Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:4 ]. j/ U' t- w) \+ H/ U% w+ i

1 `9 h0 a: @, w' V1 n/ g0 k- w# D! Z7 g) Z
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

8 ^6 C6 F+ ^- t- ]! |2 u
5 c7 ?3 \/ ~( s$ w: ]
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
" \' \& \' i& |
) L/ H/ `% u5 t7 I% p0 D
, e8 b8 F" o8 |, ]8 s. Y  `# wIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

7 H% x2 D. i) E! r' e0 e
& E. j  H8 a" y% @oh really...' U/ Y+ |) K# C
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"# q5 C+ \2 J3 k7 D6 N
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
2 @, [% }; T' Q/ E
- v" e7 ]! w6 v: u2 v  K. }9 X& R當然這是個假設性問題! Q% Y; f: {$ Y
但將人數倍大
% [/ }/ h* a; a' u& E4 a例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個! d" [9 [1 n+ ?6 T
(情況可以換作其他)4 R. ~) `; L: W) o9 s5 o
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
$ U' Z+ }% L' K( a如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
+ D1 t/ }# V% P+ D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 V8 r" P. ]+ p" D6 e. A9 w絕情谷既問題...! o7 n9 @  _. c( P' _
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
8 K; h- H+ j8 s/ s如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

/ R0 m. }  d/ K7 f+ L
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 I$ B( r2 w6 m  ~1 j
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
2 O8 D0 E; H% l3 O; ~, @3 D但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
4 X' |, }& i, c# k1 p0 C; K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+ d1 i! A' {8 `+ {1 r6 o
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢8 ?0 f5 ?$ l- @4 G' |
6 R0 Z9 k7 J& J) c4 u+ 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4 g4 U0 L. K% t& y! }. b
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:  w* w4 l& x3 u( o, L0 I
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

; b$ ~: u6 I% G+ _1 L, ?; ~: X6 P! O
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣. B+ \& _4 ~3 L/ L: \$ X5 X
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....
4 E& L5 x1 q" Z/ l0 Q! `' L; g9 s  _% D5 c4 i5 v6 d8 B2 I: X/ F1 p
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 child4 h, z1 ~% w, ^
yes, my reason is helping more, P- v% c  H: {
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
9 l. }" }. |& Wif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
" g# u( Z. }# P5 Y% qbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
$ n( Z4 ^- q# Salso 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!!!/ ~( j$ u% p! p) ]0 ~5 b% N& t+ L, E
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!% g; m- C! S5 E# Z/ K( N2 g
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' F" K# W* H. o6 d當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~. E' {2 t, a7 _/ Z  F1 y
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~3 A9 F/ a* i2 \: e
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~4 u7 [# \6 {  W! P' j+ a$ _: @
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~~! }7 x6 P* L; ~! U
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~~
( `4 b& O0 [/ E/ t7 _, i但如果o係當時o既情況中~~- z- D/ G2 N6 W, 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）