I couldn’t even finish this book because the author’s extremely apparent bias was getting in the way of everything (despite his claim in the introduction that this is an “objective and dispassionate” venture). The premise is intriguing but I quickly realized that the way it’s set up here is all wrong. First of all, Freud discusses religion where Lewis discusses Christianity. Nicholi’s proposal that these are equivalent topics says all you need to know about where he’s coming from. Secondly, Lewis is set up to always have the last word in this “debate,” simply because Freud died first. Lewis read and responded to Freud’s work, and if Freud had had the same opportunity, I’m sure he would have had his own responses to Lewis’ counterpoints. Actually, he probably would have said “who the fuck are you? I’m Sigmund Freud, get the fuck out of here.”

I couldn’t help but side with Freud (even though it’s not a real debate, or even a real conversation) just because the author had such an obvious boner for Lewis. And I really like Lewis! But this book made me like him a little less. I hope I can get over it.

I’ve read a lot of books and I’ve always felt weird giving books 3-4-5 stars on here because shouldn’t I have encountered some books that I just really really don’t like? Well now I know what it feels like when I come across it.