Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
4 {  b( K6 G! P9 _. [
/ D! ~" z* y7 ]( x9 }/ ^; f
1 L. u) }' i) T. N; N& W5 a+ X我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

, x, D' k1 t. Z7 `( ?, V) x" t7 l, j% u: X  p% R1 l0 o7 w
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:: |4 Z3 r- F9 a% O: V' P4 _

. W  x5 y4 p$ M5 m2 O- n( r+ e# r% g
+ \( g7 I. @* d; @- LIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

+ g9 M# a$ q, u8 r

/ `; F3 n5 H* k7 a/ F6 F2 M0 g# Roh really...' e. F. w1 S, M1 I' F2 w
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
' N6 F. V, x, yi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
3 B0 l. [! I- _/ @( b4 x1 o" P& t) e* b  D& \
當然這是個假設性問題
! U' T" l0 u# c, N7 }0 E但將人數倍大8 L  V+ Q* E) W' Z
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
5 J( f  H5 g. a/ C$ l(情況可以換作其他): D4 q9 J7 n* O+ E* _
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
6 H0 A* w# r0 H% q: @如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
9 R+ U, I# g4 B$ |2 y) c如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:: ^' P2 b: @7 W; d/ }1 d
絕情谷既問題...; V" l# \- n6 C' p# g2 |$ ~
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
0 `% @* y. ?. S7 p) x  M' V如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 p8 W) F$ d2 G  K. l7 ~8 S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! z& a* @% d+ _( }; Q7 B
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
' T: Q; {( Y9 H1 y- K4 a% {$ v9 x但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩, h: X5 T/ Q# L% A3 a
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
# k8 L6 C. M8 K其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
+ u. D: y8 A' P  c: h5 S6 [1 K& Q- h# d# r5 M, {4 e- t5 Z6 e
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! I$ l  G  H; a' `  M1 Z5 Q; C
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:
) l. Z1 C7 M, y1 E( f* o2 {' O- i; ~其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

2 y+ E0 K4 M3 v+ A. f' f
$ I& Y2 g! h% x8 ]2 z* ?) Rhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
4 g& c5 ?4 w+ u6 X; p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....2 n+ J6 S# ^, J% M' v, ~
* \+ S" H# Q; Q% f# @
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 child5 l3 S8 G. J" n: b
yes, my reason is helping more
' u  F; S' g5 M' kfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!* a% s7 A# a9 d( q" s# b$ N
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child0 F: @( d2 c# g  b4 v' P! a
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
2 T+ J) s3 d+ ^% y* Yalso 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!!!, J8 d0 d4 ~# ]# `2 O0 v8 [  s: O
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!+ {! N0 a- l8 l
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~~* ?% r) N( P; t9 `. J
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~6 {1 e$ {; e" g; @7 W
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~; I3 G% X8 i" c( T) Y
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
" s& S* f2 s& p- }; w4 b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~~
! e- a8 }6 K. H# `5 [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~~
4 U% u1 Y- j2 ^$ e, T/ K7 @但如果o係當時o既情況中~~& n6 u+ A/ l" 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）