Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
" L9 _/ m6 F5 ^- p- X$ T2 w& ?" O3 _: F6 v# J' B& I8 L" S
" V& p" r# i0 ^$ F8 E) y+ P
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

1 P! y; \( ~$ u( k( t* p' E1 m! u
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:# b- C& `! ^; e1 f; k! o7 D  [
" u, B0 \9 i2 N; Z7 [4 b

- @0 \# u. O) e4 V4 JIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

% F$ L6 g6 l1 R( d$ @" q# X0 k) {. f+ Z7 n' f$ Y
oh really...: y0 W! Z* d2 O: D# `
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
/ v) E9 T+ ]7 C8 `1 s& di didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題( G6 O# Z0 S0 M+ H# [, r8 v
9 D9 M9 P% }3 F& y% N6 U: I; f
當然這是個假設性問題
1 k% V4 u) r- k" F但將人數倍大, p* Z3 _8 S, V4 z: T
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個1 B+ \+ Z4 C* j9 l- r
(情況可以換作其他)) ?# q( K  i. P1 M' u
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
& C. C0 g) {5 Y3 o! N, Z如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
4 r; ^& P9 P+ q! P- `如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:; R1 ?4 {. E- b/ G
絕情谷既問題...3 w2 N" U5 }5 T) x
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...4 ~. Z) i0 O4 S8 [3 n* }* L
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

8 g  ?( x! h, m' X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6 o" |' i% ~6 r1 d1 o9 u( i7 v
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5 U- m* ^/ ^- p
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
4 A5 [+ X, a$ e( j& D0 }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 ]; c7 q. Q6 C5 W1 h3 Z
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
5 R4 t- Y# N: y. h& L  {9 p4 x' f' S" {( m9 f9 L% ^
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) K3 \1 `% U8 d' B+ V; ]
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:$ f6 V6 u/ Z# u1 |* P9 y
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

' C/ r  W" S2 T( f
& W0 ~/ ?- O0 P8 |7 ?, N
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣: X- P: A8 }. H' Z4 x# V
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....8 v" L! T% s# r" C: J  T  h& ]
' S5 }: w! L& b% k3 L6 |
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 child6 b3 V5 e$ N& N: \
yes, my reason is helping more
' a4 @) ^7 d" [, Q: A7 ~; M: _for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!) Z  b8 m6 c3 i% M" 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/ P. [8 r5 f; q3 F& A
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
+ X( {7 `' `3 j( [5 x1 Salso 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!!!( D6 |# J6 g2 s2 I! Q7 O" `
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!+ f" ~- }, D. P% q3 F/ E8 M" g! `
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~~' |' J" W% ?( Y: g% I7 v
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
( B( R' P" x8 B; U) T我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~# r- |& O1 ^' U7 p* H7 k
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
  r- m& b6 M, X& 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~~* ^5 |! g- J" x3 Y: \/ m4 f! Y
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~~2 _" [  @* n( @' Y+ }3 N; v
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
" W2 @# Y1 _: ~3 E' m) p# q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）