Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:& H1 m6 B! {9 Q$ Y) I0 L. f

% b1 E5 K; ?6 Y8 [6 V) B# G& Z+ [% C" ^& r0 \* r
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

2 p5 a1 q6 l! [' P# k4 t: L
8 ^2 R! [$ Y0 `. o5 L- g* iIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
  G9 n# \) U5 ~0 ~
4 Y% q* ?8 _2 H- i) u. K8 f& H& ?: m; ?) W: T( `
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

3 K+ a# c$ P  ]2 T! J& _) `  g9 S& L! i
oh really...& y7 ^% t0 {! D& }1 E% b
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
1 {0 t+ a6 l' k' m" V5 |i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題' ?' R& m7 Z: e9 B

+ v7 ~4 I/ C; i; H當然這是個假設性問題
# R/ _3 j% D9 A, w但將人數倍大
* k3 M1 V, n0 [1 f3 B1 z4 [例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個8 \/ T% J* P3 ~+ e
(情況可以換作其他)9 A/ j( M/ W2 @* ?$ w4 G
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
' f7 Z- {, h; c6 a! L! ~. e如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
3 S/ V2 K" ]$ j& ^3 G+ K如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
# M! \! Q/ X' i絕情谷既問題...
5 E  K7 D0 Z, D* g9 @9 R) u如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢.... j  O& K8 ]( H0 v4 k5 U6 J" a
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

; v& a1 R. {3 x4 p& G7 v0 ]
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
' R  X/ |  P, W, u+ e# H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; _. W  a3 o% n' P/ E  e  R
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
- r! E/ \  O8 ]4 J9 `& l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
3 x3 [3 Z3 }5 `8 F' Z* ?6 O5 m& u其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢  f' H& R$ O- v7 j/ w: K
! T* W. l( B3 a
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
4 t" q. r( R8 m/ Z& O& C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:
! q! m7 V' A) ~2 u3 _* b其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

; ?. E& K" [: `$ X! P& ~  l9 w: l- v6 J+ J
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
* S5 d: P) S  A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....
  l1 B6 g+ y, A* i, }1 j+ y6 n, v
" x' @: R$ q; p2 tp.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
: _7 r8 [, L7 z$ ]! Syes, my reason is helping more" j! m  P) v  H/ s! O
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!. w& J' B# d. R$ ?3 {
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child( k6 f- A  K& i0 ]! y6 W) }6 E$ N
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
$ U+ W7 E; {  d) y3 a2 B. Zalso 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!!!
, q' l8 B9 A% j7 pmay 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!
% p; P5 H) p+ h) g3 junder 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~~  H; W0 y2 ?7 I% Q8 {7 J
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
( E- o  H3 G, c7 b/ v: c我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~$ `8 F$ ^9 |  C- f! p3 R
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
0 B3 l& d- J, n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~~* D5 N, b3 \( S- B
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~~
! v+ L# o$ x9 s: X, n但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
$ M, D( N: U! m9 m; V) Z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）