Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:8 r* A2 {6 Q4 R  @7 \
  n' N$ \/ {% c6 F2 P

  _: R, _1 h4 V+ A' ~3 n我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

: k1 {" l3 ^  u5 _9 t8 _+ M
, N* i9 l6 N* u+ x" |- f
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
$ f1 W; ~9 K5 k# ?8 b1 o* `3 M0 D/ Z6 c1 T0 G
3 U7 O4 w% S) n8 |* y/ H& C5 b
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

. }  p) C: ~, K9 ^: ?
7 m) X" n! K, Goh really...# _" S2 f) ?8 i: L6 a$ z/ x% g
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
. _2 {# ]: P' T/ J" L7 oi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
6 r: g% ^7 }  _' ]4 H* w- D- R  @+ Q
1 k0 O7 I; H9 m, u* I! n' ^1 V& ~當然這是個假設性問題
8 s9 a+ X  y: [但將人數倍大
/ Q7 a4 L" R( N4 D$ q: Z例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個+ k6 U- [0 J: n2 ?, W: V# Z
(情況可以換作其他)
9 S# e) n$ T; N" p. f; [# Q6 ]- F* Q& ^始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
& }6 W( d# V3 q- x如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...8 x: E: N8 j; W. i) z4 Q0 o, U
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
8 U9 i! t2 W8 N* o$ l絕情谷既問題...
# a! F1 n% g4 t" |5 i如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
. K1 F9 ?. d- p7 `1 J如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

- F5 v; l1 p. \) `* X% z1 T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# k6 e& n2 V: H, 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: k4 @0 W& L' E0 {' p
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
* V9 V! M* ?" O6 A( h3 R" 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 u# z; g7 {, }1 W2 {
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢- g" w6 g2 E4 H- B/ Q1 K# Z
0 E% {0 X6 a0 X+ a) D
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6 V- I! v1 z3 j& h* F1 B, |
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:
* A3 m3 {' {. u* a/ R" b. R9 S其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

: b% E) I) T* r; Y4 {/ I, ]3 C' }% w7 W. Y- q
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣- v1 A5 H/ y8 y' Y* I
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....- s( J/ a+ E- r: K' u5 E+ b

* A* z  @  F$ \) G+ s- I- l, Vp.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
, a( R2 b7 U. S) B2 jyes, my reason is helping more
+ n6 q" u5 U9 ^0 W7 J. tfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
( U/ ]  y& \2 Nif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
0 m0 Q. b1 [* r0 L+ Ybecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( F, C9 w+ U5 _5 I$ T% Jalso 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!!!7 Q) Q, v% k$ c2 B; |( j
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!
. U, g6 t; i6 ?+ S! r& n" r# 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~~
% V1 S& h6 p) p; S- `, O當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
7 e% C5 g- r# o- j3 P! S3 j4 B我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~7 M; T7 t1 x* z& B
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
6 {1 p2 w& _  Y7 n' C8 Q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~~
# K) b7 [# y  c2 U8 G- W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! j6 Z6 T; U9 {- l* M! _但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
" D# Q( j: f/ \7 V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）