Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:6 W# }0 P! f2 q; z, c9 f
/ h3 [. T. \9 B1 d2 O) l

: X6 f5 I8 f9 D  `% O6 J" R: x0 b我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

( p1 O7 l# E6 J0 H
0 J! C2 }+ U5 k" y: U% GIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
+ W' `7 w' Q. j8 n% y
9 G2 S. i1 c) J' Q' \& @. u9 R# y' @# z) p" g
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

3 s1 c1 I: h. O# v
: e% T% z3 ~1 i: F7 \oh really...
. \5 w1 R& r9 |" i. a9 Khahhaa, thx a lot^^"
# l; g+ I3 ]3 f' p. Y& _% X- Qi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
$ U: X! A+ v. z0 `/ J5 Z* F5 Q' J+ ^1 @/ w
當然這是個假設性問題
7 P. Y7 V; s+ f但將人數倍大3 D: Q+ O6 p& u! T; Y  P
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個9 c( M( T* ~7 M, @8 D( {  Y
(情況可以換作其他)
* Q: z  ?8 V1 w" v1 `/ w, l始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...) p) H$ y2 F7 g; A, F! ]# ]
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...$ Q7 O2 W9 ^7 B( U' E: P
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:8 Y) e. o0 Y  l$ c! x+ I, i# C
絕情谷既問題...9 K( ~9 H9 {4 \; ~6 c. A
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...5 o* L% U  c3 I* ^5 w
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

2 Z, K& O6 }: [0 d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
; l7 r9 b) C; x1 }  V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) }* n2 l5 C! k$ H: R/ J& d) N
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
  d6 M; {3 w4 O3 P4 _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1 Y0 N, W+ L4 U. f: P) [
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
0 w3 l& l& }1 V: F$ s1 C$ U4 H
1 D" }4 o' f7 L7 F+ B- ^# x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
; w6 x0 `1 ~- Z0 w  y" D- O4 ^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:
* A+ o. t, T* f9 I其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

- `4 t+ ^) w" j
: j/ P( ~2 P8 N+ q$ @
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣4 s0 {2 V) n% V1 ^4 {
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....
8 X4 A0 j. j, x: Z" n5 w+ x; q5 D- o9 L- J, [+ g( M. g) z; U
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  E( o) n, J8 d! q0 P
yes, my reason is helping more
2 K$ Y) {( y0 x' V0 y8 i9 }for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
( F5 a0 \) S' m6 l+ N# u# J8 n5 sif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
+ ^" [( w8 I2 kbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
" E' {9 P: o2 v$ d% lalso 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!!!0 j7 y3 D, [" L; n1 I8 [2 E9 b- r
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!
+ p) r2 P8 J" d8 M# P: vunder 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 W6 L% o1 p( `- G! b
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
! L6 z0 n( }3 d0 z! u1 d7 F我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~. T: f4 K# T; T8 x
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
. l. x. p8 L. r6 S6 d. y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 m+ I1 {: w1 b. F  F+ O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~~
% ]2 ^: j& L! C1 O( ?; ~3 l: R但如果o係當時o既情況中~~/ f$ p. [1 Q* |; @* I) v2 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）