Can the problem be fully solved, partly solved, or never solved?

For the person: fully solvable, today, through repentance. For the world: never fully in this life — the test requires it. Complete justice comes on the Day of Judgment, when every account is settled.

Partly, and always provisionally. Most atheist thinkers say ignorance and suffering can be reduced without limit but never abolished; there is no final salvation, only continual improvement — and progress can be lost.

Partly, at best. Over-claiming can be resisted person by person but never abolished; and whether the ultimate questions themselves will ever be settled is exactly where agnostics divide — the 'weak' say not yet, the 'strong' say never.

Fully — but not by human effort, and not in this life. Christian teaching holds that sin was decisively defeated at the cross, is progressively overcome in the believer, and will be abolished only when Christ returns and God makes 'all things new' (Revelation 21:5).

Partly now, fully at the end: each person can repent and each generation can better the world, but complete repair waits for the messianic redemption. The movements differ on its form — Orthodoxy expects a personal Messiah; Reform speaks of a messianic age humanity helps bring about.

Fully solved, for anyone who completes the path: the third noble truth states that suffering can end without remainder, and the tradition holds up the Buddha and the arahants as proof that it has been done.

For the individual, fully: moksha ends rebirth once and for all, and Advaita even allows liberation while still living (jivanmukti). For the world as a whole the cycle itself never stops — the liberated leave it, and the wheel keeps turning for the rest.

Fully, in principle: a person can be liberated even in this life (jivan mukt) when the ego dies and the soul merges with God. But the Gurus treat ego as a lifelong adversary, so the cure must be applied every day.

Partly, and continuously. Secularists say the settlement is never finished — each generation re-fights the boundary over symbols, schools, dress, and funding — but they count a fair framework for that dispute as the achievement itself.

Partly and progressively — never finally. Early humanism (1933) was notably optimistic; after the world wars the manifestos grew more sober, claiming only that problems can be reduced, not abolished.

Managed, never finally solved. The danger of power and the fact of human disagreement are permanent, so liberalism promises no end state — only that abuses can be checked, errors corrected, and rulers replaced without bloodshed.

Feminists generally hold it can be solved in principle — what humans built, humans can rebuild. They divide on the depth required: liberal feminists believe reform within democratic institutions can largely finish the work; radical feminists hold that family and culture themselves must be transformed; none claims the work is done.

Partly. Each nation's problem can be solved by independence, but Gellner noted there are far more potential nations than possible states, and peoples are intermingled — so the principle can never be satisfied for everyone at once. Liberal nationalists answer with autonomy and minority rights short of statehood.