Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
' `9 j( d* z8 P: F$ r( j  Y4 f  @5 _" ]) h9 n1 g" K: W! C
4 d0 o9 ^) n" q+ g: W/ }
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

/ K+ b! }3 I8 j$ f: b. x* }+ w
/ n& j, R* y4 E: I
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
3 d* G7 \" B) D- j) Q8 P4 x- L  q
6 _2 k  d5 ?5 h( D( y# Z. _
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

; }' b) _# ?/ @: ]) T$ @

. i+ j$ W4 g6 A5 D5 y; Zoh really...3 J$ a* z4 I: A; Y
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
. y9 X* q3 J4 M$ N# P& e/ b( @i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題$ w: j' ^( g3 I4 G$ s' _

9 T$ Q1 ^0 |+ q; \) \2 [當然這是個假設性問題9 \/ \! \" i9 }
但將人數倍大, U1 e* t: ^$ ?* L1 ]
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個% l- g6 P* R$ V9 }$ }0 Z6 |
(情況可以換作其他)0 @3 x3 _! c. t# G$ o
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...# b6 X- q  W0 \
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
7 e6 I/ k$ S3 j  T如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
) _8 ^& j) s, _6 T絕情谷既問題...4 e* L: D$ W0 Q% J, Y; r. c. [9 E
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
, O2 r' T. v& H如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

( {1 p. D0 Y3 y# C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: G" ~9 s9 W2 g% B$ R: N. V+ X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
+ b: D# e* Q  r1 e1 _6 N# n但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩+ e( \3 E: g+ G; O6 L  @/ F5 T
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/ K) ^1 u: X+ h: v
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢  Z. K; w: n2 H/ t
- e7 E# A" h+ j$ C8 x5 m" c5 |
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" R& g- s) D% R
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:
" D' [7 q" V8 B% W3 @其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

9 {9 Y2 ^5 l& Y8 h4 h

8 ]. l, W9 t& Ehaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣- t( r" Q! U% i$ q3 W+ e$ K
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....( z' @. S+ N, }# P/ @

' a5 e. Y# W) t& D! hp.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, D+ E1 e- ~+ e- i8 i% m7 `2 W5 n
yes, my reason is helping more3 D7 \9 u: l/ [* ^$ b" N5 G
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
1 z4 G+ n% h, o+ P! qif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child) O8 q: c7 q* H$ a
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
: A9 s& D5 z! r) ~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!!!. A  D+ m, u  t7 X4 K& u8 g  o/ R
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!+ A8 r( T0 K# D; S0 h, W
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~~
# V# v& U5 Q2 p8 c% z3 T, z) K, B% O0 T當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
% z6 g) H, P* \. n* \1 }我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
0 i  O$ Z$ Z, Z7 Z7 f7 i; I9 q正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
9 ^9 e- t% O% `0 B1 d# u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~~
9 B4 B9 H6 X- W3 i2 H! 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~~6 ^6 E0 |9 m/ \
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~) {2 {9 j& T8 y' K
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）