Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:0 A# r" b6 H7 u1 d% S7 a8 l- X
/ T$ n) Y' Z) ]8 t
0 k2 p# D" h! R
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

/ p0 b/ j: C( E' f+ k

: G( |5 N, z- l: i4 }In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
/ d/ O4 z6 ^: v+ A9 `1 _; n  n' x* k; w6 K
  s- x% Q$ d- E
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

% ^# p) v$ O2 V2 B/ g# Y6 X8 h9 d$ J$ @# L& i! E
oh really...! c: ?/ ?. d5 f* Z0 a1 v3 U
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"9 g( G3 L1 e, _* l
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題* J& T& c1 l7 y3 n4 _2 ^0 ~+ x% e' o7 Q
, ^5 O/ P3 h. W8 p! x$ J
當然這是個假設性問題) S5 [( Y1 p# y5 s% u! {) r, O
但將人數倍大
4 ^+ b7 n3 E  O( n例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個" B2 F3 M6 S2 y  D8 d
(情況可以換作其他)5 x3 a) k. A  v' M* F4 y3 P& Q, M
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..." Y6 s; F) M9 ^3 C/ N8 J  A2 F
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
. D0 P( Y* R( z0 Y  s+ m如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:# D' K( }6 [: T3 [: d7 O
絕情谷既問題...
# {' A; w3 D, \0 O7 I0 t如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...0 g1 N3 B9 J# X2 _" U0 I
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

/ o* H3 _, \8 [0 _; b
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  R: T/ v7 ~1 Z
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
# w& Z2 k5 |5 f' ?但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩' B4 ^9 O( T# U6 V
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 u0 F  q1 G2 ]4 P  O1 W; Z& w其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢! Z: [0 @4 M# X2 `7 E# w
, Y: S' A  Y  y$ R+ e
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% p, i, U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:
4 V) g/ {+ d/ g6 G. v其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

) [0 [% R) n  v1 `
0 q0 |' ~( T7 H+ B/ h: k! T
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
+ w# K" r2 t/ P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....
8 b7 s5 I  |1 j& X' X8 E
1 J+ k) E1 V8 G% y7 K9 A2 Jp.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 j0 }) p, S& {- l5 M+ Z" ?
yes, my reason is helping more
+ P5 Z# S% A1 ^7 S* h6 gfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!  K, R0 ]$ C& v% d) x7 j% b+ [  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: N* r# T& h4 D' x4 t) ]% O, H+ m
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?+ {+ U. J) V- W2 h% l6 L
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!!!+ T" b( F. s) [3 }
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!5 n0 O  R5 `8 K( |* M
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+ A% O3 I' ^當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~% [" |: \: \+ b+ b2 x
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~7 }7 `6 W1 b# v" `. X5 L! W* e
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
) w! G4 R: s. X( D0 p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~~" G5 J! \, J3 N% F4 g4 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~~3 x$ i- C% h$ w6 s3 P  j6 E* e0 N% w* w
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~+ U. o# D6 n5 }  y
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）