Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
2 g9 r# [- V  R/ h+ M# d
% R! Z: V# J# k  ?& T' D6 |
- x. Z. y9 p) z* S4 O3 y8 O我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

+ p' `; k* O) O

. u8 n  L3 {! uIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:4 B; F* }; `) T4 V+ H% o6 k

5 N- S( x9 G* M( \/ Z
3 E" K3 ^; Q$ L, [2 A% \3 xIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

# q/ z1 ~0 [1 x8 h: R- r1 O2 N. A# J
oh really...
5 m) O( D1 T7 o3 {hahhaa, thx a lot^^"$ O( f+ k4 Q. W$ b2 u7 ?
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
7 i- u: V7 A, f- P( h4 ^( b
" e. n' c9 U1 B& B7 P1 p' I當然這是個假設性問題
% C$ }0 q( j$ _但將人數倍大3 G4 l0 k- R% F
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個5 G) N2 O5 X' a0 b! b6 \7 c; ?
(情況可以換作其他)/ ]/ J. v' V2 H  W5 j
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...$ Y+ y8 k. e+ C+ K% z( j3 ]
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
: u& n# H7 ~. ?& A$ N如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:% }; o$ V7 e& q
絕情谷既問題...' s- g/ r4 B" {& M! W% I
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...3 C: ^% F# \3 M3 t2 [) J+ Y
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

9 G- ?; n1 H$ L6 g2 h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: e' D8 U, g, o% T* F, g
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: l0 v& q) D  B5 a/ O' f
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩% s1 J& N  z" V) P7 W' D! N7 _
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# ~# {; w9 P7 O& N! O
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
5 e" c. R* y" i- c9 n
5 R8 e' l" o! P. P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  E' q8 ?" Y: f! [. Y: d
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:; k) s9 t: \/ ~( [" E4 j  H( _: o
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 p" ~# n6 I9 d. W9 C2 R& E
4 ]2 G% a" s. x- _" q
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣$ l0 z; j' O1 \0 T# ^" Q! G
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 U8 q; Y9 q& _: T2 d/ b5 \: p7 R6 O' n, T$ l* z2 G
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
, r- T+ T( A: D! I. X1 x0 x3 m; X: D1 jyes, my reason is helping more. \! P3 A# q0 c, x
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!! L5 s1 q" }! p0 V: `8 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
* N( p0 N4 P7 o: w6 x' Wbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?9 q/ ?; c$ Q; `; k) f! b0 l
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!!!% U; b7 M) T$ e7 u. S$ `8 r
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 T) x6 T# L2 k7 K4 C+ y
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~~
1 z' M1 Y; p8 e3 F  L當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
/ M: w' _; Q; s2 d: j我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~( Z2 Z: z' ?' C/ H" ?+ Y1 Y" \1 s0 a, ~
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~* j1 H" n1 W4 I& d& I  j  f
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~~' {, G5 L" u9 Y* @
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~~
* ~. {3 d5 q! P$ ]但如果o係當時o既情況中~~0 b  Q3 k/ w$ Q7 N: q* {
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）