Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:1 b+ v9 Y$ m* @% S: ]7 l1 a4 e- D

/ C  \5 }( M8 W( C+ Z$ Q
  f% x; q/ v4 |+ r! v+ R我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

3 y; P2 L# J, Y! j2 M

+ F& x4 a7 |' Y" }  ?" f7 uIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:. ?7 u6 ?; x& H
2 k5 q3 z/ w% L! D9 M4 W

" P1 k! i: o+ n7 B, Z* Z$ XIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

- M5 i1 F4 Z# h
# N: Z( j  T! G2 R
oh really...; t# ^$ |* l$ i# \
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
9 n; A* o: e/ Z2 s3 f: yi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
, `( f# U2 J( T% H: y& S0 K/ K  b/ z8 i, o' p( M7 r0 d! t, x! f
當然這是個假設性問題
) M/ {5 q( K+ x3 Z# F  A) Q但將人數倍大
8 r' i; n! j; i9 @2 }例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
5 J% x& e0 R* }- L, S(情況可以換作其他)( V, c* u& B8 p/ R3 D0 [' `. ~" B1 a
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
# R0 G0 a* c- d6 G5 u4 ^, o2 e如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...9 y, G3 [% [! k# z( c) ^: L9 J2 |
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:4 k3 U8 Z+ x( f6 Q! U* V' K
絕情谷既問題...  B1 n* e/ Z6 S6 D3 r+ \# i1 Q% W
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( Z4 ?* {% g" s4 g1 u4 ]
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

" w5 ~3 {8 h" @7 J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4 k/ {: [' y0 d& 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& t* H, i& G: h( S6 K
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
- S9 i$ ~. A3 B4 ]9 M  K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) n- e* w: H9 p
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
* e# [& B" u+ A4 Z
4 W, E. W* B: m- [: {" D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
; H# L0 U( g7 J* Z0 h, [" y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:' ~; v1 W( K) v: j
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

2 c7 b1 b+ V  |) b5 N' o  C5 D/ p& b: V
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣8 e7 \8 G2 T& g
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....
! |. f; W, K/ a+ q
! }2 z/ x! g0 `  `: bp.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) `0 a. j& }8 i% `3 Z
yes, my reason is helping more0 A& j% [+ x3 g+ {' `' ^* j
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!) F" Y2 d. {0 ~0 @( o: n" @
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child4 f0 ^) m, d* p& s. `4 [
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
. @. A# T3 m5 X$ P' d. ealso 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!!!
( M" n( |7 i! P1 l/ d9 Hmay 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!
3 _# s8 G1 u: ^9 z( z" t* M- Q# Kunder 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~~7 n# {( C: k1 u! W6 R2 A5 u
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~! C3 k5 W! P) U/ C
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
. B7 H  G, E* V& S正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
+ Q; P# c5 d1 A" z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~~
6 F5 M" l  f. O2 R' I% F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~~
5 T% J1 b% ^" C# J. t但如果o係當時o既情況中~~6 u/ h7 w8 A9 F) t6 j
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）