Peter Higgs called Richard Dawkins a fundamentalist and an embarrassment, do you agree?

Peter Higgs, the theoretical physicist who was correct about the Higgs Bosen particle, was very critical of Richard Dawkins. He also said that science and religion aren't incompatible and that many of his fellow scientist are religious.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/dec/26/pete...

13 Answers

Relevance
  • 4 years ago

    To call Richard Dawkins a colleague of Peter Higgs is ridiculous! You ought to take that back! One is a scientist the other a propagandist. I see Richard Dawkins extra a colleague of L. Ron Hubbard, (even looks like him) although I believe Dawkins has extra followers and has made more money than L. Ron Hubbard might have imagined.

  • 8 years ago

    I don't think anyone is saying you can't jump through hoops in order to make religion and science compatible in your mind, the question is whether that's something you should do.

    Higgs does say in the article that Dawkins is "a kind of fundamentalist". However he is not clear about what he means. What exactly is he referring to when he characterizes Dawkins thus? He doesn't say and thus gives no reason for other people to think his personal opinion of Dawkins is well founded.

    I mean, I might call someone a jerk. But unless I give an example where he for example bullied people for the fun of it there's no reason for other people to think my opinion of the person is more than personal prejudice.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Peter Higgs is entitled to his opinion; his being right about the Higgs Boson has nothing to do with Richard Dawkins... unless you want to make the argument that scientists who are right about stuff are always right about everything.

    I don't think you want to go there. lol

  • pmaxu
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    I'm not the largest fan of Dawkins, even though I agree with a bunch of what he says. I wouldn't say that he's a fundamentalist and an embarrassment, though.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 8 years ago

    Actually, he said, "almost a fundamentalist".

    Yes, I think I do agree. Maybe calling him a fundamentalist would be taking things a bit far, but he is close. Mind you, considering some of the people he is arguing against, I can't blame him too much.

  • Actually he called him ALMOST a fundamentalist if you read the article properly but let's pretend he didn't & let Dawkins answer this charge himself:

    On his website titled "How dare you call me a fundamentalist", Dawkins wrote: "No, please, do not mistake passion, which can change its mind, for fundamentalism, which never will. Passion for passion, an evangelical Christian and I may be evenly matched. But we are not equally fundamentalist. The true scientist, however passionately he may 'believe', in evolution for example, knows exactly what would change his mind: evidence! The fundamentalist knows that nothing will."

    The criticisms have not led the biologist to soften his stance on religion. In a recent interview with al-Jazeera, he implied that being raised a Catholic was worse for a child than physical abuse by a priest. Responding to a direct question from the interviewer Mehdi Hassan, Dawkins related the story of a woman in America who had written to him about abuse she suffered as a child at the hands of a priest, and the mental anguish of being told that one of her friends, a Protestant girl, would burn in hell.

    "She told me that, of those two abuses, she got over the physical abuse, it was yucky but she got over it. But the mental abuse of being told about hell, she took years to get over," said Dawkins. "Telling children such that they really, really believe that people who sin are going to go to hell and roast forever, that your skin grows again when it peels off, it seems to me intuitively entirely reasonable that that is a worse form of child abuse, that will give more nightmares because they really believe it."

    Source(s): The Guardian article linked to in the question.
  • 8 years ago

    Higgs is a douchebag. He's a clean old man. You can tell he's a religious fanatic.

  • 8 years ago

    I happen to agree. Richard Dawkins is a complete fool, and although he is intitled to some of his beliefs with the greatest pleasure his opinion of child abuse and religion being that child abuse is better than religion. He is as bad as the South African government saying you can cure HIV with beetroot (Thank Heavens she is no longer here to embarress us) Maybe there are somethings he should simply just keep to himself.

    Maybe he should walk in the shoes of someone who has actually been there.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Mr. Higgs is a disgrace to his profession.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    He isn't the first atheist to be of that opinion, and he is unlikely to be the last.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.