Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:( v' Y/ z  D" m2 Z; s5 s2 b1 k
' t1 g: _. b- O6 N1 g

$ i$ [0 S8 _- S- I7 K; z/ J我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

8 t4 g& D  I7 L2 e% F7 }( C6 j, W0 p
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
! `$ ]/ }/ N+ }2 z& F
  D( n7 W/ n7 F, N, Z/ c0 j- u
: D# h1 A( z: G6 LIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

' x' l' v" e4 I- m8 S, }( L8 K' \0 @9 z5 Q
oh really...
, o/ S" y3 v4 h% _3 }: P5 `- t  l9 W5 jhahhaa, thx a lot^^"% }0 O- W( D- X" @% m  Y
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
1 o( i+ {7 P8 Y, t$ x0 m3 V8 q- K! p
當然這是個假設性問題' o. D2 b, Z( H, t% g0 Z
但將人數倍大* ^* O! ]2 {% |5 y
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
: H7 A% Y% ?) t6 d9 e(情況可以換作其他)1 r- A/ L' P+ d& ~
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..., k( V! T9 T' K" k
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
6 m6 S8 r+ [3 Y  [  h. ^如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
, z# M* u/ g, [* ?( y5 c絕情谷既問題...
& B. |1 u2 W, Y/ I$ C如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...1 ]9 s7 C" K2 F$ R( N
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# s, a+ [% @( Q$ s/ ^' B
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. k* L. k0 f" M1 W3 ]5 J. 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* k1 D9 R8 O: j$ W# |4 H5 L
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
" r; j- D/ I1 C, J0 m3 K( u6 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
6 s2 z3 I' f) u2 \; B' N7 Z# |% _其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢/ B: n$ S( S  o& @4 P
5 t% T0 d7 S. x+ p* y
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
+ g) R- L6 Z6 C5 z- 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:
6 Y& a! f1 s2 ^6 O8 P其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

* b( d) _2 ]: M5 }+ j) K! n
+ N8 B  [# o2 T" G; E0 Zhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣9 x; K0 r2 X9 _* S( u* @2 P  d
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....
" p6 C' @7 ~% r: b. p8 Z
0 T+ G- z  ]/ Yp.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
3 K% o" h/ j' O( B5 Wyes, my reason is helping more5 r" i; L+ |4 W
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
6 V0 {  ]1 c" ~; i' B  l' u1 w+ mif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
6 U) n( j/ p! c8 {9 e$ ]* Lbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?" n/ I- ^/ U+ H2 k0 j
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!!!
' }' J; v, I0 P# @2 @6 cmay 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!; c) r; j1 ?% I! @+ h8 w: e$ \; X
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~~: f9 H( c7 P6 e; M7 x
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
4 _, U% M, u/ M# o( W0 Z  e1 x/ Y+ C我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
6 V4 p& X& a2 ?正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
' y* R+ _( t% x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~~& O& P( Y8 D: v. _% B
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/ h4 I/ l) @+ h! k1 U
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
  E8 q/ ~) H3 ~2 h6 _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）