Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:' E5 @3 _. `: v1 O8 R8 x

! m  l! u( N+ p- A$ j" ?0 L. H6 [  _$ p; o
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

+ l; O$ w2 ~. s$ Z2 z0 c6 a0 k2 [) t  D/ R+ z/ |
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:( M% U2 w& b2 m. v4 F

4 U. ~2 V( q% A' V  C
/ T: c8 T5 l( _8 t+ l: F$ dIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

+ T7 R1 _3 \0 l+ [
5 q0 W- b9 f% `$ P6 `$ G; q9 v- s
oh really...
; j. L* ]! G! [1 ^2 c3 ahahhaa, thx a lot^^"7 K4 x0 K( F8 |5 Q
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題" P8 M4 `) E. V" R
9 T/ u$ W7 p/ Z' Q1 n) D) p
當然這是個假設性問題
" z& k6 |. b$ G但將人數倍大5 l. U" Z7 }$ U0 \, B
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個+ T: p8 k4 S& D
(情況可以換作其他)) @$ k: i5 C. c! W
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...* v; x% Z6 O( i
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( i+ ?/ z, b9 D+ S  ?" Y
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
9 \4 p6 o) K1 Z* g2 k$ O# _0 q絕情谷既問題...
0 |4 H0 A% y3 u3 r1 G: M如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...5 N4 @: p# r( e! a
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 y; j4 D* W% ^1 x% d0 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
' B, [& F7 k4 r5 G/ @9 G1 k# |2 R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
9 ^" b2 @4 ]& V" ^) Y& u4 y但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
' q6 @- o  w2 K6 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. H6 b  F6 L: E
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
1 p8 @1 b% d7 C8 y  |" }" N1 p% P3 |
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( t! A# ^6 b# m" d$ c
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:  Z0 I3 w7 E4 K4 `9 S( `+ q
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

7 h# R, f0 r' T
- C' ]4 q8 k0 h/ k- o( Yhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
/ b  L( r, D* U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....* F7 W& ]* k! S' \, i8 ?4 X1 C0 y" ]

5 T: g4 K2 u; l2 p8 k* S- Mp.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# p3 e# A2 E6 d/ [6 L
yes, my reason is helping more
) R4 `+ ^5 c, Q; @6 K; e- b* ~. Ffor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
7 J$ Q: ?: V) n- wif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child! [8 j, [1 T- V  G
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( S- V* c$ n: L7 N6 m" ^( Aalso 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!!!9 \, x! i, F  O8 k1 @8 q
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!
. i. X1 ^7 C7 u$ k" eunder 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~~& q: j- J8 k/ n: O
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
% X+ K8 E. |; r  o+ h/ _我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~/ m# [7 U& O+ V$ G1 A, Z- A
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~8 Z+ W6 X! z& @; G- H
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~~' j8 I7 ]2 {: y* w5 E& M) k3 r
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~~
# P& V& I" T; t1 M% `1 {+ X7 ^& u& _但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
) C1 b+ l: m4 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）