Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:* p5 F  U" \$ y/ B! ]+ w" ]
$ O" i+ o! k- f8 T
( {7 G/ N3 U- F2 Q  K
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

0 u0 z. O4 ?8 X3 W
# T6 Z/ S% D  l. O. xIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
- F4 o: T8 m( A2 _4 n! ]
* _) A) B; r2 R5 a- J( U0 s' C% A# u! @: V: r# j
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

) b1 N! P+ H2 p4 K
3 f* W* z9 `) ~! ]
oh really...
8 C3 w; i1 k& ehahhaa, thx a lot^^"4 b& j9 M+ F# l- J& x, j; C
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題( ^! M5 y2 P0 b

4 W* u: T  ?! H( z5 C當然這是個假設性問題
9 h* B0 @- x$ X* P+ Z但將人數倍大/ K& T* g5 A( X" E
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個9 y$ n( g2 A( ]
(情況可以換作其他), M6 X0 e. T+ M$ C) _# H
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
  F" c* B+ ?! t" p' C如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...0 L' e" k# C; {7 C2 y
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:" w* r# n* p6 g! v. Q
絕情谷既問題...
1 u( l1 m. ?, m0 Q, F: {如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..., t5 L: Q! F' R; R" D6 C8 w$ w
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

' U/ k% J/ Y* \& X3 ~& l
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
* j- @& @. B; X" M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/ F( {- i  q0 {2 P" Z
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩) p! ?* V$ a2 f
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' M! |0 k. ^' s4 T, b. P0 K5 w1 c
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢8 V3 |! w: W+ T0 ]+ w7 `& d

! {9 f  z1 p8 Z$ s- h) n* ~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' f- B; p- c) f0 E
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:
2 I9 ?1 r3 I6 a5 U# {; Y; W其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

/ Q, a. @* r& x9 x8 Q! g

+ Q; e2 ?7 _0 `% Jhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣1 A! o/ [- I8 D
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 J7 }: U7 V& e* P9 t& O+ ^. q* n

* e* [+ L# q+ o6 _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 child8 ^& R8 p. _/ ?4 c
yes, my reason is helping more
, j% @, E2 E) k: [! Bfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
* V6 n1 S% h$ u. Aif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
# I8 K& v1 t) v& Bbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( ^, Z* c) c* q9 Qalso 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!!!4 G6 f/ K- k" Y! x/ m) T
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!. t( Y8 k7 \# b) v) q& D# h' P
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~~) X& _2 J5 d" n
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
  Y' S' V6 l6 U9 \* C  U9 E+ l我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
$ K! {$ H0 e& K正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
6 }* }' |2 G" e+ v" h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~~
# F% S1 C4 y- H) k9 ?' h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~~
. ~: x! X" b. n3 j- Y' }但如果o係當時o既情況中~~+ B# ^/ p* t6 {& A
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）