Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
# G1 S% p1 V# ~4 t8 e: _) Q) E
" z( y6 z8 c& K- j$ L! W
2 a* G9 f5 w+ X我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

: e& J: Z' h+ m0 \: B: Y/ w  c* x1 }+ {$ O' {) ^2 F
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:' B1 l* o3 D1 M; r3 {" d2 V& n

: o" r# G9 l' ~/ e6 X- u. D% {/ V8 C3 D1 J+ f0 Y
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

; i% V/ T" b( E) Y# p0 K9 c
% K0 C1 h* D( [" }. [" r# M$ v- E# Moh really...2 D0 ^0 w# \+ w* \$ v
hahhaa, thx a lot^^": Q; {) E- r2 n. ^( t, ?
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題. S' B' z& n3 h# D# q; t3 V
6 x4 D8 J0 I) j7 D3 y0 D
當然這是個假設性問題
7 ^% K, r; T: T4 y1 }但將人數倍大
# R* X7 @# t! d7 O2 L3 I例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
$ D5 A, D0 V, O2 b(情況可以換作其他)
/ @" K* T# h& L4 K- p" _, }5 [- n始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
/ h. {. X! e& I0 C4 Z; @; N6 O如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...; p' K/ O+ d4 R0 ^2 b
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
+ j, A. Q9 `6 `0 x絕情谷既問題...2 Y% p8 S0 S3 _, X! D; C" B; L/ g
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
. h* n; x8 c+ y如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# t: R, x3 Y/ s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
, S* j  J8 Z! q! O) 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
4 O2 h- z- G, ]' E但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
$ O7 F) B3 N1 G5 Q' F) P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
+ W7 R3 r; z! K3 K( _# m2 Z' L. _其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢$ q9 z, f3 {, S! b% w# q" I
" ~' K6 `, ?$ {/ r1 w
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9 S9 w& R. \/ w/ F  g+ |* D' A
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:2 I) r- Z9 J0 I( r$ y3 M- |' @
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

# M1 K9 Y- j) d3 n' L7 A  J. q0 F$ T. B+ L1 B) a$ C
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣) R+ u4 X" Z- y+ c8 p3 P9 x6 H; P+ a
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 m, I5 a; i. Z- X, ^6 P4 _, F# U4 `* ]

0 Y2 z* d( O0 _4 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: |* [, f2 R! l; q
yes, my reason is helping more
8 }: R3 z6 V" y3 t4 p" dfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!' E7 }( A" h6 y& ]4 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' \. e4 F" r/ ]4 J/ ~3 k% {& I- e4 U
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?' y. n) Z: w) i! B/ z2 w) W3 S, F
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!!!
0 ^- ^. k6 q6 I% m7 Umay 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!1 y$ w1 N7 f2 A: s
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~~
' N$ @! Q, b! @" P當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
7 M; [' k. T1 N. y+ w7 i% q我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~7 p& m+ B/ I8 p' v; N& I
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
- W. D; k" V2 w% `6 l, R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~~
# B; \" g. F0 L& B- i. }1 o. S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~~/ `/ J+ `+ U+ n: w, m/ I
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
6 y  {+ u0 E; M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）