Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:5 y3 P; R. ^7 J  C8 e
+ p3 |+ }7 P9 X; N4 H

& ]1 n" N8 J! Z2 C4 F# v, {我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

' A  L1 G( M% q9 q8 O6 C. \! r
2 M9 x! f0 a5 ^In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
7 @( w4 j. B) ^, |& ?* v. V- Q7 h/ Z8 V! a1 i" @( k

4 K9 I3 x1 E, hIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

: w" M0 W0 _0 p: U: A
! i* s& V5 T. ?) y% F3 n
oh really...
8 Z$ F5 ]  y1 o. [0 ?, o/ x# Thahhaa, thx a lot^^"; j0 [  Q& A/ b$ X$ ^- i
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
4 f  N7 N# H  {. s
4 x. f) m* n0 l# L6 J( t8 o當然這是個假設性問題& }3 I, M. H7 G( ^: N) w4 }
但將人數倍大
' p1 o2 g# ]" I, C1 a5 n+ w例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
9 q: R+ h8 `. x' t+ o(情況可以換作其他)
* g+ w; v. G, E4 B* M始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...+ W* o5 @/ E% G4 i
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...7 O8 c3 c5 b- _6 l& K) g7 a
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
& p5 _2 k& O( s# j1 }) ?$ g9 M絕情谷既問題...
" I- l  v9 u7 I! I1 {; u' D如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...) ?- r; F+ T  F) j1 J
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

5 F( ?& s5 d! O( v* q
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
2 p1 G0 @$ p; L% P/ X) ?! O, i1 n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
. E, q9 ?- q4 P/ ~但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩4 |( c- Y( R) @( B! T+ F
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1 i8 [. B4 v3 S$ Y8 [
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢& M# m* i) r6 a0 R
5 p  I, Z# P/ ]; @5 r
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 z+ s/ V3 Z+ D& ^, _, b; j0 H- 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:
: N+ l; L; X# X8 e. X& u( l1 _其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

6 G( y6 X" O- r
9 d+ z$ O* v. w0 g' Y
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
5 |. c3 w9 `$ k6 R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....
  i" `2 r4 b* y" j# m- p, {  |) A2 F7 I1 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
/ O8 y: |% J" [$ L) e) Dyes, my reason is helping more* ~# |" w% c2 {: b7 C
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!6 I. `4 t; H) |  _  ?
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 a& O; r: rbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
: _! N! R" b7 i7 balso 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!!!- x; g/ D' z1 A9 U0 w9 u/ W
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!
+ R* `5 j% t+ Q" C. g$ f9 \under 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~~
9 w" S0 N1 E1 e* e+ _5 b" a5 Z; u$ H0 X當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~! E7 y" N% U: S2 i8 I; r  `; H3 J
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~: n/ ]# T; l( f: h* R/ J- O
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
2 \7 ]" ?/ \7 g+ d: T. X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~~' m" `0 |+ {; e/ W  _' 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~~! s, b' t0 F2 z! w' }! K# Z" j9 C
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
0 F5 P, v4 b9 ~. 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）