Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:- Z. [) A# w2 V. _
+ c& H9 P* f' f: m# `5 k2 h
! N& r/ o9 }8 m: `5 s. Q1 |
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

2 c" c4 c0 V* F# P- o8 v5 R1 {; ~
& y( r1 c5 [. t" j
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:5 n" P1 X1 W% V0 l
0 `( M. U  |4 A: ~8 |

, o- x' b4 d) q' vIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

: o, }0 a% U- G: ?$ N4 x
3 {9 D5 W3 ]# g8 c8 Roh really...
0 A2 z! K, s+ O# whahhaa, thx a lot^^"
) {2 c/ @" W  q5 Z. G9 ti didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題, X$ ?* w( e  {* s6 d! p
# x; v6 z1 W6 z, }4 q
當然這是個假設性問題
) G0 |7 B  f7 b+ r0 b但將人數倍大8 \5 m/ n8 ]# d% b* v
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
/ P# |% Q7 T, z(情況可以換作其他)
; P1 ^" w7 e5 o+ n% \# F; j始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
1 N  V( v) Y; T如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
2 ^: |# [* z/ ?4 V$ V0 ~& Z如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:4 S9 J* P- V- Q' I; j- J: h4 P9 J
絕情谷既問題...' K) i- V. a% @; F
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...% F5 X7 [  m% Y& o" L- U5 a) s8 }
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# e; H* j% L* y1 E" \7 n
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9 ^- v6 I" g( I4 ~* a
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
, M8 |3 m( M( z但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
3 z3 |3 b$ _2 @$ G# c; X! {+ C+ B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+ ?1 K6 q) H9 ?
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
! p5 I- d' ~2 r/ {3 q$ Y; K( P6 y  M
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; u- x1 f" n" ~# K$ g
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:
* I% ^& Y: J- u1 S! P3 ~" M: Q其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

( C* h: k1 C, @

' X& x4 N) S% C3 t- Y3 uhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
& s+ N* p4 l$ L/ |- j9 K1 S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....
" ~  A) s3 J% V; o9 Q
  y- V7 F( f) y' G4 Pp.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/ E& J- ]3 i$ g$ M* b0 j- m' g
yes, my reason is helping more; i3 w. C! b! Z3 E* @7 q7 U: [! f
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
2 K3 ~& C. ~0 T6 R" J- }if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child; s; Z8 C$ e9 N2 ^1 T  k
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?, D; t/ L) k2 D, i9 q8 U5 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!!!
5 c# d- P# W6 m: T* b1 k/ ^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!
' R& n3 g' `% `$ f- F& ]5 K6 hunder 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~~
0 p& V5 B" c8 p- F- u! I+ V當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
: V  q2 }* [1 v* Q* i我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
+ H$ t+ y# U% t8 A5 M正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~( G/ y6 x/ X' b. J3 r
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~~
- z: k/ U, q/ j; b  e( D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~~
& M" L  x7 b2 ~* k; e5 N但如果o係當時o既情況中~~% P) a  @- s9 s) j& |0 S) M$ a9 ?
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）