Lawrence Krauss and the supposed decline of philosophy and religion

In a recent interview at the Atlantic, Lawrence Krauss shows he doesn’t really have any idea what philosophy is, what it is to do philosophy or that the claims he makes in his recent books can come of as naive.

Here is a little gold nugget from that interview:

Interviewer: It sounds like you’re arguing that ‘nothing’ is really a quantum vacuum, and that a quantum vacuum is unstable in such a way as to make the production of matter and space inevitable. But a quantum vacuum has properties. For one, it is subject to the equations of quantum field theory. Why should we think of it as nothing?
Krauss: That would be a legitimate argument if that were all I was arguing. By the way it’s a nebulous term to say that something is a quantum vacuum in this way. That’s another term that these theologians and philosophers have started using because they don’t know what the hell it is, but it makes them sound like they know what they’re talking about. When I talk about empty space, I am talking about a quantum vacuum, but when I’m talking about no space whatsoever, I don’t see how you can call it a quantum vacuum. It’s true that I’m applying the laws of quantum mechanics to it, but I’m applying it to nothing, to literally nothing. No space, no time, nothing.
Even if you accept this argument that nothing is not nothing, you have to acknowledge that nothing is being used in a philosophical sense. But I don’t really give a damn about what “nothing” means to philosophers; I care about the “nothing” of reality. And if the “nothing” of reality is full of stuff, then I’ll go with that.
My brain is full of ponies and unicorns when reading that statement. So nothing is really full of stuff is it mr. Krauss. How interesting.
Massimo Pagliucci has a very eloquent response to Krauss on his blog, which you can find here. 
 I found the interview with Krauss via this, and the reply by Pagliucci was in my rss feed.