What can I add to over 150 reviews? How about a more detailed explanation of what the book covers? I read several reviews that include the reviewers' opinions and feelings about the book but not many that actually summarize the book. Nicholi's work breaks down as follows....Nicholi does a good job of letting each man speak for himself. Each protagonist is quoted often and at length, so much so that the editor uses a unique footnoting system which doesn't use numbers so the text isn't distracting. Some reviews have faulted Nicholi for being biased but that is hard to do when quoting so much. At worst, he may be selective at what he quotes and chooses not to quote but each man, at the very least, said as much as if quoted here. The interesting thing is he quotes as much if not more from private correspondence as the men's published works which gives interesting insight into their private thought lives. Regardless how much you have read of C.S. Lewis or Sigmund Freud, the book is worth the read just for the color all this private correspondence adds to what we know of them.First, there are two broad sections. Part one titled "What should we believe?" comprises roughly 1/3rd of the book. It is the philosophy of these two geniuses on subjects like is there a Creator and where does our Conscience come from. Part two, "How should we live?" comprises the larger 2/3rd of the book and emphasizes more of the practical, daily impact of each man's belief on his happiness, love, dealing with pain, death, and, yes, even their sex lives.Within Part One, chapter 1 is short biographical sketch of each man that explores how his life experience may have shaped his view. Chapter 4 seems at first glance not to fit theme of Part One which contrasts the two men's philosophies because it is a detailed account of C.S. Lewis' conversion. However, I believe the contrast in view here is Freud's claim that a conversion experience is a "hallucinatory psychosis" against which Nicholi offers up the details of Lewis' conversion to ask his readers whether it fits the description of hallucination.Part Two begins to cover the men's reaction and experience, as much or more as philosophy toward happiness, sex, love, death, etc. For example, in Chapter 5 on happiness we see Freud's view that sexual (genital) love is the foundation of happiness and that unhappiness comes from 1) our bodies wearing out 2) external forces attacking us and 3) other men. In contrast, Lewis sees happiness coming from a relationship with out Soul's Creator. Unhappiness comes from the abuse of Free Will. Their personal lives come to light in that Freud struggled with clinical depression most of his life and self-medicated with cocaine. Lewis had similar struggles before his conversion but found true joy thereafter. Also both men struggled with an obsession with fame and frustration over lack of attaining it except, for Lewis, this went away after his conversion.In chapter 6 on sex, we see Freud's core theories that sexual attraction is the basis of all attraction, even parental, sibling and friend. Interesting both men maintained sexual impulses needed to be controlled but for very different reasons which Nicholi lays out. The private sex lives of both men are laid out in some detail (hint: neither is particularly inspiring).In chapter 7, each man gives his view on love. Freud saw all love as sexual. Lewis followed the traditional Greek view of love with categories and words for 1) storge (family love) 2) Philia (friendship) 3) Eros (erotic) and 4) agape (God and neighbor). Nicholi looks at the general pattern of relationships in each man life--Freud's generally following a pattern of conflict followed by termination and Lewis contrast between relationship struggles before his conversion and placing a radical new value on people afterwards.I found this perhaps the most interesting chapter. Although Nicholi himself doesn't directly ask the question, the take away for me is how do you view love if you start with a worldview then define love within its confines or start with your view of love and let that drive you to a worldview? For example, if you start with a materialist worldview it strongly points you towards Freud's view of love as sexual impulses necessary for biological survival. But if I start by asking myself, "Do I love my wife for more than just sex?", "Do I really love my sister or am I just repressing the desire to sleep with her?", "Do I love my mom sexually?", then that view of love strongly points me toward Lewis' theism. Read the chapter and decide for yourself.Chapter 8 deals with the seminal philosophical problem of pain. For Freud there could not be pain and also be a God that would allow pain. Lewis notes that the majority of pain, issues like poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, and slaves, are the result of man inflicting pain on man. He sees this as consistent with free will and a necessary consequence since "a world of automata--of creates that worked like machines--would hardly be worth creating." Lewis was mad at God over the issue of pain before his conversion. The chapter shows how his wrestling with the question was at the core of his conversion.The final chapter, Death, shows Freud as someone obsessed with his death, thinking of it every day of his life and anticipating it at specific ages based on superstitions as silly as what number hotel room we stayed in. This is a side of Freud we would not see apart from his private correspondence. Lewis likewise feared death before his conversion but afterwards embraced it with peace.I get why atheist wouldn't like the book. It shows Freud as he was--unhappy, sexless, and afraid of death. This isn't a very flattering picture of the atheist world view. The question is, is it true? I have not seen any reviews accusing Nicholi or misquoting or misrepresenting Freud.