Customer Reviews

The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life

5 star:		(64)
4 star:		(28)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(13)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

I thoroughly enjoyed exploring both the thoughts of Freud and Lewis through Dr. Nicholi's summary in this book. People who are not familiar with the writings of Lewis or Freud (or both) will find this a very readable primer on their basic worldviews.

I confess that I am puzzled at those who accuse Nicholi of "stacking the deck" in favor of Lewis, or merely feigning objectivity while actually casting Freud in a poor light. The thinly veiled assertion seems to be that Freud was actually very different than he is made out to be in this book, and that Nicholi either consciously or unconsciously skews Freud's real positions and ideas. I found that far from the truth.

First, Nicholi readily acknowledges that no one is truly objective and dispassionate, particularly on such fundamental questions as the meaning of life and existence of God. But I believe he does an excellent job of not injecting his own bias into the equation. Second, Nicholi takes pains to point out many of the (rather substantial) contributions Freud has made to modern thought, particularly in his field of psychoanalysis. Finally, Nicholi's text is historical. Where people may have encountered frustration (particularly supporters or Freud's wordlview) is when Nicholi attempts to look at the actual EFFECT of each man's worldview on his life; a perfectly appropriate tactic given the goal of the book. Nicholi cites nothing but historically verifiable facts about these two men. Whether one believes in God or not, the rather dramatic nature of Lewis' conversion is undeniable -- one may debate the cause(s) of his change, but not the existence of the change. The same holds true for the despair and lonliness that Freud freely acknowledges experiencing in heavy doses. If Nicholi omitted important information about Freud, then critique him as a poor historian and offer factual backup. But do not simply react against the picture he paints merely because of how it looks.

I, for one, am categorically not an adherent to Freud's worldview. But I actually came away from Nicholi's book feeling like I now understand and appreciate Freud far more than I did before.

Quite simply, The Question of God is an exceptional book. Where to start? Dr. Nicholi's basic premise is ingenious: compare and contrast the material (Atheistic) wordview of Sigmund Freud with the spiritual (Faith-based) worldview of C.S. Lewis. The result is an exceptional book that goes straight to the heart of life and living: Is there a God? Is death our only destiny? How can we/should we enjoy life? Answers to these and other life and death (literally) questions are addressed through Dr. Nicholi's remarkable and successful effort.

Dr. Nicholi's writing style is lucid, learned and accessible. Other Amazon.com critiques of his writing style as merely being "Freud says this, but Lewis says that" simply do not hold water. Dr. Nicholi injects his text on Freud and Lewis with meticulous direct quotes from each man's writings, both public and personal, plus accounts from others who knew Freud or Lewis. Dr. Nicholi's writing succeeds on all levels: fairness (Dr. Nicholi's truly unbiased prose is to be commended), lucidity, and captivation: as the favorable comments from readers on the back cover notes, I too had a hard time putting this book down.

At least one earlier Amazon reviewer dismissed the book because Lewis, being a generation after Freud, always gets the last word, so the book's premise is hopelessly flawed. On the contrary, while Dr. Nicholi not only notes in the Prologue that Freud had no chance to rebut Lewis directly, he nevertheless anticipated some spiritual worldview arguements made by Lewis, and are so noted by Dr. Nicholi.

Finally, still other reviewers dismissed C.S. Lewis as just another "apologetic" and not a very good one. Ridiculous! I was aware of Lewis' Christianity writings (had not yet read them) but was surprised to realize that Lewis did indeed bring 'authority' to his critical reading of the Bible: his vast education in mythology, and ability to read Greek. Prior to this book, I had simply assumed Lewis was just a Max Lucado or Lee Strobel of an earlier era. Frankly, I very much dislike "Christian inspiration" books that seem to be written only to the "God says it, I believe it, that settles it" type of Christian, but no one else. I was pleasantly surprised to realize Lewis is not part of that "preaching to the choir" genre, but rather a leader in framing faith based on reason. I suggest non-believing and/or uncertain readers will find Lewis' reasoning intellectually stimulating and strong.

