Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
; b. _2 Z! L3 Y+ f+ J% `$ U) G* ^

- ]# M, y! v( |我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

% o9 K5 m0 l, B. P2 C) I( N- i/ P2 F
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
/ b6 ~1 z/ L# ^, y* Y
# V4 C9 F; q2 f5 H0 ^% b
/ ?6 f7 k& Y, A, c" @  ^- w% b: IIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

; w# U4 z) T. ]+ [9 |

2 f! I/ j' g- {0 g. e. y- xoh really...
  d( b( W& v7 M  b  Vhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
+ Q# j5 K: N: c# t3 }( ei didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
6 _+ \4 T7 [" o- `) y7 \, _( Q4 n: l. U' p9 ~  N: a. z
當然這是個假設性問題
; ~# m0 I( N. Q! b8 u1 h4 f但將人數倍大
7 X: H, U0 d: [例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
" N' X3 f7 z6 E3 u! I% P' n9 I(情況可以換作其他)) |- i! u# d4 m7 o
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...( n0 [& U# w: `* t2 K
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
  x" p- {7 S5 S, h9 s& v9 r如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
5 J) A% F# d2 Q絕情谷既問題...% s4 ?1 \0 \" |. r5 v. f6 g! y
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...# d6 f# v- F1 g' D* J" W) e8 \
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

. a% S; Z; W( I) B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
* o, z' Z1 L6 q+ e% H) _. h% 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- Y) [/ I) `. E9 e/ V) Q' n2 `
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩- x- f# [! t' E$ O
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
- v2 Z6 j" i+ L( E! D, I其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢; t& d4 ~& p9 ?9 u3 ?) K3 z! n
/ l* a5 {8 d5 A+ D8 Y. T
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& S3 H- x; p( }5 i
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 r6 @3 p9 w. C4 y; K其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

5 N# M" K. e7 [0 F6 W' E
2 c1 n( v- F  I2 ]! _  c
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣2 }$ \4 [7 c. L& I6 g) Z
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 f. x  \) C4 L" g( f
- T: \; M6 }. ?6 b3 m  Fp.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
) K) G2 U! [9 `4 \, O( zyes, my reason is helping more! l( `8 R* e! U/ C: I4 j* a9 s
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!* P- a, }% K/ U
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
7 \5 L' }7 I- Pbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
8 @0 K: p' ]2 e" lalso 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!!!
9 A* t# u8 c' u& X2 \& @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!
. S. y$ `$ v: N3 Y* \: R+ Munder 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~~: _. W( |' T% p. i
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~& e) h" J2 X* E( C! {' Q# X  c
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
& p/ n' ~% d' w' t9 S, \正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
5 o, `( E3 ~/ t8 k. G; ~& [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~~1 |! \5 K4 D) n1 o& B
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~~# W! P8 d$ h) m' ]
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
* w; a/ x/ t8 Y, q# F# v' N- ^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）