Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
) |! U- v- c9 [4 z% O8 {  R! a9 s3 z8 l0 _
% o) z/ B8 p0 s$ e3 E: {& q
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

) P% P4 r7 B0 P
3 A, M, m; m% |: B2 g  t) T
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
# @; T# }) ]3 }" B( e- D
1 N9 k5 R5 n* M% C' x6 C0 `2 J" V2 k2 I# [8 e9 T" d( g  n
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

- A5 B; B. G( Q* g: c7 p, k
2 i- x4 m$ @' s  I/ toh really...
! [9 I9 z7 L: R; j" d, a+ d. Uhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
; T0 b0 G7 S, f1 z9 V! A0 di didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
5 o- v# W9 ~# ~& [6 u. {
/ C8 v% [: x: R$ g4 B' i9 U/ x當然這是個假設性問題
5 i" ]# Z: N' m0 A3 m. Q3 M, x但將人數倍大
7 k, h1 d9 x# U2 P# c# A. c4 g0 H例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個- t% y. a! |1 Y2 z( ^
(情況可以換作其他)- q1 [* w2 ?7 b) X
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
' o) B) W5 U( D. I$ t如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
5 T* S; s* @; Z0 w如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
! m( t8 |7 ]; ]# d絕情谷既問題...
' h: y1 p: |/ n如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...1 C3 s$ e- d+ A7 [3 d
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

! F3 }7 {7 w* R- w5 _
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
* {/ A+ b& a% x3 Y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/ w4 f4 W3 k! Z; S9 f) G
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩& {6 F! Y" I- W5 e
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8 p* ?9 @/ Y8 ?; i
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
( L, g. A) F% n; g4 t: \
) U/ n7 c& C0 e' q/ w/ o1 z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) s* @9 `" 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:3 q( v. D0 e  d5 z
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

- v  h6 ^4 z$ L9 A5 a% m* z% ?1 H) d4 F3 ~
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣3 m8 y% x5 a5 v6 k, ]
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....
1 V" k9 \6 n9 r7 p
  l! Q, L4 d2 H% t& k% J: ^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
6 M9 m7 o# B2 d" lyes, my reason is helping more0 c5 W5 X! a- o% x# v
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
5 f! x- c3 C. Oif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child' w8 O0 d* A- K+ }0 w- U$ R% t7 d
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
+ U! O" p6 z7 X/ l' aalso 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!!!  c/ o1 G/ E8 M/ A% j% p, X
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!
/ l  K+ r) {- r+ \1 ]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~~. w+ u, B! Q$ g9 i
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~' Y, U) G/ F6 D$ R: X6 d) u
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
- t8 O8 s, K0 |  c6 R正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~9 k' O* [) O! u' n9 Z& 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~~: A" d4 v2 o2 t* v# q: N
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~~
) ?! d2 f! X" W& e! B* \但如果o係當時o既情況中~~( b6 B' x8 E' P8 Q& ~& W6 \" N
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）