Quite frankly, the above raps against the book by some other reviewers puzzled me, as if reviewers were looking for a reason to disqualify this book and dismiss it out of hand. To those reviewers I wish to simply remind them of Dr. Nicholi's simple and quite reasonable request of the reader in the Prologue: he quotes Sir Francis Bacon (I'm quoting from memory): "Read not to contradict, but to weigh and consider." If you are willing to do this, your effort will repay you well.

Which brings up a key point: if you are a non-believer (as I have been), be willing to read this book with an open mind. Weigh and consider. Rest assured, this exceptional, fair book is worthy of your effort to do so. You will be glad you did. If you feel you are in the category of non-believer or uncertain or believe you must commit intellectual suicide to be a Christian, and you have been disappointed by weak "preach to the choir" books like Strobel's vapid "The Case for Faith," you owe it to yourself to read this finely executed, genuinely intellectual and thoughtful work on this important subject; no, make that the most important of all subjects.

Prior to reading this book I knew very little about Sigmund Freud, and already quite a bit about C.S. Lewis. To be honest, my initial interest in purchasing and reading the book was based on my shameless/addictive quest to own and read everything I possibly can, about LEWIS.
Having said that though, I am glad to have learned so much about Freud in the process. I think that the author does a good job of presenting the viewpoints of each man, with respect to their opinions on such topics as Creation, Conscience, Religious Conversion, Happiness, Sex, Love, Pain, and Death.
Big issues. Worthy of big, deeply felt convictions. And each man had them.
So many reviewers here have speculated that the author does not write this book from a disinterested stance, that he in fact, favors Lewis, and presents him as being a more consistent and (for lack of a better word) healthy individual. I agree that Lewis does come off as being such. But what is most important to me (as a reader of the information) is... is it TRUE? Is this slant toward Lewis as a more self-actualized person fair? Or is it fabricated? Is it manufactured? Is Lewis deliberately favored?
Hmmm...
Dr. Nicholi has studied the philosophical writings of both men for over twenty-five years, and teaches a course at Harvard based on an examination of these two worldviews. Somehow, I do not imagine this present book as some latent "hate-on" for Freud finally making itself known in printed form. It did not appear that way for me, although yes, Lewis does come across as being someone who lived a more personally fulfilled, whole life.
I believe that the quotation marks speak for themselves. This is a well-researched book, I do not feel that Dr. Nicholi is really putting words or ideas INTO the mouth and mind of either figure. Over thirty-five pages of endnotes! In my opinion, this is one of those "let the chips fall where they may" type things!
As is stated in the Prologue, the philosophical speculations (the worldviews, if you will) of these two men are not at all ambiguous. "One of them begins with the basic premise that God does not exist, the other with the premise that He does. They are, therefore, mutually exclusive - if one is right, the other must be wrong. Does it really make any difference to know which one is which? Both Freud and Lewis thought so. They spent a good portion of their lives exploring these issues, repeatedly asking the the question 'Is it true?'"

Both men are presented as having troubled childhoods... both being touched with profound losses, alienations, disillusionments, etc. One of the main things that becomes clear in this book is that one of these men discovered the possibility of transcending this pain and disconnectedness experienced in childhood, and the other, quite frankly, did not.
Neither of them were ever perfect, and neither of them were ever perfect[ed]. Both men made great contributions to the fields for which they were formally trained (English Literature / Psychology)... yet both dabbled in these philosophical areas where they each OUGHT to have been out of their depth. This is what makes them so interesting to us.

My one criticism of TQOG is that there is a bit too much repetition of previously mentioned actual stories and/or quotes. But overall, I was impressed with the wealth of information and the dovetailing of ideas. It really IS as though these dudes are debating. I agree with Peter Kreeft, who said "It is as exciting as a novel, and we must supply the ending."

The idea of paralleling Lewis' and Freud's thoughts and writings is intriguing, to say the least. I've long been a fan of C.S. Lewis' fiction, as well as his cerebral takes on the Christian message. I'm not as familiar with Freud, but his basic ideas and verbage are so much a part of our culture that his influence cannot be denied. (In fact, I did get to visit his home and office in Vienna. A visit well worth taking, if you ever have the chance.)

