Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
% I9 s! c* b/ K- u
6 x- {9 c8 P; ]: _) c" v& @9 @, u2 ^3 c2 G- _6 U
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

; s5 w) n& f0 u1 y; T( M5 w
- o& I5 E& g1 L) i- m
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:; o- ~8 h& J# ^! _7 l

( C( p1 U1 [+ H: c: g
* k# q/ X4 k. R) r; K* ?6 V7 xIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

6 k. d  X" C: d$ k. h: j* I$ x7 a

5 `" [3 B, E7 f9 h8 |; I5 Hoh really...& w/ t$ Q- G4 w% Q
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
7 ^& }. ]8 u% ^: G& Mi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
+ {% Z: S  W" b( K% H) K9 @: K1 w, Z; }
當然這是個假設性問題
2 L6 _; s) g0 H  A# L# T' Z但將人數倍大
, f8 v' z4 |- [  {7 [, u例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個* B7 w4 t$ H) A. a& e3 E% Q, C6 j
(情況可以換作其他)% C7 u! p# u# z/ ~( f- o0 b  r" A
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
5 b- q2 X4 |) ~8 i: X' W, C+ h如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ \2 x( ?' d9 {6 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:
& H* `$ }* p, r+ y& G" b絕情谷既問題...
$ j% [7 c, f, S6 i如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
, [+ H  I. L4 }  K如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

' ^! Z0 n% |- h9 h. `8 b% \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6 m/ c3 y3 j$ l5 h4 d
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
, T8 m1 W/ w! i! d6 O, y4 Q+ P但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
) z' c5 u; ^8 r, 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
$ g# W  }$ l4 F其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢& p! B! @, T7 W( ]& \9 p
+ r8 r: A* ?5 W3 G- Y4 U
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. X5 R7 l* G; v2 v( \! j- Y& u2 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:
) f- ^' [( _+ h' i/ O3 P其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

& A! q- ]! p. o; s. r  I% W; |& G
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
7 ^- y; B$ R/ A; B9 T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...., I6 s! q: V; \- U& w# X/ G
2 C- L' }( }( k3 S( n
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" p7 `$ J8 @5 q* N1 T6 ]
yes, my reason is helping more" |5 `  |. v2 V; e* F
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!! ]1 r. @. e+ G  h2 J
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
+ X; d0 M/ A1 s, M$ ]/ E( |because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
' Z7 k& V& H" u% q$ 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!!!
$ z* l: N7 L1 v4 ~4 t& P* H8 imay 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!
* V( `7 \# Q7 z0 runder 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~~
% {" ~% a3 `& i8 d' S7 R( e2 r當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
) R& T1 a+ J( h2 U/ b' k0 B我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
  H& o4 r( w- }3 l. m* m正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~1 f" Q8 M1 T$ `) v2 e  B
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~~
) N! {& h' v8 C1 f! j5 D4 z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 C4 P+ Z2 f" O* ?7 V
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~& Q" Q2 Y. l0 I+ Y% {# B' J) D$ M3 y3 ~
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）