Talk:Absence of good

Christianity: Theology Stub‑class Low‑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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Niedrig	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Start

This is my understanding of the matter (which may be incomplete), and my belief (which is clearly not objective). It might break some of the guidelines for Wiki articles (even though I was careful to say "if" a lot), so feel free to redo whatever you think you should. --Polyparadigm 07:05, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"However, in this case evil is the default state of the universe, and good exists only through constant effort; any lapse or redirection of good will apparently create evil out of nothing."

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatio_boni""

I would not call this a true statement. If the metaphor of light is viewed as energy, and not confined to a visible spectrum of wavelength. Then it could be stated that evil would be the absence of energy. To my knowledge, there is never an absence of energy, possibly an unquantifiable amount.

There would be an absense of energy for areas where the universe has not expanded yet...

False

This paragraph:

"Our perceptions are based on contrast, so that light and dark, good and evil, are imperceptible without each other; in this context, these sets of opposites show a certain symmetry. But a basic study of optics teaches us that light has a physical presence of its own, whereas darkness does not: no "anti-lamp" or "flashdark" can be constructed which casts a beam of darkness onto a surface that is otherwise well-lit. Instead, darkness only appears when sources of light are extinguished or obscured, and only persists when an object absorbs a disproportionate amount of the light that strikes it."

is false. Whoever wrote it has obviously never heard of interference of light waves which can produce light and dark fringes. 86.139.159.151 (talk) 22:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that example is still valid. I'm certainly not denying that interference of light waves can produce dark fringes by preventing light from reaching specific aspects of a surface. But notice "when sources of light are extinguished or obscured... In this case, the light waves that would have ordinarily struck the surface and produced observable light were obscured by other light waves that deflected them from their trajectory. Even though other light waves were the cause, it's still a case of deflection, and thus obscuration. If I throw a football to you, and someone else knocks it away with another football, the throw was still deflected even though it was with the same type of object.

Note: I'm certainly not trying to imply that this viewpoint is accurate; I personally feel that the transition between "good and evil is relative" and "therefore God exists" is too great of a gap for this argument to be valid on its own merits. I just wanted to point out that the specific rebuttal above isn't accurate. Verin (talk) 14:34, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UE?

WP:CAPS needs fixing here. But also, just wondering; Has this been tested according to Google Scholar/Books to establish that English is not "commonly used" per WP:Article titles? This seems rather generic. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Privatio Boni → Privation of good – Per WP:UE. Term very well established in English in English texts, see: "privation of good" Google Books hits. amend to Absence of Good. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. "Absence of good" gets 22,000 post-1980 English-language Google Book results. "Privation of good" gets 1,840. Kauffner (talk) 08:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Amend proposal -> Absence of good - the above comment by Kauffner is clearly correct, the "privation of good" is significantly less and not what privatio means in this context. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:42, 10 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Watchlisting of this article suddenly not working

This article recently started to be unable to show in my Watchlist. Is anyone else getting that same problem? Would someone please report that to some relevant person? Thank you. Bo99 (talk) 23:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]