Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:+ E2 Z0 p: q- y( D% ]
2 k$ i$ O) w- a8 T0 ~. V

; z$ m! _4 ?8 G7 l0 m我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

: Q! e2 D; X7 h+ d3 b- W

- c: @2 U' X6 d3 L7 fIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:6 e: D! \+ O- _) ~# {% D/ d' u# ]
. @& h6 f1 n" l1 X0 u* g; D
( v+ V: e0 X0 W4 \* }" p
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

" ?, f, J  t" O( r
# @5 [0 o: M( Y- K/ ]
oh really...4 z- o# V9 x  g5 b1 ^" Z1 p$ C# m4 F
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
  I/ Z+ f' s* ~. X) ?! J. bi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題/ A, U/ ^# c& F
2 D' B/ o% O4 F1 d/ m1 }
當然這是個假設性問題) i6 P# O" _5 c% H9 N
但將人數倍大, c2 }4 _( l+ {+ G8 e7 e3 g# A3 u6 V
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個$ O! y1 H& `# l- S  x& _" o7 J' o
(情況可以換作其他), k0 [, T1 d( I, }% g  ~2 @
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..." n, c- T# d" K! G# y2 d
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...) g+ P! ?  p, s' V
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:% m7 P/ n, O$ _1 j; I; j3 X
絕情谷既問題...
6 `% F. r3 c( R! \+ J如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
. _6 E/ f+ A; R如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

5 U( k# k) C4 T3 ~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
/ v( U( @( ^: i  o! p5 X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9 g$ T4 D. R0 `6 c6 ]* t
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩# p7 Z! g1 P# r' S; u$ ~- W
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
, h0 X" E& m, {7 b; l+ C其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢5 A9 p" d5 {2 g4 x  b% K0 W2 D( \# e+ v
- |+ K( V- f2 E/ ~2 R
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, n0 H9 \6 Q" _! x: M
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:
5 ?/ N: p( d/ x) p4 a其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

# e3 k! o$ J8 F0 c, X. `( [, z+ d
4 r( i' m. D4 O& X; b* b7 n- ~haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣8 t* |7 f+ G2 ]
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....7 z  ]2 l0 I& D' _2 |* }) U: c
+ a* B" I! V0 l3 N7 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
3 r6 X5 o  D1 O  {4 [yes, my reason is helping more, b: e# E* X6 a0 `2 t
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
3 K. j1 K' e7 Y& g/ v0 mif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
7 t% V  }- M6 C* U/ ebecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
0 j8 z- v. {) ]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!!!
3 N- f$ f; k: fmay 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!: M$ L$ K. b+ F( g/ ~/ W
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~~
9 Q: f% M! `. G' H0 k: X' L* I當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~  w/ a# k) R: M# }
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~" J" \0 z% a7 j  Y( S# b0 F5 ^3 Z
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~+ x3 U  d% t' Q' ?* A8 v2 B, C2 f; X
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~~
/ w, I& H; O. k1 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~~
5 d' c; T% m! _& `; E0 N8 Y但如果o係當時o既情況中~~6 \% e7 }: K9 k( |3 f: C
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）