Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:% o% V" A+ y2 j! i& o" {
) C. f3 h2 J% @& I  I5 V3 M, A
% N4 c" A! ?3 o
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

% t; |% I' h; }+ f0 n% r" Q" `3 D
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:* Z! Z; Q" T8 \% }7 K; R. g

/ @6 N3 Z, Y% {% U- V1 X
! v) j2 f& h+ L5 e* UIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

" J8 |/ g! a7 U+ F

7 i, G) J+ w( ~oh really...
" m8 _: ^; O, o: Y% G) Yhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
  e3 j$ ^! \8 Z5 c2 T  ]6 L7 d7 gi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題! ^* ~% g1 h1 S- H
2 R" t$ P8 L9 l
當然這是個假設性問題
/ F# d1 s( U7 I& o8 I5 h但將人數倍大
% O; n0 c" y; k例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個$ D4 Y6 d& [. U* M9 W& w' U1 J1 ~) Y
(情況可以換作其他)6 T" a/ E$ B! c0 i9 U
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...4 c. B- n7 ?+ X. g' ]" g, r4 A
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
! ^8 C  J, \: {如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
- k0 o8 `0 [5 l# E% T絕情谷既問題.../ o' l8 P4 U. m+ T3 m* d; _. U
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
# g% D" S  g4 S$ C: l, Q6 c3 Z, B1 X如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

  w& |4 ?) P; D) `" P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
5 Q/ i2 I# P/ ^+ r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0 I8 y3 @: u* P. ~
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩) y7 b: n, f, W$ 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
' n4 x6 a8 c9 G/ e0 M1 ^其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
2 _. f/ }8 l1 I, m3 f7 ]( P/ A8 g, w- v% h
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- E4 i- r! F* a
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 L& G+ w$ e9 c4 }7 [4 _
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 O7 Z3 H8 W' b& s$ f/ b  p% @/ V. Y

. _. ^6 i+ U) d9 t6 k9 C2 yhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣% V( w1 v5 z/ Q2 F; ^& 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....
. o# ^; I& L2 l' u+ K7 H$ F5 e4 A4 F& a- C
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
/ P) h0 W' w. `7 x$ E# m. ]yes, my reason is helping more* C: m) |" R" X" }$ @& ?& x& y; y
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
' k5 y/ y+ _- V1 Z1 M( ?" Dif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
5 \0 r8 _; s* T% cbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?2 Q; l9 c) ]# I; o0 y9 k- W
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!!!
- T. b, R2 T1 J' K6 X6 _) wmay 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!
8 o9 t( a: G) j2 i5 F( Funder 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~~
. ~6 n+ N2 L* b& ?$ j" w+ H) T當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~9 K3 ^3 z6 K  f$ P8 Y* ~, `
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~4 o& H$ Z7 r7 h/ F3 N& c
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
! @: M3 ~8 u5 f7 n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~~9 N3 A" P( _, n3 C
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~~% g; v+ C8 H0 Q+ |0 {" h; A# O
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
, b4 k# w/ {. F+ e4 v. A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）