Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
  H& z8 R( `6 i! d8 l6 |" D3 e8 K$ B1 I' \
% b+ d4 k- N0 |1 A5 G5 d8 g
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

& s: T2 r' F2 L, h4 S
+ v8 B) P1 F- u3 Y1 BIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
/ \; @% ~3 y' p) d4 b: A& X. x4 b# e0 v, }* F* k( A3 F! F" \

4 Z- o' e- c8 t+ k4 l0 R5 t1 EIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

& r9 A5 \. V$ @/ V3 b, t+ _
- Z* y& [$ N8 ]- C& Q/ i; uoh really...
) {' `0 m6 }& Q1 {/ l+ d0 f; O4 ihahhaa, thx a lot^^"' k$ E! d7 i9 U8 I" s+ c
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
& i9 H* {8 `7 k8 h" F$ P) t# b7 `
當然這是個假設性問題$ j$ R" T& {1 P1 w
但將人數倍大6 o) [2 Q, \3 p4 t& \9 d# s. A
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個9 _& o/ v7 ~1 N
(情況可以換作其他)) p. E8 F* ~7 Q
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
. P3 n- Z3 h$ Y1 d! N* D如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
( ~8 w# c) Q# t. u: H) @' t如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
  m& I% u0 ?5 u9 u- W" K絕情谷既問題...
% w8 \+ m  m* }/ y2 y( _& U如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...# W' C6 o5 P/ B4 d, x
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

, X% X' n( M! I* u5 _% I& K
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" c/ X) _6 i6 d
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* k0 i9 G1 Q5 v2 D: w$ d
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩7 O4 y  B8 A3 }
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/ D+ g5 B4 D! r其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
5 B8 K# ~& f% B0 B  r' e; Q) v' V4 F. T& n" M3 G$ |+ I
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
1 f. t$ y) i0 U, C7 T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:
/ {1 y/ L% Y# z4 i3 w其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

0 S! Z" j7 a& q, R3 Y! w9 r, b6 p. E* N5 c
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣# O0 b, ^& G; b8 v9 P
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....
9 k  l5 Z$ a% j$ d2 e# S
5 o# i3 j: v* L% w2 rp.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 child9 O! S: r0 Z5 z7 W) |6 r/ V
yes, my reason is helping more0 j, Y6 ~; A+ i: ?' D! O5 y. I
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!! u5 u# I8 j6 y; F: ~9 ?: a5 w
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
( F; ^, W6 d4 B1 e* abecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?" P+ M) k# T4 h  M6 M3 i9 y
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!!!- v/ i# V) T! P) J
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!
+ S( P6 R0 l  ^( B, G2 eunder 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~~* }& E& b" D0 U1 w3 u
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
8 t- b5 n6 D" f! m, ~1 |2 i$ J我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~4 C; ?0 n. y+ z3 w+ g' y1 b
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~: J" I' ^% Q6 g) S
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~~
- [2 y2 v* E( X( P1 K$ `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~~
' t* B' G) D5 m5 U6 Q但如果o係當時o既情況中~~" G0 C; Y% d+ w7 f$ \
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）