Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
* K# W7 t3 h% q: z2 b. m3 ^4 ?) g3 f2 m, t2 C3 B" m

2 Z  w* U& V8 P) C$ L: F" S+ {我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

# ]+ L1 i4 R; V5 I: S1 A5 o4 t0 \/ D$ H! D) F; P- g1 L/ W2 Y
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
( Z$ x/ }+ l5 k  h9 B( f1 R9 N! T5 ^) r! f/ P' p' O% D
, q# N0 `& T$ o6 ~' V
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

- E/ g  t! Y! K
4 i* D) K/ C2 K6 r" poh really...
3 }( y# L& X$ N0 ]2 X# ?, Rhahhaa, thx a lot^^"0 ?* C: Q" A2 b! I5 F' o
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
" I+ [! B1 u$ E  ~- [- w
: `, L3 z1 d" e' |. ]0 J! R% w當然這是個假設性問題
3 W7 Z. M& M4 f但將人數倍大4 A. y6 w9 n! ]* {) i# v1 I
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個4 Q& n. Q  Z) m1 J5 P0 u
(情況可以換作其他)& `- N' g7 M9 d
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
# K+ q& E+ e+ E4 C: O如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...' y; O3 w1 R# S0 ]) j
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
, n2 d- a: T5 O! ~. F' B/ F, x絕情谷既問題...0 K2 Z/ }7 D" W- [) o# Y" t' S
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...: q- I3 d) w& K/ B
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 R- t) M; k) Y4 o9 _
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
5 \/ x  H8 W2 y3 h5 h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
4 m: P! Y" p0 y- J8 E. o; y但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
6 m1 a$ _( K6 c: D4 R. d+ Y4 W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
" T# t0 b( ~  m& R" g* ~其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
1 a' B# k. `$ @1 \. M: S& Z
3 h/ p' `3 r+ z$ L% N' Z8 `( L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
$ A* n2 F- Q$ `8 h/ l, A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:
5 M4 k# E8 ?3 r其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

  ~* f& \6 l( D5 w1 r! ^# r  S

# z9 S0 b& Q- B  z; Y2 k+ f/ m2 l* l' khaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣8 b  ]0 u# Z' G7 w
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....! m9 q. h7 ^8 g5 i/ H2 _9 T3 @

8 O( z2 c# R% op.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
' R5 ]5 z7 Y" zyes, my reason is helping more
/ H0 P/ n0 W1 n  {- h6 ufor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
  v; E* p  I( n/ fif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child  [  ?1 I, k) L( s+ j
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?4 t7 Q. u" I8 m' f9 c4 Y& a
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!!!9 G- C: X" |2 \( e4 Y: e/ ~
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!
5 e+ S2 r# b8 u3 d7 G* X0 Q6 W( K% Funder 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~~; ?6 r1 [. Y; S3 j* e& h% c& ~) Y
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
4 k2 [, [, n, i: w1 Q4 q我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~6 u$ }" B$ `. u1 R1 M! b
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~0 Z4 H0 y% a5 C, v( B& i
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~~; ^9 r" Y/ s- _1 M' 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~~+ V! k5 H9 {; [1 o0 [  q6 X
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
5 M% B& C( j" 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）