Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
- M! M; z# w3 {) L2 ^2 [9 Q) n7 w) L, F/ B: k
$ e" h: z- N, x. A
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

  ~* G3 y& N2 n, \9 u* b$ V0 ^6 I+ @' y1 x( X# z' G
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:5 R7 A: C; ~- Z" p2 p+ m! k+ P5 \
1 F: A3 P* G: U- x
* w' O1 K- @; d. N% M* z, |0 H
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

0 J/ g2 j* w$ A" U& n6 E6 q& M: G
* Y2 S1 W5 B" Z* C1 D; j% N
oh really...! m8 e, _# J! o. l+ I
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"7 E' M2 ?( o4 r" @3 D( L
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題! U' A# V6 D- C' N

; T4 w  @8 Z2 q9 Z當然這是個假設性問題0 g/ k2 l# a- s6 X' r5 J( J8 p
但將人數倍大
; A/ T  D( h" E$ E例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
; I/ e, B9 e0 T# F% Z  a(情況可以換作其他)$ K9 T5 I: V( E! o! ~5 s& m/ f
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
8 A# R; _. ^7 `/ C1 q# ~! D如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...$ _8 x6 u" h* r1 I; ]
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:& C8 `1 d$ L& b& o4 m- c: k+ q
絕情谷既問題...
2 A8 m0 B$ U6 s0 G6 U$ h- C如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
3 Y) x& r  |1 D. S6 e如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

1 c# C( Y! b; ]- d8 z* O0 m6 Z" q2 z. R$ Y
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 ~! f0 B8 l! G2 {( k4 W3 r0 u: D* g2 J, 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
8 @) a% h" N  q& B% `但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
2 ~. C% s* b5 J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
7 N9 p) g. u( R: H! c1 x其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
$ O! `4 ?/ b  [& ~
2 r2 H1 [% u( B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
$ _9 ~: A$ B1 d( I! |0 s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:+ H- u& l, y; a
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

' n) r3 A4 c; c8 p6 ~5 r
/ G0 D9 U  ?- s
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
: U; g' s8 y0 n% f& c, 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....6 E& q, b' Y7 v& P% i% e
: ?+ {( }9 ^, v+ f# ?! n+ b8 ^5 `
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
8 ]$ ^. T0 L" ^yes, my reason is helping more& Z8 y5 ^7 O. N; D' a- U! s
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!4 I3 E4 I9 i/ J0 z: R
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
6 [# Y, k* U( b6 \; g0 vbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?3 u& c( ~# w5 D2 l2 b8 o
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 m: s1 q+ n( v) Q2 c1 gmay 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!
9 K* e4 E2 \  Aunder 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~~
, \& ]) X% n2 b+ a! c) `: P當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
) A/ U7 g: Q: {4 _% l9 l" m我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
0 l7 ]8 t* A. x& z* T2 |, V% g正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~: `' L$ {( {3 L5 \1 e3 ^5 H8 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~~
" g; I7 }1 A# }: Z# }2 ^3 }6 R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~~& ?" v- M: `% l# [
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~; Y+ O& q9 O- ~; Y1 t9 z6 n. x
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）