Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:1 {. N/ C: Z- L+ L+ F- d2 W+ u5 q

6 v* O+ A+ w) B( e8 w" H8 m
  F; X& k  y0 m' [" W! U; M! S我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

5 L6 A: O; \& v1 s7 S# q; {2 R
  e) r; I% Q+ k& J  Q/ g
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:0 \0 F; t+ B/ E

9 s: e0 H8 F, l0 G* P* E* |8 E- j) U. R( a) k6 i
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

$ G* O* [, {8 J( X9 O) D
. [  i# F8 n+ b- Y' W+ L
oh really...
8 i# B+ e8 s) i0 ^9 D: r  u3 Jhahhaa, thx a lot^^"8 ~5 }, ^- [" J. t# [) x- P9 k
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
; M+ P& w0 c9 F" s. @
3 k9 m, d. Y8 y" c5 X- h0 \# W當然這是個假設性問題& Y& s) j* K9 {
但將人數倍大$ C) T1 n% l. [+ c: y5 Z- H
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個7 f! h: v! f4 R" y/ M6 Z
(情況可以換作其他). Z3 ^, n! B; v: r
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
: X- K0 D2 z7 W1 `. \5 _9 I如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...* l- q# Y7 R& u, i7 V
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:( t; r# C- U8 a9 r* K4 c$ V
絕情谷既問題.../ {' e- P" U0 C+ `8 `  O
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..." A5 X8 T/ A/ F. `3 y) L
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

% `1 ]+ B* R/ D' 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5 g! u$ s  E0 `9 G, I) o1 e
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4 U/ ~: O3 b9 w. \
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
' o$ L8 E9 J' O( T% M/ R; h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0 ~" f5 Z) e, W. y4 S0 c
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢( T. p% c- l, _; O3 V
2 w" E5 v1 w& Y! `  k! I
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5 A  z6 q% O6 o# j' Z! Y8 U
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:
, c' Z2 [7 _! }* V  J! @其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

" \9 d0 |9 f: g
1 G7 r$ s- |# n% r1 }! o- phaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
( D, q; Q* _# b! m; }5 h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....0 H2 j1 h% c% X( c( T. y& E6 x5 F

0 |& R/ H# Z! m0 Xp.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
3 S* o! r4 l9 Q) Y3 _yes, my reason is helping more
* M2 y4 Z: c7 K) L! B5 J) Bfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
7 E5 V7 d. T/ f+ d* d2 ^if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child, E1 Z/ j5 u6 [+ S' S" x
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?( X! B5 ~& y0 K' A, _. c$ Z
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!!!
: v7 z# {% f" ~1 f& }2 lmay 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!
4 |5 r7 j0 ?7 a, A3 Runder 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 y% g6 ~) F$ V
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~% t  Q, w1 Q$ L& t; l' I, X
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~5 H/ y5 q9 r# K* Y5 K3 f
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
! R6 f* |2 S0 B: Q# P, Q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~~
. U5 s* P, _5 j. k# 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~~8 Q& ~3 s. H7 h
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
. C& D7 n, G# h  Z6 I9 _- J4 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）