Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
/ N. r1 [3 p; A$ ~- K: h$ g$ ]
0 }2 X6 j0 Q6 t: V8 Z8 o* ]9 ?8 r/ m+ V' m$ K. O# t5 \
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

, \' z; A6 `: T1 A8 i

2 K1 v. h* O" RIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:7 ^6 p* \( q- Q1 l# W

$ \- M1 S; m  t: a' }6 ~% R" J; y2 |! K$ N( a, ]; F
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

& R) m0 `0 k4 y* H6 P( e& \' C  y, F6 m% W4 r5 X' ~+ D
oh really...
$ u9 }* U) H# k% T- Fhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
5 a% s+ p  |/ o! S2 mi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
/ A0 }; C! D  n# x0 h: w, T7 t" U4 N
* K4 F7 ~+ Z6 n9 a. R6 q4 s當然這是個假設性問題
* I: Z2 G4 n8 b* l$ y但將人數倍大
: y) E2 f3 D1 {( G" X$ `; e例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
( j0 |' {  d1 c) G1 Q; M(情況可以換作其他)
8 F& K8 Y5 n; t  [始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
/ t$ `; v8 l, X: M如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
* B; ^* R! n$ M3 Z如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:" i7 l5 ?$ i+ k5 C! u
絕情谷既問題.../ p$ Q$ s# A4 _
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...' `5 T+ Q( ~4 ~$ c  e. {: `
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

8 \+ s/ a$ b3 M
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
3 V+ w) d6 v' L/ a' 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
% u7 ]# u9 `, p! d0 Y9 M但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩7 r& x+ ~2 o  T4 ]# m8 }' o
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* b: w; c0 X: x6 m. L
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢1 [/ b# V, p4 ^, O

( a( F) \" [* S+ S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
# |' ?5 l4 k2 X! c* l' f, }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:6 \' R  E' ~6 N2 T7 u/ B
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

* s/ }" x' n/ ?4 n: C
# G7 S* Y1 P, B6 q6 s
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
8 y0 u  o* U% z) I& l9 c4 g! Q& s0 x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 I# ]5 F. }; h' y5 Q

8 H7 {' y" E& H" R$ `! g* L  G+ Ip.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/ s; X5 X' B7 V+ x1 E0 ^3 X
yes, my reason is helping more8 H: s2 \$ l/ k6 c9 {5 r. Q
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!; r4 n* _+ j3 K4 Z/ ^+ w' u3 W
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
( E( j; I" ^2 q% _: q) y) \- P- J; Vbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
5 I! p2 f( L6 [- nalso 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!!!
+ t$ m" z( i6 `0 i* g% w+ }8 bmay 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!
: n$ G- k( [; I5 d- k" z4 qunder 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~~  t5 }- d  c; E" \. S9 z' s) F
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
/ Q0 r, P4 C  K4 @7 d" S* H( O% |+ N我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
8 a+ j. I0 ]' P8 H: B2 K" _正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
9 r6 `3 j2 P% b. W+ ^) J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~~
. d9 [' k& E% R# K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~~) C! w, v6 N0 T4 @" q- h
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~2 n8 x1 e& U) p; v/ j  v: h
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）