Nicholi's knowledge of his subjects is considerable. He puts forth the arguments of both men in a readable and concise manner, never failing to deepen our own knowledge. His writing is bright and well conceived. If, however, you expect pure objectivism here (is such a thing possible?), you might be disappointed. Nicholi's own views come to the front, although he makes a game attempt to keep all material within the writings of his two debaters. Personally, I agree with Nicholi's convictions and, in this age of political correctness, admired his courage to make them apparent. He highlights good and bad in both men's lives, and contradictions in their own beliefs. Yes, he seems to lean toward Lewis' views on God and faith, but he never does so by berating or undermining Freud's teachings. If you, like myself, are looking for deeper understanding of either man's thoughts, you will find it here. Just be warned that Nicholi, after his many years of studying and teaching this subject, has come to his own convictions and makes them clear. I suppose we, even by reading this book, seek to strengthen or challenge or own convictions as well.

I found the sections on love and sex particularly insightful, with deep insights from both Freud and Lewis. It's actually amazing how often their ideas overlap, with the difference being their belief in a moral or materialistic universe. I was prone to underline entire paragraphs at a time.

Lewis vs. Freud. This is the match of the century. The tantalizing thought that these two giants may well have met before Freud's death is material for a worthy novelist. Meanwhile, we are left with Nicholi's non-fiction work...and it's a work worthy of its cover price.

I really enjoyed reading this clearly-written, extensively documented book on two of the twentieth century's greatest thinkers. Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis have to be the most articulate representatives of their completely opposite world views. Who would have surmised that their writings and lives would parallel one another so closely in their search to understand God, love, sex, happiness, suffering, death (and the meaning of life as the title says!)?

The author quotes extensively from both, using their works, letters, and the current literature to define, on the one hand Freud's empiricist, scientific view, and on the other C.S. Lewis' spiritual perspective. He devotes an entire chapter to Lewis' remarkable change from die-hard atheist to ardent believer. Through Freud's correspondence, we see the great psychoanalyst as human, struggling with the same issues as Lewis, but ultimately arriving at a completely different conclusion. Nicholi also brings in his own research as well as that of others to shed light on their world views, making them relevant in the here and now.

If you're looking for a lively debate on some central topics, this book is for you!

Professor of psycharity, Dr. Armand M. Nicholi, Jr's book is a brillant look into the ideas and life of two modern icons, Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis. Like the title suggests, the author compares the views and lives of these two men who have, in their own way, contriuted greatly to some of the most common and perplexing issues of all time.

Nicholi takes great pains to remain objective as possible, while admitting his bias. His objectivity is largely intact as he accurately relates the theories and ideas of each person. One should not msitake his form of objectivity for impartiality, a claim he does not make.

This book is very engrossing and reads very easily. The strength of his book is that the author explores how one views the world in relation to how one lives in the world. The author aviods broad brushing statements because he is largely focusing on these two men and not inducing that everyone falls into these catagories, however, as a guide, he does suggest that normally thier is a relation between ones beliefs and life. This is a prima facia position because it stands to reason taht ones views would effect ones practices.

Chapters on hap[piness, sex, love and death are completely engrossing and the book picks up the pace as it towards the end. Further, in the last segenmnets as we read about the last days of Freud and Lewis, we feel for both characters, but we do so differently. Both have greatly influnced their field of study. Both reached beyound the cirles of their fields to have a great impact on other fields of study, and both discussed many of the same topics at length; i.e., sex, love, and death.

In the end, however, one feels compassion for Freud and Lewis, but for Freud, the compassion is felt as loss for a man who left this world in a state of exestential agnst and for Lewis, the sense of loss is selfish, for we want more thoughts and ideas from him. But our compassion reminds the same, for his barriers for love were only opended towards the last years of his life.

In the end, one found "joy" and purpose (Lewis), and the other pain and anguish (Freud). Both insightfully shared their lives with us.

