Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:/ y6 P. q$ U9 D0 m6 f+ \/ r$ Y

: o4 h* N9 u! Q% F! h0 V' C' I2 F4 c9 u* v
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

  \* T% A, j( y6 a5 }9 V' h2 W! j; O- {* Q
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:5 b; f! {( z* `

, \) d7 n8 E# V1 \* ~  \. g7 m5 Z0 Y6 V4 S3 S5 p$ s3 u  N
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

) g- q2 x1 Z* R2 c) t) A
$ @1 v" T8 k2 C/ I) K8 m0 n0 n
oh really...& x6 J# b5 d9 E1 z
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
/ l6 e! ]3 o4 ?4 Yi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
! g" i9 O/ S9 ~0 Q" s' \" J' D& Q( n# w+ }) C
當然這是個假設性問題+ O# _6 z* W/ C
但將人數倍大! g0 E. ^0 z4 e
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個8 R! }! F! T) Q6 E8 C
(情況可以換作其他)
' [! j# z2 S5 P$ \) h始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
0 z: {' k6 T% J4 J6 N! G0 q如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( p  v) j8 L' s6 K
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:" \" Y/ }7 _8 W; d% l
絕情谷既問題...4 [6 I2 N: ~) y$ j& ^
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...9 k5 W$ y$ {6 J0 ?+ U7 H
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

: V/ {- x; _# P$ L+ }* I1 \" v. i
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& h# G* `; N% ^: ~" 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
! \. Y  S0 C5 W$ o但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩" ~" F/ E4 ?2 t" H( `
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* \1 q0 f& W0 }; B- _. l
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢! G8 B8 @7 O  e

, u5 u5 e4 ~  Q9 J9 J+ l* v% 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
- @) c, Q) T1 ]) t  t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:: ]9 C. |7 P, X# T: i
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

9 c# T9 y: s2 @* _  L7 K
3 X9 T# X  F/ @haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
1 t% C" \4 l' n( t3 m! f2 Q5 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....
! S( T, G9 \6 y; [& O; _, z" ?. B# y9 x. Q4 h7 [) ]
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$ e7 G, Q; k/ I$ }+ N, a  Q
yes, my reason is helping more
& {3 e4 d9 v: l2 s1 W( jfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!& d" u& Z9 E0 a* n
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
5 N) p8 ~7 ^+ _; h% e2 x1 _because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
; S1 O1 b1 \$ falso 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!!!7 x+ Q+ j& l1 T
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!
! H- L. w+ a1 e' z, }+ gunder 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~~; d! \8 T5 x; |$ H3 d+ z& b
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
% Z1 P7 j3 r, F5 g我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
& [2 y7 K+ ^( m2 j' N+ H2 S正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~( X1 i. n' ]# ]& z! `: _
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~~
4 H2 O; e6 d1 C# m2 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~~
1 B' i/ C/ C) Z2 \- U但如果o係當時o既情況中~~7 R) ]) M6 W7 ^+ }2 T  K' A
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）