Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:! Z/ }- U% O" a5 u+ ?+ ]6 Z
$ M" C$ m: p& \' h# P

3 o4 D; `# p. J7 U1 {5 d我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

$ i/ x6 H1 x8 o" I# H/ m7 d# m' V" b- N0 S) ]8 A; U
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:- _1 H# Y) `( D, B8 q

, q; e4 O% p. e* v; B5 ]: c2 e9 U6 Q% V- d
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

( Z" O0 V4 o+ [
9 c1 x1 k. R3 V$ Y
oh really...0 g" `& q' s& V4 J2 q( @! n
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"+ z) Y6 p6 j, O8 |  \/ k, E
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題; G3 r6 G$ `1 j% s9 _0 {

; O5 ^* ~! O! [, M當然這是個假設性問題
& r, r; F. E- P  k2 N& ]0 O但將人數倍大/ P9 K+ B+ l) ]/ ^8 g
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
- E0 I* h/ j8 K0 _  o- E# i(情況可以換作其他)6 G/ d" v1 `( _* C* I2 F- i
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
3 n  n- j- x% o- C! \( l3 Y( J如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
: p& w1 `1 Z# V' h7 _如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:! k( T, L4 |% ]+ @, ~
絕情谷既問題...( ^5 @: O4 U5 U: x! G% D4 m$ @
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
# t, l- Q+ x+ m9 @1 B1 E7 K如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

1 g- P1 t5 r3 \4 E6 ^$ c# Q
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 O- F  e$ H( \, W9 ^
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# V! N. }# W4 h7 p
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩- w  w7 ?$ E$ P1 {# l0 @/ N
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: }# |! J4 X9 ]" s
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢2 p. e1 ^; {7 _5 x

; a, `# z+ i$ q8 m5 B- j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4 e5 W" g4 E! ~) T% s) 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:
( b) ?* K% L/ I其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

  I/ d9 u5 }! X9 }
" g& s0 r8 k* M- B, D+ t
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣: k! Z* u( N# W  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..... d) b+ X. y! K+ s( ~
4 ~  N: @4 y) y' t
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
8 g) F! c  k: R" |+ ^! y9 gyes, my reason is helping more9 [' s: g0 |) K- A: N* d2 k
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
% t4 J+ J/ p+ O8 l. X0 ~if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child: P9 t7 O- _9 D! t7 k' ~
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?& o# v2 A/ f" u, B1 N5 f7 i
also 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!!!8 D$ E9 {# i4 ]  i, P2 `: n
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!( a2 s5 _# o% H% C( Q
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~~  U( E( k' ]" A( P9 Z& m) D
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
5 |/ d/ ?4 Q2 {5 v/ \% T. H我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~, ]8 }; Y5 j$ X
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~  h/ L( x, v2 ?; T- ?9 G
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~~+ j: U2 a2 k' B: _( |/ |
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~~$ c1 e7 J9 m9 a" k  c$ e
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
% j3 t5 ?7 y" {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）