Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
- B" T/ H  n: d5 Q( k, F, i, [1 V/ ^/ a4 W+ p
* f9 Z& T' ]) B5 ]( J
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

, S. s, u/ i+ R
3 ~9 z& n& z+ U% C4 w
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:* U. S) Z: L- k* m* X

; z$ T! _! [) H  r& T8 T5 x, i5 J& \2 I
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

. v1 k9 ]( F( x/ x) l. w" {1 G" w0 r; _, A+ V
oh really...0 T5 C% T: e2 G* S2 r5 E
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
( [! C) c# N( i: R$ Ci didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
7 v! ?2 z+ _6 ^0 C2 |/ z* m
- y# R3 ?/ L. n7 h# ]7 m$ I當然這是個假設性問題! E* ~& U1 t  L
但將人數倍大
% k& b& h: g6 ?) L" ^) I例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
: d% F. a: L* ~) C# G6 Y+ F7 S# S(情況可以換作其他). S+ t8 C8 M# [6 \. X) x- y
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題.../ Y& l9 u2 c+ m3 H/ q& S8 \( k
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...+ m+ d* d4 `$ O" B. H! R" f
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:" i: h2 ]' i( Q7 L# T" ?
絕情谷既問題...4 G1 y6 e! R: |4 ^  _3 O1 j2 H
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( i1 ?& Y- T7 [& {7 x$ w
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

2 t8 C9 G2 I# a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5 d0 E% R: l3 ]9 b8 B
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 m  l  B4 C! z但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
. ~! C9 b# B4 [" C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! r& X, X) s8 Y0 g4 h
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
8 `+ q  f4 N( h1 @% r
: V* F$ ^6 {% o6 ]; C3 n+ z: c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( h$ z( E0 }% u% O5 G
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 g  C/ m5 X# M
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

6 L, L0 W" H* ?0 s# z, W( z9 S+ x4 {8 m5 G
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
" [8 R# Y  h! ^1 }3 [. l' [+ o% I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..... \( }3 y# d2 m+ m
! E- ?7 h0 ~5 V* g8 x- l
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
2 X) ]$ n0 K6 I/ R9 S; Gyes, my reason is helping more# t# F* }* Y' i5 K1 I4 C9 f! O
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!* b+ H  v5 M+ s2 ~* s, E- N% g
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child( m& x# N  y( x# k! a  a! P
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?/ [* w  Y/ y& G
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!!!+ _8 J" e6 w* I
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!
/ ~' Z, C+ s- c; Tunder 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~~
4 o/ Y$ K, Q! L- J當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~* J, F3 t, c; O0 C
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~- s+ y7 `8 G6 b) c" k6 b+ ^4 l( C( @
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~( C0 r, z. D( y, k
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~~. _4 K6 w7 f: m0 y6 [) C# ?
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~~
) x% P8 B; H+ W7 q/ I& @但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
% W  J/ ?- J3 v$ O( L! w  ]1 b7 N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）