Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
' p5 u  M0 L" @  f$ [! l$ ^
9 _# D; f1 Z, u/ y. P0 J- K: o  |
0 N; U. G: `& I$ |! t我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

; W. I. G$ T# @- }7 f, F
# n1 i0 i9 U8 u
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
0 q  S" n4 a0 `# O. b( U, o" @# m' M7 d7 h9 \

1 Z5 u% D# {; Y. }) r6 _( dIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

% S- e0 D# {! ~6 I; M$ X
/ Q4 S+ V4 f, Z' G  Y
oh really...
0 T2 E4 I* c$ Z1 `8 P8 f" whahhaa, thx a lot^^"
& d7 b5 N  y" Yi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
0 q6 w& u' n. d# g
2 I: q) p5 ^( ^當然這是個假設性問題
0 I. E# q2 w( j8 k  x但將人數倍大4 i; z2 s+ @/ x7 n' m7 G6 |
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個0 {8 H3 T, X' V% g4 U
(情況可以換作其他)
$ v7 O+ D( G' O0 Y0 v1 q始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
* R. p3 R# K# x' S8 W" y6 ^如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...: W+ j# l0 H" T, r: k! h: [! 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:
1 o1 a; h! b7 b絕情谷既問題...
- |$ E. s% t  T% B. K8 V如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
& S, G& [% t& y" w* b- r如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

- @$ F8 j3 |; l2 z. }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
" c+ {2 `. ^4 Y$ e( T, d  T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) @9 b. S& V: Y8 v但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
8 Q4 v4 Y1 a5 u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' t/ x+ l$ @/ Z1 {  w* f
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢+ }0 y2 @8 _2 ^, `; ?1 B
, h/ s0 H. H$ F
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9 H7 p$ @( i) O% s6 \0 H
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:
. s9 e8 h- l! Y/ X" e; J3 z: @其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

  A! [# R" Y8 `# v  u, D3 A  j
: B5 y9 o! Y# t, u. p5 jhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣5 w1 w- Z: O; P) P
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....
9 Z4 r& A& j5 Y. \: [# L8 A$ Y! U7 n, F% D
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
# ^1 ?$ I! r  q9 N  v9 q+ X0 a2 Yyes, my reason is helping more
* D, T1 n( M0 W+ Y1 g& Qfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
7 |) Z% k* I( `if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child- ^' E7 @4 w6 w1 L9 o- u" L
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
) x% y& e: F. J5 x0 C8 }1 \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!!!
2 I1 Z5 p0 A. |' W5 [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!( w5 o: [1 U' `# B: P5 q) T5 i# g
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~~  K+ ]+ h$ O: X  O+ W
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~, a/ o8 _$ O! R) i5 A
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~6 _3 S4 u6 \6 p: _. s9 G
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~, f9 |& c4 d+ [6 u0 O- h) R
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~~3 L1 G$ i+ t: 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~~. d8 d! P6 D' t, z8 [* c/ W
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~0 ?0 x* z0 _3 K' Z  ^
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）