Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
* R. d; l' P$ q" s) }1 r/ ~& B- D3 v
4 t2 b: H' Q3 c
) s3 O$ Q# i% E# `' V' T- @3 O  h% R; z我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

# x- F. R) Z0 J, `3 T; m: O; j
5 x0 f/ x4 x4 |3 S/ e0 c/ vIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:' N* p% ^; I5 }
3 J9 y7 I+ v* G' p, R' e
& P# a! \& a% D8 o% r
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

1 B, u3 i7 j) A! [" f0 i8 m, t, s6 J4 ^" s. s7 C- O6 P
oh really...6 p. ]' ^2 o8 I
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"; T/ M: Y- y- Q: H9 S+ F, V
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題6 u; T$ b- u5 y/ f3 R+ B, J
6 f+ G# `2 j+ N  A
當然這是個假設性問題: w" P+ P' c  X
但將人數倍大5 y9 x; a( x2 [+ \
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個, G* G; ~  a2 |% C" d* t
(情況可以換作其他)
  v: P! f* w! ?' |6 J/ u始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...; _6 {+ P9 Y  ]1 S0 D5 P& M( Y
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ h% d, q! t  G5 g如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
7 K3 l' X5 I  ^0 b7 X, B. F- ]絕情谷既問題...
' P; ~3 ]" T0 H! {- K2 Y2 h如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...& C5 S* a: i6 x( A9 `
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 F3 s1 i0 K) C9 k) E
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' W8 K3 a* w9 v+ 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
" Q4 s4 F3 P' \. }; _但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩# i* l0 q- T; v' M7 G, o* D  J
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
0 ^! w* t+ f, D8 A% G+ C0 J其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
' ^4 I, d5 P( i  u. }6 Q$ B  q) n/ I! W  G- l
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
& I' g% h8 F, L* V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:
; y$ o5 r8 g7 a, k/ C其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

, T, J7 O' F! H9 c

" `: g. {: I1 Q$ shaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
3 g8 o; ]3 v$ S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....' M  ^0 R; }1 E) ]% [

& d* w1 _4 C7 ?$ _p.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
) k7 _# s" N( qyes, my reason is helping more
$ R! j1 [/ V( g, z3 xfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
0 d2 o- Z1 {& U) O% b$ Hif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
. y# Z2 _9 U' Q% r6 A. vbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( D; P; O- X( F7 Walso 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 T+ ?( M1 B7 h. `
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!7 X# ~4 g$ Z( v+ {6 u
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~~; H$ S1 N; n: w$ b  G* B
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
  N+ [) B# f, c/ g我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
) x# S. |% r& r8 x正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~3 x) S; [' O( G" [! z. B9 O
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~~$ Z7 h" N% H& p3 b& H  l" 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~~
  W) N: B, p+ I0 A$ u$ P$ |0 U但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
9 z* h. L' z. e( 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）