Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:, M6 P6 _1 u1 u. K
4 F- T& X; |. u

: Z# a2 Q) l( J! `/ `7 x" u我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

1 Z% e5 D2 Q1 O+ |7 s

1 ?4 }; m/ D- `1 M8 |1 n2 `" cIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:* x. \' Z8 @# u6 U, y7 U; N
; Z+ `. o7 G- {5 ~9 ~, E# I$ c
1 A; R6 f. E, H: P( H
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

# b7 O( z9 L8 @! ]! S" g* T

1 ?# V1 \3 Q+ c5 z" v  [oh really...& M  \" f% q: e' y& H- e
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"6 G4 Z1 w# n% N( @* h, D# U3 E
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題! I! C8 r; L$ N
/ B3 j8 K- ?: Y: P
當然這是個假設性問題
0 q) g6 t+ Y7 D1 P" E& J但將人數倍大
% R4 M7 }# O0 ]例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
) q* T( u: y1 R( E(情況可以換作其他)# n+ q2 M: ]8 c8 l5 Q8 n
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...& m0 a9 ?4 k' b  b( d
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
0 G& F2 F! a; l" p如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:; u! z5 O' F0 j
絕情谷既問題...# t0 E2 |0 ?( G$ h& y
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...8 _. Y* ^8 h2 \" I( m: k- L! D
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

$ T2 B8 F9 \  I* E" \$ N, R5 f
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" Y% |2 C3 \) ?1 X' 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
* T% D/ T8 M: o: e但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
. a, D* S$ J5 J8 |% b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  B- x) B& _2 C! S
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢7 n/ p3 t5 Y( e1 r7 a/ M! [7 I" s5 K( b

* J3 {$ x$ X7 A( v" _4 n; l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& O; K: L* P8 o& X
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:
- D: J  l9 {1 S' t1 x其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

* q  P) o6 Q. |
$ o& E+ ]7 o) o2 b* W" F
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
5 K' `2 {" E5 S! 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....
; T' M( A# A* r2 o" S* T& p$ p+ s/ t( U
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/ d4 \7 M& L  y& t' R' y( M
yes, my reason is helping more) Z4 I/ x9 q. D
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
+ n0 w* z# b$ u0 l) m# |if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child) b$ R9 a* n: P8 G5 Z
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?. O& Y# _4 K  O1 l% L
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!!!
  n9 q+ J$ ~1 [# Z/ W0 e# ^/ gmay 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!
+ J* c4 {9 W) W% _2 i+ Q7 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~~, m! `; b1 w7 Z2 l
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~% n; |% x1 q1 w4 k$ J  J0 c
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
$ p, q) [* l- U3 l正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~4 ^- s& ~& N4 ^. q; L
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~~/ @& ~) p; N( X% f8 K" x1 t: D
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~~( M6 `, ]) x7 L- D) \4 h" `- C
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
) Z& ?& N/ F8 f0 B1 O5 K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）