Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
6 u' H6 U& F. S1 Y
9 }  e% o$ q, C& I) f. _2 |8 z8 T: l6 _
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

7 v9 ^# f& G+ u, S3 y3 T+ {. E3 L
/ J. w6 D, s. y# x; v% f% _In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
7 |; G9 q8 x; n6 t& p
5 P1 A+ r, z" Y* G3 @2 g4 H! c$ n* d2 s& s
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

- }9 X* D5 h  j( x  q) u; v4 c3 [: h9 i$ T
oh really...
% B) L+ y6 v' e: z& [& phahhaa, thx a lot^^"# B' _- k. q& U1 k
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題4 K7 A  G  m% Y! \1 j) M- g4 ?

% B/ v0 G; {! k* k當然這是個假設性問題
: F2 ]9 y! f3 X) Y6 V- h$ p$ n但將人數倍大
" O; `$ H) X: P* a$ t4 G9 ~例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個' @# B, X8 j) }4 Z% K7 N- Q
(情況可以換作其他)
4 T( N7 s$ v  H' Y始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
7 W/ Z' e) [5 m  o' y如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ E9 f5 u7 S# X0 K. r6 H* |如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
& |: R3 A3 F- V: {! l絕情谷既問題...* y3 s( D' T. e1 h
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
4 ^, n/ u& D* z/ {2 O; z$ T9 U. Z如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

4 N8 J  x, W  t$ N, B% c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
' g8 ^0 Q9 ?6 E& @7 Z. ]# j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& ]' Q2 k- H3 }( U9 \) a
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
: |2 T/ R! W7 r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& f0 ]7 ^3 R% J# F
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
+ `* F; i4 f. ^1 T* J; y3 \6 x# J$ b3 z5 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3 t8 B! L, R& {. ]$ s5 E$ T4 Q
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:
9 d5 B# I+ E- o* m& X3 ^其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 ^! x7 N5 y! x- _& p% q4 A, D* J
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
5 I( f; p5 u/ o& O+ L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....6 @: P$ `; i$ A) `# o6 B$ _

" e& H) n" `1 j( H- Lp.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; i( m: c1 ?8 R* w1 t' _, q' }. A
yes, my reason is helping more, f! p* S5 M8 A4 O  Q4 s
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
" s- a7 g( h" T& B/ J9 Y) kif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child& v! j% L! w1 v7 h( F) |" ~
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
; N' Y  @2 C9 H8 c- R2 d: 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!!!* i6 ^+ v! o, _# C3 y
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!4 w; B6 O2 ]/ D& G% M: I4 H3 t
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~~
. w3 I8 O( ?& f1 @: c0 o% [! H4 w當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~4 S+ Y# ^7 x+ R
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
; e% ^8 }" F, u: w# W6 o+ [% }, k& ~正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~! d( g+ D! |2 d
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~~7 I! Z4 L0 |, I/ W- k* i# B+ d
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~~/ @! l8 r2 c/ D. [% T
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~( p% V0 \& M3 M+ E: I
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）