Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
, l! \& o1 G; a' z0 g
- e7 O' Y4 S" g$ k1 X, O$ w- G) n( y4 E5 x2 L4 Y. h( r/ J' n
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

( v+ {6 x* \+ U
% N& ~1 M% h6 WIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:: A5 H) J9 G8 Z) O7 A# W
5 t& N5 V4 f5 _. J6 g, M4 A0 _
1 Q& _! X4 ~2 c2 r7 n
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

$ |" \# L) G1 g5 N2 W0 _9 E
6 w: ~9 v5 P% \  H) y0 I* k
oh really...
3 _# c5 D7 P8 Q$ \hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
+ u! c# C$ V% @! F* q0 Z# wi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
4 q* }% _( u, W5 t- g) ^" B* I& x
/ l/ H5 Q; M- M8 w, \當然這是個假設性問題3 V# L3 X9 A8 Z* g
但將人數倍大
7 ]; z% [# Z7 b9 c9 A8 j7 V, }% ]) D例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個2 B6 h3 c7 l6 G
(情況可以換作其他)
6 l: ?# v7 ~5 d" g$ p始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...% X4 R( W1 t& N5 B
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
2 o$ |, H6 l3 E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 W4 ]- C1 y7 B2 r" w
絕情谷既問題...
* S9 Y! y# o& a5 F9 q如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...# Q1 g5 `6 L/ ~3 \& x
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

, ]% X( z$ _/ D/ n) d
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+ |7 \8 i/ ~4 L
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' X1 R( Z% t7 m# _! i
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩: d8 N; a/ S( h% [  j
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& _, i8 t. g/ i) R
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
, L: k/ p- G. B& k1 n" |) j6 o9 f) F& w* n& L! K* |- [
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. _' F. h  r! D* @! t$ M5 ^& q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:$ H* G2 `, o+ ]% d+ j
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

" }- ?+ p) `9 {' P) G" I3 W

& c) V5 i0 k# v2 U) Hhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣1 u' q) W8 D0 `+ m# M
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....4 h, L! n+ }& W2 W' P

$ i7 ]" }% m8 op.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. ^+ l& X+ N; Y% k7 _
yes, my reason is helping more  w- v: T% i0 u
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!3 z) a9 k# _2 z! p
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
4 L+ X* m3 y; c: v6 o' tbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
* B5 N* Q& B# }. D2 v' Valso 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!!!7 N2 U/ T+ V7 P  ?( b3 N3 Z
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!( y5 `  F8 K6 \4 U
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 B2 k, \3 l8 z, S1 q  H當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~, k. [; V5 G" K# j. \/ {* Q
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~6 S* r; o* r: i# L$ ]
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~. k6 Z5 [2 U5 i4 u. O4 i
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~~6 J3 A- q9 |" D! m
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 y/ i. R& X( f" r/ H6 x但如果o係當時o既情況中~~4 Q: g, G4 g! F. v$ Y2 ?# \& P# S# r
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）