Recently I was reading On Human Nature and the Understanding by Hume, here's an interesting quote:

"If we take in our hand any volume: of divinity or school of metaphysics, for instance, let us ask, 'Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number?' No. 'Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existance?' No. Commit it then to the flames; for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion."

Do you agree?

You can hold that true to many classic books, but there are still good ones that are not held to that ruling. But the concept of abstract content and unique outlook is seemingly preferred in society...look at the cat in the hat: an instant classic because of how weird it was, but understandable in its content. Look also at books like Steven Hawking's "Theory of the Universe" that has great amounts of strange, abstract, and even unheard of content.

Who is to say we don't live in illusion?

God.