Nicholi's The Question of God illuminates in an extraordinary way how two of the great minds of recent history explored the most intriguing questions in life, perhaps the only ones that really matter. Nicholi sets up a fictional debate of sorts that pits Freud, espousing a secular worldview, against Lewis's spiritual one. The dialogue is riveting. Using excerpts from the volumes of written material the two men produced over their lifetimes, Nicholi skillfully culls passages that give insight into how each man struggled with the "great questions" of life and how each ultimately developed and then embraced his own definition of truth. It's interesting to note other reviews of this book as biased towards Lewis since Nicholi is widely known as being psychoanalytically trained. I found the book the well balanced with the author as adroit facilitator.

One of the most popular courses offered at Harvard University is taught by Armand Nicholi. In it he compares and contrasts the lives and ideas of two significant thinkers: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud. The content of that course comprises the material found in this riveting and incisive book.

Both Lewis and Freud thought deep and wide about many important issues: the meaning and purpose of life, the nature of morality, true happiness, human sexuality, suffering and pain, and the existence of God. On nearly all of these issues the two thinkers came to quite different conclusions. Yet interestingly the two came from somewhat similar backgrounds.

Both men were gifted with formidable intellects and wrote widely. Both suffered significant losses in their early years. Both had conflicts with their fathers. Both had a religious upbringing which they later repudiated. Lewis later abandoned his atheism and converted to Christianity, while Freud remained an atheist.

This book lays out the many profound differences of their two divergent worldviews: the materialistic/naturalistic versus the spiritual/supernatural. One says that this world and all that is in it can be explained solely in terms of the physical, while the other says the physical world is supplemented, explained, and sustained, by the spiritual.

Thus the question of God. Freud was not only a non-believer, but he actively and aggressively attacked theism. Religion, claimed Freud, is for the ignorant and childish. Believers are deluded and primitive, he chided. Following Feuerbach, he argued that the notions of God and the spiritual are simply wish-fulfillments and human projections of inner needs. As such they are illusions and false beliefs. When people become more educated they will abandon such juvenile concepts as the divine and the supernatural.

Lewis sees things quite differently. Many of the demands of the Christian worldview, for example, are not something a person would wish for. The Gospels inform us that followers of Jesus must abandon their own desires and die to self. This is not need-fulfillment but need-rejection.

Indeed, the Christian faith never promises the absence of pain and suffering: quite the opposite. We are told to expect persecution and admonished to take up our cross and follow Jesus. Hardly the stuff of wish-fulfillment.

Moreover, the wish for something may indicate that that thing actually exists. How else do we account for the universal desire for the transcendent? This is more than just projecting childhood images of one's father onto the world at large. This universal hunger indicates a universal reality. As Lewis put it, "If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."

Of course Freud is most widely known for his views on sex. And as in other areas, his thinking differs markedly from Lewis. The views of Freud on human sexuality are well known. In his defense, he seemed more interested in the freedom to speak about sex than to necessarily act on sex, but his views nonetheless have had a lasting, often harmful, impact.

Lewis challenged the idea of Freud that sexual repression can lead to neuroses. Lewis said repression is not the same as suppression. The latter is the conscious control of one's impulses, and a necessary component of civilization. It is the not control of sexuality that is unhealthy, but the lack of control.

And simply being open about our sexuality, or at least our discussion of it, is not the panacea that Freud seemed to suppose. In recent decades we have been embarrassingly open about sexual discussion, but we do not seem the better for it. Instead, out revolution in sexuality has lead to a whole range of problems, from busted marriages and ruined families to sexually transmitted diseases and teen promiscuity.

Not surprisingly, Freud felt that real happiness was primarily tied up in the satisfaction of our sexual needs. Lewis thought otherwise. He felt that happiness will always be elusive if directly sought after. It can be obtained indirectly, as a by-product, if we live our lives in accordance with our design. And we are designed to have a relationship with our creator.

Indeed, argues Lewis, all our attempts to obtain happiness will fail until we realize the primary purpose of our lives: to be in relationship with the Peron who made us. Happiness is only found in God, and God cannot give it apart from himself. So refuse God and you forfeit the path to happiness.

