Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
2 O- i) e' ?, @% |4 h- @8 ]
/ \8 a' K( U+ D- C! ]1 c( y
2 y+ H3 d) j) R% i  L% s% V我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

; k  H$ h/ ?% @$ o/ y

) E. w! i1 z. ~' q/ [In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
1 Y9 @; g/ ?* h0 w& B' c" P) {( B- b8 g/ W; R( W$ A" U; {5 S

+ C( q% Z5 i6 N+ R" G( NIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

9 Z' K, B* E4 f4 Z4 z+ `; x- O

; H: A" r; x( @5 r2 ~' u3 `oh really...( Z# q8 U; l3 P; c2 [
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"* l% l' Z# F  {
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
( f( L- c# q7 Z; ?  y/ ]' _- n) [
3 P5 \. ~% r+ J9 e當然這是個假設性問題
, _' D+ v( {/ n$ b2 X但將人數倍大
8 ^0 A% Z: S  t( |* K例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
7 ^  G  Y8 Q* x1 C; g' C(情況可以換作其他)* C9 o! H+ @+ Y% L5 E! [& b
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...6 z5 X( a- C$ T% T: |: x, y
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ V2 ?. Q) a, |* m, 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:' w7 |- Q9 }( B. t1 N4 s
絕情谷既問題...- L; y2 G$ Z7 G% C4 I
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...* f; t: o* K& ^2 J0 G
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# Y& \" m1 E% v9 D0 h. e
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" x4 {* u6 s, J7 e1 p" P4 ~
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
% n0 i5 b4 S7 e" v( p9 T6 }% k9 u7 U但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
! @! @: K7 p& l5 L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
6 `$ ~2 C" z2 |: [( A; X  l( K其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
% B3 G$ n+ e9 j% D: m7 X, s7 y9 L) h" C' Z
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& N" y* G1 ?! T! Y1 c3 C8 {+ {3 l& m7 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:
+ v. {  Z) H% Q0 t6 J1 ]其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

: F2 \$ u9 e6 {/ ?7 ?7 W6 b- \4 o' B, j# u. g! Y/ r, z( m% Z) l( ~
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
, g: K/ ~7 X1 M; v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....! E% o" _/ t! p1 |2 V3 w
' `  V' S6 D1 v
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 child2 E4 t" ]7 `# c+ C
yes, my reason is helping more
' _+ q* S+ O3 o9 i% Z' P# e: q9 `for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!- }6 F$ t0 W. r$ |$ 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( C& O4 f8 N& {& h/ V* s
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
5 n" i0 o* x4 L% q" yalso 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!!!
$ A8 l" D8 }& ^0 Lmay 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  `" P! p0 d" P! R' e; G* Xunder 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~~
( G- C6 {( j* b6 p% w2 P當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~" q5 Z! O  l: A
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~& j+ s& r+ n/ z% f- \% g6 ]/ q
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~1 Z! s! V2 o$ q" E  B
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~~) N5 h: H0 G) n2 N+ C" 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~~$ r' N' k( v9 \" ?6 F, Z
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
( S0 ^: K( x+ c, n/ S( f6 D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）