Talk:Problem of evil

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Problem of evil article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 100 days

Religion

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Judaism

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Religion High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of religion

Atheism High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.

Quick help

Recent activity

To do

Join WikiProject atheism and be bold.

Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members.
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt-an-article.
Help out with this to-do list.

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles).
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.

Maintenance, etc.

Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references).
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly.
Always write for an encyclopedia.

Articles to improve

Agnosticism

Create

Articles on notable atheists

Expand

an atheism stub

Immediate attention

State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes.
Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Christianity: Theology Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as High-importance).

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q3. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Colgate University/CORE 151 I Legacies of the Ancient World (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Text and/or other creative content from Problem of evil was copied or moved into Religious responses to the problem of evil. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Contents WP:SPLIT from Problem of evil and moved to Religious responses to the problem of evil

This article has been split into two articles due to length. Sections 4 and 5 have been copied and moved to Religious responses to the problem of evil. I will now add a short summary of it and a link to it to this article. Please go there and edit as you see fit! Original history of editing remains here. Jenhawk777 (talk) 00:38, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem of evil is now at 8400 words - well within the limits. Jenhawk777 (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unsolicited advice

What's the distinction between the sections "Religious responses" vs "Responses, defences and theodicies"? Ideally, sections should not overlap. (t · c) buidhe 19:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey buidhe! Defences and theodicies are listed under definitions, and that's all they are; they are simply defined, no arguments are presented. That's where they belong.

Religious responses included at one time, all the religious arguments, which are really all the arguments there are against the problem of evil, that are already stated in the article by their p[roper titles. Having a separate section for religious responses meant all the same things being restated, which was not only redundant, but was also misleading - as if 'religious responses' were something separate from what is already discussed. So I split the article, and religious responses is now a separate article. If you think it should be removed entirely, I have no objection. Perhaps leave the link to it? Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

buidhe Hey, don't do anything radical yet. Your question has prompted me to do something with the organization of this article that makes it clearer that there are secular responses to the problem as well as religious ones. That differentiation is not clear. Most of what's in this article is religious responses, and it shouldn't be left that way. Our readers need more. Perhaps some rearranging and then reabsorbing some of Religious responses back into this article will be appropriate, but there should be a secular section and a religious section, and there isn't. I will work on that. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jenhawk777, That's good, I wasn't really clear on there being both secular and religious responses to the problem of evil so I'm glad you're clarifying it. (t · c) buidhe 05:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

buidhe See what you think now. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

revert at [1]

Editor2020 (talk · contribs) I am aware 'that that' construction is grammatical, it's just rather ungainly in written form. It distracts from the logic as it draws attention to itself instead of the defining clause which follows it; 'that that' leads to confusion over meaning, and most sentences benefit from being reworded to avoid it. Its use is declining. It's inelegant. I won't get into an edit war over this, but surely you can see that particular sentence could be stated better. How about "Supporters of the free will explanation state that altering the logical natural outcomes of choices would no longer embody free will."? Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rearranging to better recognize secular views

I am going to post a major reconstruction tag on this article in order to add a section on secular responses, and make it clearer that the detailed arguments section that is already there are all religious responses. This will require moving things around in the rest of the article as well, so it is a major overhaul, but it needs to be clearer who says what and why, and organization is the key. I will wait a bit to see if there is anyone who has any major objections to reorganizing up front, but of course, objection may not come till after, and that's perfectly fine too. Please don't be quick to revert, post here and I will accommodate all objections as best I can. Normally I would post those changes here first, but there is just too much. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC) See "Unsolicited advice" above. Jenhawk777 (talk) 19:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think I am done now. Thank you for your patience. Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jenhawk777, Thanks for clarifying secular vs. religious responses, that's helpful. However, now we have an issue where content is duplicated, for example there are two sections about "Evil as the absence of good (privation theory)". (t · c) buidhe 06:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Au contraire mon frere buidhe - there are two sections titled the same - is that wrong? - but they are not duplicates.Jenhawk777 (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of a section on Hermeneutics

The Biblical texts are narratives of how people experienced the intervention / presence of God in their lives. Which is why we have to be careful when translating texts like the Bible into legal logical documents. The texts describe how evil disrupts the relationship with God. However it is not a philosophical abstract evil (influence of Greek philosophical thought). It is not something binary, but more relational. The texts do not connect it to Satan but to the ability to rebel to one's own detriment. 105.225.223.189 (talk) 21:54, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Protest Atheism" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Protest Atheism and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 15 § Protest Atheism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]