Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a225c854a921b36e

Jump to content

Talk:Problem of dirty hands

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page created

[edit]

Created in response to this. PamD (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks. :-) SlimVirgin talk|contribs 19:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
[edit]

It occurs to me that a link to washing one's hands may be appropriate for this page's "See also" section. Do you think it's worth adding? --Muchness (talk) 05:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Section: "The problem of dirty hands: paradox or confusion?"

[edit]

I wanted to open discussion regarding the section, "The problem of dirty hands: paradox or confusion?" When I had made significant additions to the page back in 2015, I had written this section to cover how the problem of dirty hands relates to common ethical philosophies (e.g., utilitarianism, Kantianism...). Two years later, the section was largely gutted by user Joefromrandb of its apparent "original research", and this revision remains in the current version of the page.

While I don't myself think I was including original research in that section, I can see why it might be read that way so I'd be happy to defer to others if people disagree with me. However, if the section is original research for our purposes and thus not appropriate for Wikipedia, I'd like to propose removing the section altogether. As it stands, the section is still there but only has a quotation from Bernard Williams that, by itself, appears irrelevant to the topic. While I think the section in its original state added something important and interesting to the article, the article can stand on its own without it and would avoid the charge of "original research".

Best regards, Akakios (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2018 (UTC)Reply