Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
8 [* a* l% @6 _' B# A5 u& u. z
+ |. F9 o5 L7 Q. f) n
( `7 [$ A7 J$ s; C! {我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

2 n, r6 Z' `8 ?7 n# a3 T6 T8 |7 W8 L( D
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:$ `! |# P' A7 m  C' F. G( |3 b
% [& }" P: ^  U$ d

2 e' m$ ?) t$ \- B7 K% Q  O, J# D% sIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

1 N* W7 v5 p2 h) @+ f) N
2 x. i! B3 j5 n; K; N) o6 koh really...
7 P- h% ]9 ^! D$ v  Ehahhaa, thx a lot^^"% {0 ?- G; Z! }( I
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
, ?6 y0 f# L" O; p6 C! r8 f3 Y7 o9 b5 ]% f2 l+ y8 O
當然這是個假設性問題) _4 n6 ], K1 `3 ~9 Z+ a; I6 z
但將人數倍大$ A9 j5 T2 o+ Q! w, k! |
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
& u; @- `9 I( k0 Y! P0 J, B& \(情況可以換作其他)
: ?- Y) w7 Q0 J" @6 {8 W/ V始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...0 ]( @9 V" a: _
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...8 H( P0 R! {3 N2 B% X; ~
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
$ I& I5 M% c3 n1 N2 o) t2 z絕情谷既問題...3 T& e2 p: D, n# A- p3 E6 i1 c
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...5 ^4 n+ g+ [$ m/ u% y  c( O
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

5 _, J% u$ H# [+ B" n8 j8 F
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
& ^  k5 g, E8 |+ |8 r& e, m; N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
5 f4 Q/ V2 i$ ?; k5 O/ V3 q% K但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
2 E4 q" i$ j1 {( q3 `. ~7 a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
4 k9 f# j( \6 s$ h8 Q! @其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
3 f- X: S. d& y1 j* S' q" h7 s6 |4 t" u+ Y. W
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
9 r4 f6 V/ O! y/ F0 w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:
( B( f# y2 }: i$ W" V5 Z其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

4 S0 w1 S( l) ]) b# A

1 U* C% {, h* Xhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣: H2 D4 z3 v, W7 }+ O4 i+ W9 D, C
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....
' J- f4 q/ o1 T5 O
; I8 ~, z! |- S; I, ~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
. V, V: J0 m2 ~% J: kyes, my reason is helping more
$ x7 }/ |! D9 gfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!# b; A. O$ x+ @* K& D' E' l/ X% V
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
) m0 R1 G! U1 Z, g6 a. qbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
8 S+ m  i# ?- B6 B4 z( 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!!!: Y/ S% Z5 F6 B0 P$ h
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!
/ p1 x- e8 @3 z  O1 U, t9 ?4 v+ ~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~~
& B" J$ e. d$ Y0 D, L, X# ^當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~' Y1 h2 b+ z4 z( {
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
5 Z- r7 g  L7 j* n, _3 @3 s. [7 L正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~  I0 o9 O8 u- ^8 x- n0 m! O
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~~$ {+ Q# U7 }! ?
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~~
$ j+ \+ m8 G4 P但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
/ v# f- c9 G8 y2 L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）