Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:; \4 l$ ?3 W% B3 _, i3 m$ N

2 Z8 B8 |. C- g' |7 Z
$ t: u7 S" N1 F- h; g% i; z; ?我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

9 R0 R0 o8 K1 a+ Z
' p' p) C! q2 E+ A' |
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:4 p, f. m! s, P4 ~: {& P

# {' M0 n1 |4 m# T3 e! m; n" q: L# z' S3 K
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

3 ^& I, @& S1 t$ H4 U0 Q, z3 l  I; y
oh really...0 k- b) Y* I4 F7 c% y
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"% p" l+ g5 O9 t' Y
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
5 n, ^. ]( m$ P4 c; F0 B$ c5 Y4 y' b8 B. n
當然這是個假設性問題2 Y+ Y1 d3 y9 E1 p/ m7 B
但將人數倍大' A0 I& m6 q3 {0 J
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
8 T0 u' ]. Z7 I. F/ n(情況可以換作其他)
9 X' n  I: |: v( ]$ ~, R始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
' q2 R6 g$ T) Q# `$ e/ H如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
0 m# f2 V8 L# n- h* `如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
9 n3 M+ Z1 L* p1 F) N/ Q絕情谷既問題...$ ^* {4 V: y4 x) R' y3 M' e
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
0 ~# W6 B) n7 z0 k$ D6 @( l如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

; {4 X& R! X4 q. ?& Y
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
+ O9 _5 M7 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5 R1 }3 \# Y# y) c7 E# r
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩3 i! Z# ^; N  A/ }+ m
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$ ]2 ^7 e$ O- Y3 _' m6 S6 i
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢9 ]4 `) o% c, e9 Z  w

6 _7 h7 }  q6 B4 Y9 d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
( @% y+ q+ U3 q" T0 h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:
  j. u* W. B3 a& Y) c其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

( i3 x# S  Z0 a' O( O
9 \, N1 r7 h2 A- [3 @+ ]! Y; M$ m
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣- V0 c7 l# O8 [! a
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& l) m% N; ?: I: N: q! A

& p# z4 J" ~# {. C! P, G6 h& ip.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- H) W+ n( [" K, k2 w6 {2 I& V
yes, my reason is helping more
! s4 _' d5 \8 [+ i: X0 Z0 Pfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!1 [* t' ^( b( D7 G
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child% F, B# s3 @, l4 T% c. q0 n4 K% G! z
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
2 Y( K3 t) Y) C2 e( ~" \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!!!
% @0 e9 h# G6 \. [9 omay 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!/ L  u" F8 J9 G5 s6 t2 S" \! Z
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~~- i* M2 ~( m: L) Z
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
# P$ [' F4 L; _% b' ]我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~" ?. W0 D3 T: G+ ~( i' N
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
0 x* B% O  ?, |" ^4 P, o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~~2 L/ E$ V4 k( e/ z# ~6 K) @
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~~' C; x1 d8 b7 l; _
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
) |! W# g  v3 s7 n, U0 {# L" q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）