Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:# K9 b& e( V6 B. d" [

. v9 [. ^2 N. L6 k7 W' C; A3 i9 T$ {5 p6 n. g% s
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

! u9 L! ?# C' m5 c5 A8 D: B6 H8 [7 g, v
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:* Y' b& O6 I- B  ^

! h) y/ [! H* c% E7 v8 X2 l: ~
) A/ P; O7 b, PIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

. O! I& ?$ o) Q8 {
# D# V+ Q, ~& z) F2 w: O! Zoh really...) \8 i* T/ c8 R/ b% |1 C
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"* Y! }5 t& O. S' B& \4 B" q& I
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題& `) \5 z; m" B/ Q
$ t- K/ \! P/ R
當然這是個假設性問題
, R% L/ K% M8 ^) E但將人數倍大
) k; o: f% V/ X例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
* k  ^* N: ?. H) m7 R(情況可以換作其他)
& p# I1 d7 \2 y  \. q) O始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
" o7 ^4 r; }; P如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...: `8 U9 ?4 v' n4 s2 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:7 S: {; {$ [4 f: g* _6 V
絕情谷既問題...0 G+ l6 R+ R' J4 w6 g) C! `8 F- ?
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...5 J/ l& s; n: a% @
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

+ o. z- C  ?; x5 P! J+ T
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; w( }# W8 n  x" y& g/ ?
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
* ]! j! N2 G1 C1 _0 e% u1 A但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
4 Y) I4 d4 g: y, \' L( D0 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
$ a- N/ x; c; u% d3 g' C其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢$ @! q$ _, V( p

( ?7 X6 {* o. c( S3 c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 B! ?+ B8 O" E/ n4 ^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:
; M6 M/ t8 P( [4 m其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

9 e$ a# K* i# E

- d, ?+ `" ^3 O( `- [9 K2 l0 s% jhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
, ^( Y9 [# M9 b) n7 h6 ?+ 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....
0 I6 D- _; x2 z  K$ R+ O0 X" e' N; {* G5 l! p6 F  l3 E- m% L6 g
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& O' Y! W8 N7 o8 e2 l4 {- M' Q7 b
yes, my reason is helping more; Z; u  i$ y' S3 p. M; o
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!- y" D! r: C# _' a, Y
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child7 K  {2 W% q+ e% R1 ?
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?7 C$ |: w  v. \6 _1 m1 d$ u! {% \9 _6 r
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!!!
& s& _* T+ \) o9 w0 k7 z# S1 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!
( r2 Y8 v$ D5 K% [$ i9 V9 vunder 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~~% B; r( J4 T# `% i
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
0 A2 E( C" D% K我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~7 U: Z; d  ?* o2 Y! v: \, B
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~  d; u$ n  Z8 {0 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~~1 z* j- c. d& |6 a- F
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~~. u& ?7 D" ?7 A7 i+ d
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~6 \+ d' T" w) 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）