Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
6 Y& p# @1 I# |1 U* p( {6 _( w3 P! D+ n' I2 _" f! M5 q

  f# w, \; |0 G' x7 g+ S) y' z( h3 p我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

9 n/ L7 Z4 ^; z. i6 O$ d* |$ f
0 o/ Z9 O0 S; k/ s5 OIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
1 Y8 j0 L* ], v# u
) I; k  ^  F" i2 h, o  J0 A, \5 ^; |% g/ S
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

$ {/ L/ L4 c5 t$ j
0 F0 L% y- ^* Boh really...2 F; ~0 u, f* a) u
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
, @% M8 V! v3 G; ?" B- ^! |i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
2 t' `8 b* R/ N3 |7 a- A/ I+ m7 X' \" D+ y0 ?
當然這是個假設性問題2 o; e9 j* q5 b) v% L' k7 u  e
但將人數倍大
  v1 v4 @( p8 ^! v# v4 f9 _5 n, i例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
& R5 U+ O+ @. |& Y; d" y2 ^(情況可以換作其他)
3 i, @+ i/ j, m- L5 v7 q+ X  t6 ?始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
1 \) k/ K+ i5 C& Z) s' Y! g如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
9 B4 P8 s8 ?$ V$ [4 D* R如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
0 a6 u4 P; x( h6 n( D. }, I, w絕情谷既問題...  G. I1 A8 Y' o( {' S9 P8 V
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
+ U0 T( G8 B) R& e2 W如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

- w4 ?5 R8 B; i! c6 f) M, Y% 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
$ q* f  `; K! w; X) T& H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+ s$ w* y6 `, x" _5 Z1 c/ U
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩" s+ r3 O2 y3 u# X
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
4 `' D2 z/ u& k. F" A! N7 W5 D! x9 t其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢% X* ]* F2 I8 g9 {/ d' u( C/ [

7 N7 n+ q4 X' f! f, x- @( 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
' |( b* a1 v6 I# S0 r. k9 c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:2 b% D6 O- ]8 L
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

* |% u$ _9 L" `; S0 l& t5 E0 E2 r. J8 `# `$ T" Q3 F8 V
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣* w/ v/ R2 V- Z
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....
( {+ ~) e8 y$ C* }* E* j+ {$ I, i
  L# z; c6 K" A4 l, G, qp.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
1 Y5 {# F# S- ?4 P1 H4 _$ Lyes, my reason is helping more
8 b7 ^5 ^. B  W% \# b+ x4 x6 ?) @# Cfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!  o8 S" x0 u4 e! 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
  @8 Y& O' q6 o2 P$ W5 Lbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
9 K. q( i# B! G/ ealso 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!!!8 w  q9 M0 M: Y/ X/ U, ?% ]
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!3 L8 V1 {. a, l) Y
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~~
+ e/ I1 d1 ~2 P( |) @0 c當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~3 a/ U4 n% \- ^5 t; ]" _; @
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~$ }' ~% g  s# `" q
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~1 a- P9 Z: s: P: x9 N
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~~
) ~# L( a+ \# L$ `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~~
* q* n6 N( @# o6 @4 Z( Q& c$ r但如果o係當時o既情況中~~6 I5 q5 k+ N+ R& ^7 C8 B1 ]/ `
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）