Answer

I know him a little. People sent me some of his materials (and also a film about his being a refusenik, which greatly impressed me about his character). What I read seemed to me quite similar to some of my own arguments. I disagreed with a few points and with the way they were presented, but it is definitely interesting and worth reading. As for his being world-renowned as a scientist, I don’t know. What I do know is that the religious world, and especially the Haredi world, tends to treat every scientific researcher as a world-renowned scientist (someone who has published “twenty international articles” and spoken at various conferences abroad, which is typical of any standard academic). But specifically regarding him, I truly don’t know.
And one more thing: it seems to me that what makes him distinctive is that he is religious, and less that he is right-wing. But beyond that, referring to him as a “professor from the right” is insulting and full of inferiority feelings, and it is also irrelevant. The question is what his reasoning and arguments are worth, not whether he is “from the right” (that is the gist of my last column, 362).