Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:9 O2 U7 C/ B7 i. j
' R& R% Q1 u7 e  a0 W$ q

1 N6 ]: s4 d8 x5 i$ l8 d( u2 I' `. Y我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

9 y1 w8 n, t+ a" e
$ Q+ a# c3 s* NIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
* g) Y3 y4 u2 `
+ U6 r' D7 m5 m/ [7 x4 o1 Z7 O2 k6 u  {7 v
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

0 K4 W2 d+ [+ p. N/ N5 {) @
* K/ n+ f/ W2 Q  S
oh really...
6 X, k+ J5 u) ?& i1 c( w. c* mhahhaa, thx a lot^^"3 _* N! e! l( k" Y, r! |
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
8 w$ [. Y, Q  ^
. Z8 r1 y) c& O當然這是個假設性問題( P) ~) ~9 e- N6 q( J) Z2 \
但將人數倍大) p# }; K7 h/ _9 k8 F& l3 ^
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
, ]- C4 R+ H6 o(情況可以換作其他)' P/ X: I& \) M/ l/ E
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..." U# C7 B, q: w. u- Z) O
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
( t& M$ w" b" ^  _. [如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:, ~& ^  L5 R# B: D/ k6 A" B
絕情谷既問題..." @% k) ~- i1 w: z8 a! Q5 Z
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
: M0 S1 o1 c# P$ x9 \' w% I如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

4 I, K7 @( S* e+ ]8 K3 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
  d+ q' o  W& i9 G( h- e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) ?+ H9 S% i& E& t3 y' P5 F/ ^- ?
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩1 j1 y8 Q+ Y2 T* s1 ^3 M1 E+ R3 M* C
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2 P, S4 W/ d; {7 L
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢9 \; B. H8 N; w: @
7 g5 M2 {$ ]" ?! m) B
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: Y# Q: f0 m$ P! i, J9 i2 Y
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:
# n  b  o; Y6 w0 d& s% K其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 s3 a$ z, ]  E  R: Q2 E
% W5 c+ V! Z0 W$ Y
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
7 u- C/ H) e5 L1 E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....
2 _% _' d2 @" ^
" }+ b+ k4 E8 M. _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
0 s* e- X( l% {% Q3 D5 O% eyes, my reason is helping more# l. L) B; _" Q& s! w: ~4 j
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!; S4 N. y+ C9 m* S8 F
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
+ N' _& U* t  T7 F' ^because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?7 n* i( 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!!!
8 N3 x! F2 I. S& P# p4 O# o9 V1 Gmay 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!, F2 d8 |: X+ Q. n! a
under 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~~6 o/ q# E6 m5 c, X
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~  v% n1 J9 m5 Z
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~1 o, O" O: S" j  B
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
# u) ]) s6 N, ?+ Q& G2 b9 E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~~
) G4 X1 E$ O/ @5 R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~~
% `' @. m9 t1 J9 H3 C5 C6 k+ H但如果o係當時o既情況中~~+ G* u; e! Y/ P. r% U0 H" \
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）