Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
; C7 v2 }1 o& X6 c' f7 X! a/ Q  x9 p- g7 W% F2 g1 V2 ~; H

0 f, X# C. v6 n( O我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

1 o9 n# q5 x: B
  s2 a/ `$ o8 _! Z, z2 l; ?
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:& C: q1 [. x6 T
3 w) Z0 }* W+ U) h. h7 ^; n, l
3 m. H3 K. S( ]5 I. g) m) R& e
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

* n2 ]" [: l( [. @' z1 r
. z% F2 M" o8 J; M3 e: X. K
oh really...
; Q5 A& I: T( a. chahhaa, thx a lot^^"
$ t; ?; j. E1 Z. f$ ei didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
2 O0 E. s* r4 K! a8 @& y5 s
) l* Z+ _5 `. p& v2 m2 U4 f7 m4 c當然這是個假設性問題
. @: X* O2 K# F+ w但將人數倍大8 v6 O8 R: t. ^7 U$ ]0 z
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
9 ^, C6 g6 \/ Z. l(情況可以換作其他)/ j% f0 W, E8 z# Z* r$ s  `4 _
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
+ m5 C! j( z) v7 d) n1 o* s如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...4 |2 S8 W9 {2 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:
- U2 |$ W/ P5 J絕情谷既問題...4 r- N' c& C) M5 I9 H# k# m
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
  Z" U0 f! {1 u6 W3 |6 @) x如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

1 E% n7 u1 ^6 ]
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
& @8 N5 }6 X, k8 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$ R# F* p- V5 N  Z
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩6 C% \6 c3 G! _# o( H! f0 R
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9 A4 R  @0 r! b
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
% F: G8 _" }, y5 b2 |& [0 K: G# ?; i6 M) S! t  C7 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
, s. n5 ]. L6 p% g4 j" B, }7 ^0 d  ]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:
! L. w# G5 ?* R1 W( ?其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

# H9 I% N" I  o8 h$ |5 y) a1 C7 E" D7 d; i
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣9 |& U* r5 p+ N/ |0 b5 ]
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....3 `$ v' |2 }3 X& t2 M
+ C( c' z( v( d
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 child3 M& p$ A& m4 S& J
yes, my reason is helping more. X. G& I: J# f4 _: h  a
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!+ ]& ]/ l( S9 j  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
0 L- [/ D, ]6 P4 G/ jbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?% w% J5 k( N' ]& n3 u
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!!!! u- p; |+ ]- w8 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!  y" i/ w/ [; _2 z& x
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~~
2 M: @; J9 [7 O! Z1 H2 A( e當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~/ W" C3 c' U. g9 P
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~- V8 C. c* x. O, v$ M5 L
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
3 E/ l4 j" x, {( X; L5 G3 g# r  j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~~: _$ V' c" p' X8 n: A: ~" i
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~~9 F# }; |/ x  i+ t* E
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
5 k% G. N5 E: ^' [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）