The Question of God: Library Edition

Rating:
Summary: Christian propaganda disguised as scholarship
Review: A very dear friend who disapproves of my atheism sent me THE QUESTON OF GOD -- from Amazon, in fact -- in the hope that it would convert me to Christianity. Alas, it has had the reverse effect. The book pretends to be a dispassionate examination of the lives and religious (or irreligious) views of Sigmund Freud and C. S. Lewis, the one a lifelong atheist, the other someone who flirted with atheism during his youth but returned to Christianity. In reality, however, the book is thinly disguised Christian propaganda, so relentlessly manipulative and annoyingly tendentious, so eager to win us over to Jesus, chapter after chapter, that its very one-sidedness had me rooting for Freud -- and respecting him all the more for his courage, his humility, and his often self-lacerating honesty -- each time the author attempted to score points off him. Armand Nicholi is a professor of psychology who writes more like a minister or priest. (He's convinced, for example, that the root of all failed relationships is our failed relationship with God,) He may be genuinely well-intentioned -- most missionaries are, I suppose -- but it's hard to forgive him for setting himself up as an even-handed explicator of these two men's philosophies, making a show of carefully weighing one against the other on a variety of topics, when in fact -- like those notorious Soviet-bloc Olympic judges back in the days of the Cold War -- he is unfailingly biased toward his favorite (Lewis) and always has his finger on the scale.

The very terms Nicholi uses in presenting Freud's and Lewis's views are loaded ones: Freud -- whom Nicholi treats with condescension masquerading as sympathy -- is always admitting, acknowledging, confessing, conceding, realizing himself guilty of some inconsistency or self-contradiction, whereas Lewis -- who, as the younger man, always gets the last word -- is forever pointing out, noting, observing, explaining, and reminding us. (Lewis, whatever one thinks of his beliefs, wrote like an angel; I've enjoyed a number of his books, even if I find his theology preposterous. But here, quoted piecemeal by Nicholi and at other times paraphrased, Lewis comes off as disagreeably smug; and -- though it may sound paradoxical -- when Lewis writes about how he finally gave up the fight and surrendered himself to the Lord, his delight in his own self-abasement sounds positively creepy.)

Nicholi's modes of argument are no less annoying. In order to buttress his case, at least four times in the course of the book he cites a Gallup poll which found that an enormous majority of Americans are religious. (The last time I looked, a majority also believed in ghosts and ESP, and close to half believe in UFOs -- but so what?) Nicholi also resorts to the what's-in-it-for-me? argument: We're informed that Lewis's career blossomed when he threw off his foolish atheism and returned to God; he was happier than the frequently depressed Freud; he was less consumed with ambition; he had (this is a real stretch, from what I know of Lewis) a more satisfying sex life; with his rosy anticipation of an eternal afterlife, he didn't suffer, as Freud did, from a fear of death. (To which one might respond: Duh! If religion isn't about assuaging our fear of death, what good is it?) All these arguments speak to the practical benefits of being a believer: They're akin to the benefits of Prozac or of meditation or of joining a health club, but they don't tell us anything about the truth or foolishness of the belief itself -- the "Question of God" of the title. Because Lewis was genial and Freud could be quarrelsome (though Nicholi delights in taking Freud's lifelong modesty and self-criticism, as expressed in letters and memoirs, as the whole truth), does it follow that what Lewis believed was true and that Freud was mistaken? Always eager to point out flaws in Freud's personality, Nicholi seems to hold him vaguely responsible for the failure of Freud's friendship with his onetime disciple Jung, but he never mentions Jung's jealousy or his accommodation, when it suited him, to the Nazis. Finally -- and perhaps I shouldn't hold this against him, but I find this sort of "holy" style a turnoff -- Nicholi is so devout that he'll capitalize not just He and His in relation to God and Jesus, but other words as well, e.g. "the Object of his faith." It's clear, from such choices, that Nicholi is a pious man, even if, like his hero, C. S. Lewis, his piety sometimes looks a lot like smugness.

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Reading
Review: 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.

Rating:
Summary: Enjoyable Read
Review: 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 (...)

Rating:
Summary: Lucid Account of Theism vs. Atheism May Be Stacked
Review: Some reviewers have criticized the author Nicholi for "stacking the deck" in favor of C.S. Lewis over Freud, a sort of hidden tactic Nicholi, who professes to be "neutral," employs. They may be right since Lewis looks like the winner here. Lewis finds peace, love, transformation, and a good-hearted rectitude after his conversion. In contrast, Freud comes across as paranoid to all religion, especially Christianity, which Nicholi points out, was for Freud the cause of much anti-semitism he suffered. Also Freud comes across as a cranky, pompous man ranting and raving against God to his grave, a man who, for being an atheist, sure devotes a lot of energy to this God he does not believe in. Finally, Nicholi shows how Freud constantly contradicts himself when it comes to God. He is a man who embraces a conservative Moral Law for himself (though he professes a sort of hedonism for others), for example. So indeed perhaps there is a hidden subtext and/or agenda here. I don't know. The truth of it is, Nicholi has written a real page-turner here, his account lucid and even suspensful. It's rare that an author can create this effect with argumentation and dialectical reasoning.