Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
! H# O: C& u: j* E& L4 E0 S
7 Y0 A! X, n' E/ _
6 N2 Q7 e' p7 m; s: i# |我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

' [2 u* y% a5 Q* r
2 s8 E  l. T3 M% FIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:3 s, n8 B% |) _& I

$ X: T) ^2 h: ?% p6 Y/ |. Y( l2 S& T: G6 N
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

/ B8 V, A; I3 M4 v5 k  |% ?& y" S; z1 `- f
oh really...
4 X9 \! e! p& j: bhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
( k' `9 _8 W; V9 @& Hi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
2 s, {2 J' _* \1 x# ?$ W" _8 b; i
* G7 l/ @' y% m0 Q: V1 B當然這是個假設性問題% E; l5 g) E  ?# @
但將人數倍大
9 b: C# v; P1 W1 C8 w8 k% z' ]例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個2 e% Q1 y6 q. j! j, z! X* c9 R1 h
(情況可以換作其他)
4 x# m; Y, A& ]8 X! Z始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...8 V( j% G2 `! }; g9 K
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
) R* I# [; M1 A0 m% D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& M5 e6 g- C, o1 d
絕情谷既問題...
3 S7 q! F( n$ ]$ g5 p* x/ S7 `/ l如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
2 K/ L& V  z" |2 F如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 _) i' a+ J! I. ^' S* ]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: y% S5 L9 j% R: f
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+ ?, c" L9 G- ^! `. l& y
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
6 t/ \6 M% n( z5 ?$ \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' u5 Q& f* i1 z% D+ D2 {
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
9 W' K" m& `7 ~) y3 f
" e( g* s6 g' U9 c3 A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 U: H5 R# c8 U8 @$ t4 s2 Y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:; ^! o1 u: U/ v( G$ S( C
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

1 l2 i9 @7 t, {" S/ ?, c
2 P8 S$ h  n. a" l. v6 J# t6 mhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
  Q2 J+ o# ?( M( J: j6 _  I8 C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....! J/ k0 G4 W3 Y6 I" ~

% z% |" i$ M) v: J8 Np.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 child7 y8 O4 H& D( c$ l
yes, my reason is helping more
# P  W3 H. u0 q2 w1 f8 c2 Sfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
3 Z" }' M" _1 ^3 r8 q- p2 R( Yif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
0 S9 u+ z+ _& h. R9 Sbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?1 C7 X& d6 u- W4 K" ?
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!!!
4 P4 V' N) K9 Tmay 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!6 L1 O$ J  L" l3 w
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~~; N5 a! Y. _+ a: L/ D' v% {
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
5 F3 P. p+ D: \' q( H. w! k+ G我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~- y+ @; G* m* Y2 R* q
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
* u& V+ m7 X0 _7 r$ 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~~
0 s2 T; T: C- I& W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~~
  n! c' O; i6 X) f: H但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
- m: h* g) r- r$ l: e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）