how we view the author's presentation.