Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
' G. D3 W7 Q, V+ g% o
) L0 f0 W# u, i$ v5 @6 c  E5 n; |! w& S* f* B
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

1 }! V- Z! T3 j
2 l1 u2 [/ F* m- o, |; A+ RIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:9 Q6 h' w, v: t! W0 y7 A; c/ y

/ T7 H+ N) |2 ^; @3 l! f- L
! J4 d- Y$ ~) m/ E* W7 t* AIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

; t3 Q4 I, {: u" x0 n6 A
* ^; K) H: Q1 b8 g4 ?
oh really...
) K- `  n, o; B/ Thahhaa, thx a lot^^"
5 J0 c: ~3 D! a9 t" Di didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題8 u1 U* Q1 s& G: m
: \- m0 J7 I# Q' c% e  I1 v- a
當然這是個假設性問題
" B8 M* ?; q8 J1 w( S但將人數倍大
0 {7 @0 }9 l2 X/ Y8 j+ O8 A例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個% ]1 E" m/ }) d% B, @+ W- Q
(情況可以換作其他)
9 A! U. \2 E' F/ m9 R0 ~  s3 S始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...9 e) T" S, f% \" J, Z
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...1 q  z( t! \! @0 j" @3 G8 G; _
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
) Z! k$ b3 o) {, M2 A$ k. r絕情谷既問題...
+ Y( b- V9 Y7 W! v0 R' K% r  \如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
- L1 }7 J% d* O9 Q8 y9 N1 e1 \如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

0 q. ^9 c: r' B, f. j
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. o3 m3 T- ~1 r; J
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" n& j2 Y4 ~+ V: H1 |% e
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
0 F# x; y0 L4 l9 P* e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0 l$ h1 W0 Z$ F2 W
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
" M1 t9 P* e  B* b1 x! E+ c. t' m' K! C% w" U
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
# Y4 U7 A* ]/ G7 [; M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:
4 N6 V" ^; `  I" ^  d其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

& C. v+ D7 _" _% Z+ C$ |! \& C) G$ |( h8 R
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
; ?/ W. P, ~: R5 j" K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....# x8 d3 c( T7 g
; x9 @& V- F# W9 u* w0 E( s
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 child8 f5 c3 c& S/ ]8 P$ D$ n
yes, my reason is helping more
+ Z) ~" l  F6 B( g' |for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
% @. i/ T5 }4 F& l/ P! S1 Yif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child' H( \# K- Q: Q1 M% B& r2 t
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?/ u3 W" u9 q) g- |; M
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!!!
6 y" b6 W5 N" C3 ?; i4 Y+ v1 X# Xmay 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!
/ I2 X- G( ^5 I9 E( N2 w4 punder 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& C  O% M: B% _+ A# _當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
0 |. e0 @& l7 M5 M: t我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~5 S3 O7 E1 E' W' Z  D9 _- W' I
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
$ {5 ]; e: L) }* {- K- H' a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~~! ?6 K9 u: @; T
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~~5 ~7 ~% x# d/ Q0 M& d
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~2 b9 C# C: f3 h5 M
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）