Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
+ J! i7 o( Q, D7 a9 G$ S0 h, Z' K# o4 f
6 }2 i% n9 H0 Q5 q: R) M
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

/ r5 D8 ~# Y+ p  C$ w& y
& N5 {5 p0 x* \* Z
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
' \' y- e, t) J, z( T. U" K7 \
- m: e9 y) c' N3 @; \- i: I$ _
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

% K5 Q# }1 `- o; y( k, b' a- o4 H
! R2 n- o  l) e! M& z
oh really...: l/ _* p/ |' y% q! H( z
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"2 a2 ]$ `* M. z
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
! n- c2 Z2 Z9 p2 Q. y" K
" _' s+ ^. K+ F  Q) ]: {; V當然這是個假設性問題
  y8 L* L- `& ?* m, X) B% E/ |但將人數倍大
: ?# `" X9 L* K' a$ r: Q例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
& q. V8 d8 P# X9 [6 c8 K(情況可以換作其他)
5 d3 p( B9 q7 N0 \" T; S始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...9 U5 S- K4 ~$ A) E" k
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
$ N5 _" f* [0 s' v$ 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:! u' T8 H' m/ X% H4 T0 J
絕情谷既問題...+ ~; |; ?; f+ S5 V& I1 r6 x0 T
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
9 y; [5 s% c) }% D如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

6 d9 e$ ]: R! h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: f8 V. r, h8 }1 F. x% K
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
% v9 I( o6 v0 J, x0 p4 R" |但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
; B  a* Z+ d7 f$ r: S- |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
+ O- S0 q4 {/ B其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢  F, Z( p/ \7 J
' Q, a" E" l/ G/ C" @! r  A2 b+ e
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 K0 ^) \/ X" x5 r) `3 f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:
! X9 R9 Q# D. N+ d; ]其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

0 F& }4 d; L0 l% K: }- j, I0 s3 f
1 u  B4 z# k" O/ Khaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣# s; r5 p" R7 P* g* 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....
6 m* f9 M* d9 D" v' d7 U+ L/ v* V5 q9 b; |
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* Q% x1 ]  E3 L5 `, E
yes, my reason is helping more
) l& S& K+ ?! }for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!0 }- l, H, p* u  Y$ J0 `  A4 |8 o
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
* X  Y) A) F& q0 @* ~' t/ J2 hbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
8 b$ E" M1 U2 Y. h3 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!!!
) O  b" }' i- U' X" 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!
+ e3 S" q2 \* X& P  Aunder 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~~) L' u* e% _; R# G& l5 _
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~" Q; g/ b4 k/ i
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
# |& V! h! E) r正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~: {+ v2 `: v$ m0 ]
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~~- V. P. ?' l) V7 P1 P
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~~
, Q4 Y/ n/ d. D. g- f8 q' `但如果o係當時o既情況中~~/ D9 J) S7 z  ]/ q
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）