Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:4 {; C: x- i: _* z6 m9 R; ?* ~

/ Q+ w5 t1 X% J  {2 ?
# m* \' @& a  d% X: _我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

+ W: t5 L. a, \; M2 q& K5 L; M0 l5 Q! r- h+ N
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:9 P+ [" {9 [) o/ B  i: s; s8 T
8 k$ Z: l, q" I% g4 c, G+ P3 c

9 {4 I+ d, }. c  h& m' c" K$ yIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

4 ~9 P. \' i4 L1 v: W; r' X
! @7 N: z. l8 T: Y% i  Eoh really...
* Q* s1 h; Y9 Z5 ehahhaa, thx a lot^^") u; W1 n3 N. q6 x: K; R2 B
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題5 I7 d) Z3 Y, D, S. C
1 Z/ I' ~) H6 a" n: \
當然這是個假設性問題+ j) t) Y! s: j, B8 F" Z& T
但將人數倍大
5 f. O5 o" Y3 a+ ~# d例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個* G  O4 n/ B% F. C9 v3 q+ U  q% ~
(情況可以換作其他)
. o% B- s. B  b; u; |: o7 p; j始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
+ d0 o/ f5 l/ H; z1 y5 v, \1 I如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...% _* _- Y$ o! N2 c& r
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:/ d0 M4 T" c) i6 Y9 h
絕情谷既問題.... N( w5 c3 K$ l0 K9 z7 R
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
7 A$ D5 y0 [& X8 E9 U# m如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

: v: s3 n7 }* L. a, |! |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 |! s8 B8 A, b: ^
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+ G0 p( z% e# J# B7 l
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩  ?0 Y: f3 \( \  P+ A# b9 D2 ~) u8 D
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 A" a/ e- w# N4 i8 O$ A3 p
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢0 z; Z* i9 v9 s9 d, h1 ?

3 D$ h: g) d5 R; U$ 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
0 v8 ?6 `! _( A# A+ G& p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 {: g7 h3 t" E: \
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

" r% R' |! W, @6 H9 Q7 W; k
. T- g' J2 H1 Q  P; R& r3 khaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
/ P/ H$ q; E% x1 A7 s$ Y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....
* y2 i0 [2 M" M2 S- H# j
5 J4 e8 b3 }  W" Yp.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
3 J3 b# f& z. _- Y3 X5 i4 ]yes, my reason is helping more6 T& [5 f9 K) Q) z- E9 ]& t! d
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
" t% A9 q8 A+ h' n6 gif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
3 M  Z  ^! A% N$ T+ g" D0 Zbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
$ b* u3 ?& j$ R% 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 b7 m! g# v: Imay 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!
* h* K* [# E) g. ^0 n# P+ _& O: @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& [7 Z' v# Y
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~. n( ?1 C5 N0 u- ?% i8 @
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~5 T% H( Z5 Z* |
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
. i) i7 n$ n2 I+ h2 B3 p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~~
! b1 h9 t, P  H" x3 I3 G7 E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~~9 V2 {- H+ J2 @/ a  H3 G
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
9 [1 ^' |5 T5 R# H8 |- u' 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）