Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:! F# c) @  R8 n  R3 ^: t6 A$ K8 b  u

$ S0 S9 u+ \; A" b; {9 w9 X5 L: {7 e, G6 E% N
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

# a  t7 ^, `6 p9 Z$ n7 A
( J' V' t" T; \6 ~' Q
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:: h2 V! W7 q- c1 R( u
( k  H5 t* @, N7 V0 Q5 `5 K; X4 N

) x: R9 G* g- D9 W/ G, v  gIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

4 M# k7 n: H. q% t. v. k& X) }) B% H0 P% Q+ P) m& i
oh really...4 |6 Z2 a3 W2 i# q
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
  f0 B# ~2 y9 C5 p( H+ Ci didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
4 o+ q5 I& M! p( n* t' m' r  m! Z, P9 O" G) u8 b* y  x# e+ f
當然這是個假設性問題$ |' s4 `. ^' j. B& M- t
但將人數倍大+ [" {# V% l. v* R0 }' T! A8 k0 M6 L
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
: [# h% f' d& ]4 H  l) s; [% B(情況可以換作其他)
. P# ^( V3 S7 t始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...4 Q3 m. e3 h9 r. A
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..., E" X( x( }% G' ^
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:( T  i' E( F* v- s6 x
絕情谷既問題...
2 l. k. {/ }% z. O6 b# M# A如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
; Z1 o! }( W' v8 u6 C; [+ Y5 i* M如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

+ f! A9 ~3 g$ s; v, v9 g殺一警百...

srfqt1

其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多愈好* G+ f* B; r: E. s- H% [4 @% c: |
於是好像好順理成章要讓火車轉往停用的鐵軌,等多d小朋友逃生+ ~( g6 ^( O8 K1 e
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩7 Q- A- E: `+ ~- K& }8 d
好像crap兄講一樣,停用軌玩的小孩, 因他始終才是守規則的人, 他可沒有預料過會有危險,點解要犧牲一個守規矩的小朋友,去換取其他唔守規矩的小朋友的性命呢: ~+ i9 t% j* T$ P1 ^5 w' I
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢% M7 i4 s; E# O% U% p$ _
' m3 L3 q3 g0 a9 j
我估如果我有時間去想清楚的話,我都係會救係停用路軌玩的小孩,我都認為冇理由要犧牲守規矩的小朋友,去換取其他唔守規矩的小朋友的性命
% |3 H) e3 W6 D/ [8 n不過,係千鈞一髮的時間要我去做抉擇的話,可能我應該會被表面上的人數的多與少去蒙蔽咗,而且眼前真係有一班小朋友,不過的確又好像maxfigo講話明係停用...咁條鐵軌一定有d問題ga la...如果轉左去好易累死果班乘客 !!,可能我係會其實為咗少數唔守規矩的小朋友,犧牲咗更多無辜的火車乘客

crap

Originally posted by srfqt1 at 2005-4-27 05:44 PM:
# U- D0 `$ q. a: m其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

7 W3 t' L% u4 G: O7 l  e; m; `

! n" Y/ F( y2 q  u2 Ihaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣/ t$ ?  V, O) g% O( _  U3 B
你所說的也對, 下意識的確會選擇救人多的一方, 當時根本沒辦法分清誰對誰錯, 只好靠本能做決定..其他的要看天意了....
0 P$ ], l. S' I8 M9 U) |( G4 k" l9 K
p.s. 小弟昨天在你於好文區發表的文章下留了言, srfqt1兄你有看到嗎

jason williams

i think i will help those children instead of that child8 Z! Y* ?7 M$ x5 Y: b0 s6 n+ P% o; ^6 O
yes, my reason is helping more
; R+ k$ h/ k2 Q5 |6 lfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!" ]- r: O- z6 f! L" q6 d8 N
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child3 E0 D/ H0 g  C  u+ V# Q$ s! [
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
4 j1 \& o7 D3 I2 ealso i think the question hasn't tell us the background, none  know that child is obeyin the rule so that he play at the rail which is not using!!!
) \* I$ o: B1 Xmay be other reasons so that he play himself at there, such as, he is a bad guy that none like to play with him, or all children also dunno which is using and which is not using!
) a( ~# z0 q+ J6 Munder so much confusing on the background, i would choose help more than less, just a normal think during this short urgetn period!!!

sfxc0000

作為一個人類~~
. d  d0 ~7 j& G; ?1 R' j$ A9 a當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~0 q- `% {  {4 ^# K# g; n; J+ _4 Z* ]
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~1 q2 C. @  E% T  Z+ F
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~4 W4 M* r3 W2 v) R- D( T7 L" q. q; {
即係我會救個一班唔守規矩o既細路而犧牲o個位守規矩o既細路~~, v' Y* t6 j. T; \9 k" V
我只有o係事件過後先可以好似Crap同srfqt1好理性咁去分析輕重, 對錯~~
) j. h3 o& M7 w( q; V但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
  y; d+ [) G6 J8 {我只有犧牲一位細路的性命稷換取一班細路的性命

中華卡樂ｂ

我諗我不會搞到火車轉往停用的鐵軌，因為咁樣會搞到火車乘客犧牲，而且果個守規矩既細路冇理由要佢犧牲的！而且我睇到火車黎中，我會用我既本能去救果一班唔守規矩既壞細路，雖然我明白到一定會有人死，可能我自己都會死，但我咁做一定唔會後悔，減少犧牲的人數，而且可以令一班唔守規矩而且死唔去既壞細路知道錯誤！（個人意見）