Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
" x1 N, ?& [! f) q2 W# [. i1 w- n# f7 F6 I" u+ F+ N
- s& Z. Y2 k2 i. X) }* i5 D3 H
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

- a+ p: K0 \) q9 g* [9 S! z: ], a$ m* ^
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:! O4 _3 e2 K9 h& O

+ {; X3 N$ @7 M  O, Y; \  ?$ w; Z% H: ?! {
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

5 R' I2 ^$ [% A, d0 k% x

' h9 P) N4 k3 B7 ]oh really...
+ [3 a, B6 {6 zhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
; q. R( J6 |( b( \4 l) Z! Ci didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題7 C% J: u, v- z. q* ^  r& I

" `' C6 G! u2 G  P0 h當然這是個假設性問題
( i! |6 \) u0 Z7 _" @" a8 c5 f2 t但將人數倍大
1 I. V# {; Z( z8 V2 ?例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個' _2 y5 o. Y- h2 G1 h. G
(情況可以換作其他)
; _- x: B6 i+ q6 S始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
+ t9 U: f: d6 E如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
# m# ~, ^6 u# ~( B8 Q如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:6 j# L9 _, p/ f" m
絕情谷既問題...
4 F4 s1 q6 D! h$ S( z如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...* r, o. l& v. o+ M$ B
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

9 q9 z0 j% b0 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
$ o1 x4 A  p& z6 g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
$ P1 ^: R; }8 g/ ^3 U, B但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩8 X9 c  T1 ~0 c# m
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
. L% r4 n9 H& r% }! R7 m+ g其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
" E! c1 Z3 i! B/ g: m9 q/ F1 W5 Q- J+ D: t, q$ a: M3 H7 ^9 m
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 [# _) c& T; \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:
- Z( t. w$ @1 ~+ S! P5 i4 O其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 \) ^; F! |( v9 A/ v% r
/ C, d* N7 r5 a" i, l4 t& g1 z4 p
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
7 K+ ~  v9 ^: f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 \$ _$ ^( ^! [* v2 d: _
4 t( X/ L9 Y7 U1 H1 y: W/ f# 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
; |: c% ~3 F+ [! ?1 Kyes, my reason is helping more
+ k4 Z2 v9 L, x. C6 k3 jfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!$ t9 r' L& p/ o$ b
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child1 B: i8 n2 H+ n! W- {0 V& j" `+ M1 u
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?5 ~+ t$ d% D/ r1 I; X0 ~
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!!!
0 b6 ]2 P2 [) [0 ], o* \4 J6 e$ Xmay 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!+ G& k$ s0 h: p5 O
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~~' C" I; T, J8 V+ E
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~2 r1 L5 P% t- @. Z$ `) t+ ~
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~' [" Y" C6 z3 `
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~) E9 z+ D3 H; M* A
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~~$ [& k5 |5 A8 T* }$ O" G; _0 I
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~~
( L+ A( h! b1 G) U& _5 S但如果o係當時o既情況中~~  G2 G( v, A+ J$ {2 {
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）