This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article contains a translation of Paradoxo de Epicuro from pt.wikipedia. |
On 16 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Epicurus' paradox to Epicurean paradox. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The result of the move request was: moved. Uncontested RM ( closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 18:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Epicurus' paradox → Epicurean paradox – A quick review of sources shows Epicurean paradox as the clear common name of the topic. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
This article was created by a now-banned hoaxter, Drekmikc76. None of the sources I checked actually talk about anything called "Epicurus' paradox". It may be the same thing as the problem of evil, which already has an article. I did find a blog here [1] but that's not RS. The strange ref style makes it hard to know what's a source and what's not, and I'm going to try to fix that. But I suspect this article should just be deleted. @ Seraphimblade: GA-RT-22 ( talk) 15:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
The article first calls it a "logical dilemma" but then calls it a " trilemma". I think it's actually a quadrilemma. I've brought this up on the trilemma talk page as well.
I do not know how Epicurus himself formulated it, but there is actually a fourth possibility as well ("evil does not exist"). The quadrilemma is based upon the following inconsistent tetrad (cf. inconsistent triad):
If the theist cannot resolve the paradox then he must choose which of the four premises to throw away. So he can keep three out of the four. This allows for four possible combinations ((1,3,4), (1,2,4), (2,3,4), (1,2,3)) so it's a quadrilemma. 2601:49:8400:26B:1921:3F36:9E7D:CACA ( talk) 13:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article contains a translation of Paradoxo de Epicuro from pt.wikipedia. |
On 16 February 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from Epicurus' paradox to Epicurean paradox. The result of the discussion was moved. |
The result of the move request was: moved. Uncontested RM ( closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 18:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Epicurus' paradox → Epicurean paradox – A quick review of sources shows Epicurean paradox as the clear common name of the topic. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
This article was created by a now-banned hoaxter, Drekmikc76. None of the sources I checked actually talk about anything called "Epicurus' paradox". It may be the same thing as the problem of evil, which already has an article. I did find a blog here [1] but that's not RS. The strange ref style makes it hard to know what's a source and what's not, and I'm going to try to fix that. But I suspect this article should just be deleted. @ Seraphimblade: GA-RT-22 ( talk) 15:27, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
The article first calls it a "logical dilemma" but then calls it a " trilemma". I think it's actually a quadrilemma. I've brought this up on the trilemma talk page as well.
I do not know how Epicurus himself formulated it, but there is actually a fourth possibility as well ("evil does not exist"). The quadrilemma is based upon the following inconsistent tetrad (cf. inconsistent triad):
If the theist cannot resolve the paradox then he must choose which of the four premises to throw away. So he can keep three out of the four. This allows for four possible combinations ((1,3,4), (1,2,4), (2,3,4), (1,2,3)) so it's a quadrilemma. 2601:49:8400:26B:1921:3F36:9E7D:CACA ( talk) 13:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)