As I've explained before, one of the most powerful evidences for the veracity of Jime's Iron Law is the absolute and astonishing intrinsic unability of hard-core atheists to understand what nothing (=not anything= absence of something) means. Something in the spiritual and intellectual nature of atheists simply prevent them to understand the concept of "not anything".
As you can watch in the above video, the public laugh aloud about the stupid atheist re-definition of "nothing" as "something which is simple or basic". However, Dawkins doesn't understand the (obvious) motive of laughs and ask "Why is that funny?" Look in Dawkins' face: Personally I think Dawkins is being HONEST in his question: He simply doesn't understand why people laugh on this, because for him it is very obvious that "nothing" is a very simple "something".
You can think that it is astonishing, and it does. But, from a scientific and spiritual perspective, it tells us A LOT about the veracity of Jime's Iron Law and the atheist's mindset.
People don't affected by Jime's Iron Law (=non-atheists, i.e. over the 97% of people on Earth) will agree with Edward Feser's illustration of the atheistic "nothing is something" fallacy: "Let me explain how this whole house is held up by nothing. Consider the floor, which is what I really mean by ‘nothing.’ Now, the rest of the house is held up by the floor. Thus, I’ve explained how the whole house is held up by nothing!” Well, no you haven’t. You’ve “explained” at most how partof the house is held up by another part, but you’ve left unexplained how the floor itself is held up, and thus (since the floor is itself part of the house) you haven’t really explained at all how the house as a whole is held up, either by “nothing” or by anything else. Furthermore, you’ve made what is really just sheer muddleheadedness sound profound by using “nothing” in an eccentric way."
Don't expect that hard-core atheists will understand this. If Jime's Iron Law is true, they WON'T.
0 comments:
Post a Comment