Other areas of difference are explored. Taken together, they provide a very nice contrast between two competing philosophies of life: the materialist vs the spiritual. In short, this book describes the difference of God and the difference he makes. Freud's atheism had a profound effect on all that he thought and wrote about. So too did Lewis's theism. The question is, which worldview best explains the world we find ourselves in, and which one gives us a proper grounding for hope, meaning and a satisfied life?

Nicholi is to be congratulated for taking some of the deep questions about life and living and putting them into this very accessible and readable account. He has made Lewis and Freud come alive, and has presented his readers with a clear contrast in conflicting worldviews.

The question of God is one that all of us must grapple with. And "The Question of God" by Nicholi is a great vehicle for that task.

This is an advance copy of a review to be published in the Summer issue of the Harvard Political Review, available in May online at hpronline.org.

"Whether we realize it or not, all of us possess a worldview. A few years after birth, we all gradually formulate our philosophy of life. Most of us make one of two basic assumptions: we view the universe as a result of random events and life on this planet a matter of chance; or we assume an Intelligence beyond the universe who gives the universe order, and life meaning...Our worldview tells more about us perhaps than any other aspect of our personal history...Nothing has more profound and more far-reaching implications for our lives...Whether we realize it or not, we all embrace some form of either the materialist worldview advocated by [Sigmund] Freud or the spiritual worldview advocated by [C.S.] Lewis."

Today, national policy reforms are crushed into sound bites averaging 7.8 seconds, while neatly-packaged pop religion and consumer-friendly philosophy proliferate book shelves with simplistic, sugar-coated answers to the important questions of life. In this stilted environment, Dr. Armand Nicholi's new book is a breath of fresh air. In The Question of God: C.S. Lewis and Sigmund Freud Debate God, Love, Sex, and the Meaning of Life Nicholi plums the depths of real human life in all of its emotional and academic complexity. Using Lewis and Freud's published works, letters, personal histories, and modern psychology, Nicholi brings together the faithful Oxford don and the skeptical father of psychoanalysis in an intimate and entertaining dialogue.

Nicholi's book is a refreshing contribution to the theism debate. Without ignoring the philosophical arguments, he breaths warmth and relevance into this often cold intellectual debate by investigating the personal testimony of each man's life; how their lives shaped their ideas, and the impact their ideas seemed to have on their lives.

Nicholi, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, has been teaching his phenomenally popular course, "Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis: Two Contrasting Worldviews," at Harvard's College and Medical School for 26 years. "I had the book in mind for the last 25 years," Nicholi told the HPR. Over two decades, Nicholi and course alumni, many of whom are Harvard faculty members, compiled a database brimming over with 10,000 entries of research on Freud, Lewis, and the psychology of religion. Nicholi's prowess as a teacher and a psychiatrist ultimately applied this copious data in this meticulously researched final project. "I wanted it to be clear and simple, but very scholarly. I didn't want a huge tome that only academics would read," he said of the book that just breaks the 200-page mark. The entertaining and accessible text is based on Nicholi's 1998 centennial William Belden Noble Memorial Lectures at Harvard's Memorial Church. Unbeknownst to Nicholi, a friend sent transcripts of the lectures to the Simon and Schuster publishing house, which solicited Nicholi to write the book.

Acknowledging that "their arguments can never prove or disprove the existence of God," Nicholi brings his psychiatric expertise, scientific methodology, and narrative skill to bear in colorfully allowing each man's life to testify alongside his reasoning. "Human beings do not always live what they profess, nor profess what they live," however, Nicholi insists that "their lives...offer sharp commentary on the truth, believability, and utility of their views." Nicholi asks his readers to examine how these men lived out the worldviews they espoused, and whether their lives draw modern readers to emulation or incredulity.

