Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
3 @$ D) y3 A5 i, p& ?4 F
- O. _' y6 \5 B7 Z5 e) c- y, B! r9 @- }3 E% j
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

6 m8 `( l$ c& |9 Y, X$ l
1 r8 D  h5 U2 J( Z% V) H$ e
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:1 p4 h! G9 ^5 ^2 ]

6 \0 T& V; {! A, L
& d( e! q5 o  u8 o8 [In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

6 N& G# L% b* [' w& g& D0 |, c

  Z1 i1 ^4 M' n5 Loh really...- e% p$ V) j0 [' }; h
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"7 \1 m' h. ?9 `* ~* I& j& T
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題3 H4 Y4 G4 W% S3 O

0 m' g! ?5 L4 E8 H. Y當然這是個假設性問題1 V3 J1 l* l8 ~: W/ J) J% }" ~% l9 R' S6 u
但將人數倍大/ E8 R* y8 f+ h' t7 q: _, q
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個" ^9 T' c% w* a' r7 f
(情況可以換作其他)
/ y) W7 k7 U7 v始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
0 Q8 m5 T2 c' g6 f如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
( J' @8 P& k9 K, l+ `如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
) {- ?0 v1 d4 |: u* @/ V0 C絕情谷既問題...
3 ~! x. b/ Z: M: O! i; @如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( I- n( [& X: x% r# r
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

  t3 v- e: O8 y- x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
. M' K$ @; W6 F! ?# f% R% z# i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
" H- @4 u, x1 ^) z& `但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
! Q. u. L2 J8 O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/ y0 v0 L6 w; B8 e3 T" p/ \
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢' L  ?; J( ~8 X6 X

, H/ G- [9 Z* q& S  K/ {& r/ S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
1 e# k. q& Y1 O% v6 B$ {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:
6 @, D; X% Y: W: J% S9 ]+ g: D其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

; y% H+ H; U2 L1 F, S
2 o. @0 y9 ~( ?; o: q0 zhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
0 T: w7 b- F8 e4 R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....
! i0 K  c+ R' y9 H
5 E6 O6 T# f' w  B& x9 Z) K% Xp.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
) f# X! V9 c# O1 }( ?" Eyes, my reason is helping more
& w$ R# ]5 f) ^0 g( t! ~! E. m5 mfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!0 R- T7 {7 t  A0 s
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! I" b' B; u7 E/ h. {because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?: B4 q9 H" e5 j# U& W
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!!!9 H1 ^& B( S0 X( G" e
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!
3 X+ }+ b! G( K! _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~~
, l0 L4 q; a" G9 u; F7 p當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
6 j' T" T1 s* d7 Q, j/ Z( \9 F我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~! |5 _0 y8 ^( ~! M
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
0 n' r  @' K1 c4 E) I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~~! Y; S+ Y- U# 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~~% h2 H/ q, g% r  |: i, K
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~9 q* g2 E2 ~) d' a
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）