Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:- j2 X* F# w. h  s( w/ z: Y

( u1 a. ~" f* R7 |( M! R$ }' _& L7 e( j+ i; _  A# s& P3 h7 q
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

; J- V" A% e! _5 c' x& s) a) x

' C. N3 X  n4 XIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
' |) Z: f- q& H$ \  G* ~6 p* ^. g3 b

% ~: U  ?; C1 n3 zIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

2 K; h$ a, e( u; h$ U" P( R6 [3 J7 U  C
oh really...
- M* e/ m6 ~# u0 v  {4 y) R5 }hahhaa, thx a lot^^"& ?; b5 V  i) X
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
8 G/ O; v' k" i$ D! G- m- O( i0 W+ _( a! T+ z0 q8 S5 A# V( s
當然這是個假設性問題* t) {: q' b/ B+ ^0 a5 M' _
但將人數倍大9 n! `3 M6 p2 l( ~6 {
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個6 Z' g) M7 r. w: A9 S: \0 f
(情況可以換作其他)6 b* s" c' J$ s  u: V) _
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
3 q8 q) ?6 }- s9 b如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ Z% U! D0 A- P! J8 _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 K% G' `# X2 z* [) i6 r3 W- d絕情谷既問題...
6 ?: W  S' }2 z- r5 E如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..., K! E% K% j( m1 M0 Z
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

* F1 m, z' _# M' ^
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
+ K4 L' h- Z( g8 F' H, ]9 r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; {1 ]: [' X! b& o+ d
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩7 G: y6 K; x  m3 x/ c6 ~. 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
( V2 ?1 K( ?0 v" c其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢4 R  \' I5 ?2 I7 Y, K2 O

5 c) o' e/ J1 O9 B% W5 ?! N; I, J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
  |7 Q, L! Q; ~. 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:
! a9 W7 ]& b: T% V; N8 U其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

+ C$ u- S- ?6 ~- j
  G9 x4 G6 [; g  k( d/ o' @
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣2 m8 r4 [* j% U2 [: |
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 E3 P4 {* D
  N5 N) P- C/ r" I; mp.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! H. l0 s# ]% Q9 O: P# f: x% e
yes, my reason is helping more4 F1 c9 |$ R' t; h) d
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!9 l9 w/ b1 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% W; O6 P2 U9 e* S  D1 a, `
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( s, p$ V$ u* X" E# `; H; dalso 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!!!
* P% a- i' N# @; [/ j# }3 rmay 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!: a- l8 Y, g% 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~~7 a. M3 U' r: G5 i; a4 [
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~9 Y2 u. w9 V: h# q/ a9 h) I1 R
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
9 r. t8 Y1 D: y0 f- H正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~3 @- T( z+ b" Q$ Z2 i, d2 ^$ A5 S
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~~# X1 a# M# h# ~* i% S' \& @
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~~
3 r- e+ F& m5 {4 V但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
1 X/ K. P2 I; ~  S! N1 Q5 W! T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）