Nicholi focuses his examination on what Freud and Lewis have to say about man's most fundamental desires and fears-happiness, sex, love, pain, and death-and their fulfillment as understood by their respective worldviews. "Many people who are bothered by this book are troubled by the strength of Lewis' worldview-it changed his life and enabled him to function better," said Nicholi. "But all the evidence [in Lewis' life] is supported by well documented medical and psychological research." Confirming the preponderance of modern medical evidence about religious conversion, Lewis, who became a Christian while a professor at Oxford, became professionally, personally, and relationally more satisfied and effective after embracing a personal-as opposed to an inherited or cultural-belief in Christianity. Although Lewis's specific brand of theism is Christian, Nicholi uses him more broadly as a proponent of the "spiritual worldview," which asserts there is meaning behind life and the universe derived from a cosmic Intelligence.

Although Nicholi's examination is entertaining and helpful, one wonders whether a more pluralistic consideration of God and morality might render this distinctively American religious debate irrelevant. However Nicholi asserted that "if you included all worldviews, the book would not be as clear, and the dialectic would not be as strong." But as this text investigates monotheism and atheism, the two most popular belief systems in the West, would it be relevant to those in the East? For Nicholi, "all of the arguments pertaining to the existence of an intelligence beyond the universe are very relevant," irrespective of the cultural context.

One's answer to the "question of God" is fundamental to one's view of the world and one's relation to it, Nicholi asserts. Although they disagree profoundly, Freud and Lewis agree that "basing one's life on an illusion, on a false premise, will make living more difficult. Only the truth can help us confront the harsh realities of life."

Sharing the urgency of his two subjects, Nicholi calls readers to deliberately decide what they believe about God, rather than coast through life with an indeterminate, unexamined position. "We keep ourselves distracted. We rationalize. We tell ourselves we will consider such weighty (and anxiety-provoking) subjects when we are older-when time demands will not be as great...we nurture a `willful blindness' and a `deep-seated hatred of authority'...Perhaps we distract ourselves because looking at our lives confronts us with our lack of meaning, our unhappiness, and our loneliness-and with the difficulty, the fragility, and the unbelievable brevity of life...None of us can tolerate the notion that our worldview may be based on a false premise and, thus, our whole life headed in the wrong direction."

Though the pioneer of psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud and theologian Lewis never met (at least there is no record of such a meeting), the author, a clinical psychiatrist and an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, thought it would be interesting to position Freud's "materialist" views against Lewis's later Christian beliefs -- as well as the effects on their lives. The book grew out of Nicholi's "popular course" at Harvard on the two men's
philosophies.

Nicholi uses letters and the published writings of Lewis and Freud and his own conclusions drawn from their lives to show the differences in a life in which the person chooses faith and belief and the life of someone who chooses not to believe. He traces the courses of their lives in tandem from childhoods, through adulthood, careers, marriages, families and even how they approached death (one of the most fascinating details was what Lewis read right before he died versus what Freud read -- Homer and Les Liaisons Dangereuses for Lewis and Balzac's The Fatal Skin for Freud). The biographical information on both
men is fascinating, and it obviously focuses on the evolution of their belief systems. Both Lewis and Freud were atheists as young men, and the author posits that it was a reaction to authority. While Freud flirted with belief in God as a young man, he adopted a firm stance against the existance of a god.
Lewis, reacting to his unsatisfactory relationship with his father after his mother's death when he was still a school boy, chose atheism for a time, and then had a conversion experience, partly brought about by a long talk with colleagues, including J.R.R. Tolkien.

The book does take a position on the issue and points to faith as a help and support in life's troubles, highlighting the difference in relationships between Lewis and Freud (Lewis had lifelong friendships; Freud's friendships usually came to conflict and ended abruptly) and the way they faced their own deaths (Lewis wrote to a friend, "When you die, look me up ... It IS all rather fun--solemn fun--isn't it" (p. 237). Freud was anxious, depressed and sad about his pending death.)

The book is deeply enjoyable and rewarding, and its portrayal of both Lewis and Freud as complex human beings is unexpectedly touching. It made me want to read more about Lewis, and I have put books about him and his autobiography, as well as his book about the death of his wife Joy (portrayed in the movie "Shadowlands") on my wishlist. As a Christian, I was rewarded by the position of the book, but I don't think atheists would agree. However, regarding both men's life and work, the author makes very clear the contributions each made to our world, including the bearing that Freud's theories have had on things we just accept as true today.