Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
$ `( L" l, i0 R5 [8 U: h7 r+ a5 m5 I3 `; f1 Y4 D% y' i0 H% B( M
2 `. @8 t, C$ [' ?7 m2 m7 }7 e
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

! m7 q" _( T( g$ K, v- M9 R+ E1 ?
- _9 ^5 D2 r) A6 W+ ]& A8 d& d
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:# d: M6 {! D2 O8 n& d9 k
/ k5 X/ v7 x( N6 v

& _- U) f3 @5 a3 fIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

7 w" J5 D1 b/ Y! {1 p6 z
( N" |5 G) ^4 F0 {
oh really...  w! C9 j- f; F" `- `, m. W8 A, I+ ?
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
% l) n. o( t4 F4 ^  m0 T9 Fi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
7 y" N7 W+ e: \1 W  F; l6 b( [( ^' q
; Q2 B; B6 d" Z! O! {! ?當然這是個假設性問題
- q$ E0 [2 w; ?! a! l+ t但將人數倍大' ], A# \7 G& j+ ^+ [) U" e
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
. M- p+ r1 k' @0 T8 F5 C(情況可以換作其他)
5 H( U0 I$ l  }! M3 P9 K3 b0 K始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...2 C3 P% V/ N+ [* P+ J
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..." W, r- N* ~" f. F
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:, G( P; D8 s% K: Y+ C
絕情谷既問題...
, A# ?% C) X5 e+ a" T2 u# E如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
) i4 V! s% k7 z( n0 [9 M* ^如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

1 x6 t- \6 }% D" \# k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' _7 P' A$ a2 G* m2 @& ^3 _' o6 u/ M
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
  }3 Y# q' A( N2 S9 o但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
8 `* ]$ Z- }% |/ c, P* m# S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
2 D( v! F/ s$ W其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
" ~, _# X5 y  `, d
! \+ W* R. s1 S# w, v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
$ w9 U# ]8 O. B% V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 s5 \) l3 |% m其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

, \# B# X6 t4 I& l) L& @; Q2 Z$ H% A9 t; n
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣. r* }) f1 H, n) e1 n( C
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....+ @+ B) \4 m& p* f. F9 w2 y
, J" X( ~! u& f( _% E8 w
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
! I: a  ^: F/ Z+ x* n# q$ f+ ~% {yes, my reason is helping more8 H" [/ ?$ p& H* }3 h' j. i7 l2 @
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!4 J! K6 v. M; h+ f& K
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child) ]0 z5 @2 y  _. \! B# f; N/ l: F: H
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
! C0 D9 R- z5 c2 m* galso 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!!!4 G5 x$ j, U! T- b
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!
& }2 z4 B) L! K  O; Q) P: A3 t" ?) Zunder 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~~
* J+ h" L  r( J" z( t4 w9 s當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~, H( @  p7 s1 Q+ \
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
9 q. D4 {+ Q( Q3 `正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~7 v  I% N2 S0 [; u) D5 v
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; C1 r2 a& g8 `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~~5 t2 z- T: }7 a
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~2 a5 f/ S9 g( ^
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）