Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
7 e' N& X8 B$ b3 C1 v
# F- A; x! o2 j, J$ K2 z
" F# u- h% ~9 t* P* I我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

# h. S7 x' F7 ]. x. V) w6 ~
. l9 b5 G* c1 \1 d5 y0 N& U) i- U) DIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
' |, {1 y1 Q9 D4 g& m3 B7 L" g5 ?7 X. n' m( v
$ ]8 u2 O7 r1 Q* Y9 L
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

" f1 u0 ?$ i% y  y5 r$ l2 a& Q/ q5 e. B- h8 W# [
oh really...
8 z' x3 H) r( N3 @, ghahhaa, thx a lot^^"/ U9 `- q% j3 q& I
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題9 A" m0 G) Y  w) O6 [4 c, _

3 S4 o: E& f- D( ^0 k當然這是個假設性問題
+ ^  |0 ]- @# I; P- T0 n但將人數倍大% u, M6 r1 L7 b- W8 s& E
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
6 g# A- ]: v7 a7 `! Y& [6 C% Z5 _8 t+ e(情況可以換作其他), ]' O* L/ f1 f1 f% v& F
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...4 r: n2 ^9 ~  o) s
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...$ x$ V4 M3 @' X4 d
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
$ T5 w' ]- A) k8 `1 I) k' b+ f0 u絕情谷既問題...
3 t# ]7 b4 v! w/ V# p6 e* f如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
" B0 r. P% t( \如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

$ G  l' Q- p( l* m4 w3 O. ]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
+ e) e9 O7 w7 l$ G6 _8 s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
, [8 z; C) x7 m但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
( w8 W2 k7 S. a  K5 G1 \8 D% H; f* X' g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
6 t% l0 c( I! b其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
. r* g- }/ S; {+ N' f' N) W1 q1 F
* |% J/ Q- b' w' I3 ?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
! A, J0 I$ `, }# G1 W7 h& c' |+ u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:& t0 F4 }/ N2 \! `
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

% o6 r8 W$ H& e& r/ B( `0 P% I2 a  l) X- q  `% H
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
4 _/ g" n  ~% N) r5 \4 h6 d! q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....
! M5 z+ L& W# s+ h6 Z2 f' [2 R( p# ?9 C3 K' R% I
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 child" `  Y2 n5 o- B6 h" ~7 m
yes, my reason is helping more3 b. z" S* p, |5 v. ~
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!: W6 w$ |* t$ S0 R, ?+ g* s1 i
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child( H7 ^+ I8 C8 C0 S
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
5 L! [+ ~) U2 b3 b3 X* o/ d% }also 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!!!) G$ f  h  m: l, q
may 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' ?; x! J8 S# F" \+ G+ }* |/ wunder 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~~
0 B# F0 E8 n# k/ x0 L( |; S當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~; c/ x: R9 a% [7 n; z6 X/ X
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
! N4 A- c) k: I! z: h- [正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~6 D# j6 i; w- A3 r0 w( [# {
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~~
5 Y! T( c" w2 J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~~
( i% u# h4 p# C8 p* R8 G但如果o係當時o既情況中~~' B, {; X3 v1 X+ f+ R: M" ~
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）