Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:4 o* g( `0 b3 T2 i! h! f5 z

* L2 x( U- `) ]6 F- s) X8 Z% B
  x; C5 X4 v3 z0 g! ~5 L我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

9 t: v" A, o* O: p$ @3 J& J
, C6 l- f2 x' y) a6 C1 R4 D# N
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:: |3 r. K/ o+ j) ]
" }$ w& g2 A+ U

+ k+ V  ?0 U* }& v! f: qIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

# U( n+ I5 ?$ F

7 \" D! m$ u3 a7 d# |9 Hoh really...' I  M3 ]0 l$ _7 U, ]9 W* n) D
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
7 y$ T" @5 N$ b1 x. B; ?. p: q& Zi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題9 ~1 M8 q$ E4 O9 l6 F  ]

7 I" j0 T. u) @. A: k0 a5 D7 q當然這是個假設性問題
( R7 Z. w. \! u5 c4 {# |: }但將人數倍大
# }4 I) e% N5 r9 b, V例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個0 @2 N* p3 _9 j# M3 L$ u
(情況可以換作其他)& Z. S$ T3 T$ ~) Q- T3 M' m
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...4 e3 W6 z/ L  U9 M! ^/ r1 @5 C
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...# P' ~; M% Q# n9 B0 a4 K( `
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:! c; H7 [4 m/ `# L4 A) j2 _
絕情谷既問題...8 ~5 z& ~& X0 _/ M3 a' c& }2 s
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
0 l( b" [/ h1 q- z如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# @* @' Z. D( D8 ]2 H. Z- U) 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: ], a6 Y& {* n  }  T6 Z
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3 \! A# V* k* L2 ]2 v; }  K1 \" X
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩) d- }- d4 z$ K' P
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, X, U' K" e9 U  u5 M
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢6 T9 ~6 l% z' w9 H

- H- W! b4 w, n3 }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' L) N5 b; x' Q& k+ C4 }
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:2 f0 Y4 E. X9 E4 |' @6 ]1 J9 H' G8 P
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

$ u; l+ ~4 T( m4 X/ F+ g
" Z3 B# u/ A+ U5 S+ D( K9 s0 g; Y4 U) Dhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
  E* A, K& U* W+ h+ O, o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....4 `* Q( f# m  Z4 x  a7 ?1 H
. R6 U" {; W' y
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 child0 [3 E- p: B' j  Z
yes, my reason is helping more2 J. f- R9 J  v3 S0 k
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!  }/ ^4 X2 d1 u0 ~  u7 \
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child$ h1 M- y. F4 X+ c$ Y. {5 z
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( p9 t1 }' h/ Walso 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!!!7 \5 Q$ V* [' K2 J5 u
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!! [* ?8 f1 y" x1 S
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~~
3 Z8 [9 Z5 C# [8 I1 y當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
3 U/ g( O6 N! ]4 G5 F& H+ C# u+ F  L我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~3 |- a7 H+ e( ?9 |/ @0 w4 k
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~' r7 K& u+ ]9 W# _5 K
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~~
" b& k3 N" L8 K, f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~~
0 P9 \% l9 K/ N7 S6 m但如果o係當時o既情況中~~* {# y6 \5 f2 W! l( i- z- `
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）