Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:/ y& b+ S# K+ w7 V: L

& K, t% G$ g$ L' N2 U/ _
: ~9 h( u+ {  p$ Y5 d' |/ P我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

0 P" F+ E/ l1 o' R; v% }% w" u' r- e+ e* ^* ^
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:$ u- E% R+ N$ l% b
& l3 \6 p6 p% i, F- P

7 b9 b$ e4 p! JIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

% f& d! @: J9 |" K

) f& q) e% I1 z" Yoh really...
3 K8 e* D8 E% r* F8 j1 Z; Y) @hahhaa, thx a lot^^"8 ]( Z3 m/ }0 B. c. M1 f
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
% z# f; Z) y6 [" n. v
6 B; ^& I0 V- T1 x4 ^9 s1 x6 o當然這是個假設性問題
( R5 _/ E# q2 }" N9 m2 L但將人數倍大
6 L+ T4 x& h, W8 V4 f" Q% m4 i0 x例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
/ R9 R; _! Z; ?8 q+ A# ^4 `% `(情況可以換作其他); K2 q% S/ @3 `3 o3 T4 e- y' M$ G
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...7 a# k; G  {2 m7 v. A6 |2 `
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...9 ?8 a7 r, k# b9 @/ 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:7 t7 |. P7 v& _7 a7 V, `
絕情谷既問題...& V, P' K8 B# w5 ^: V
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
/ H% I( X7 H3 @) k6 V+ j+ e7 m如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

+ D3 _% m  U1 D2 ^  Z
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
9 y5 X1 R% t+ N6 j* e) ^  X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
0 P9 x6 b7 g2 X' y9 O但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩! C2 f. Q* Y/ B) j# T* O! n0 ]* _- c
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
, N! V+ b( m" i% ^/ z) B其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢$ ^' P2 P' d- n
" B: y0 n3 f" T4 Z4 H
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, J! u( U4 F" A+ ]" G" y
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:* G1 }& }5 R. m! U7 b6 n
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

/ o4 G* y% T9 D# n" \/ u" M

" G  J8 }. o: j' T( yhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣% [+ z( ^' w  `; ?
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 h8 ^- J# j2 f& h

* W0 P, ^$ w: _, H; X" gp.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# y: y9 _& J0 q# U# ^! [# E3 z& s8 U
yes, my reason is helping more2 T* k- j( z+ o4 z( i  W0 I! O6 e( h
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!( V9 N) T) w1 g) s7 |
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
( a6 ]/ i  ?/ N6 Fbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?3 X9 T1 N6 L5 B0 q% `! F% F
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!!!9 z$ i# Y' g# C% ~8 a+ V/ ^$ s
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!" x+ i6 R! ?; P9 j0 e, X, t, E. K
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~~2 d/ H  r7 V1 W  L
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~. q* e7 d2 K) z# B
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~7 `# Q! d- k& F% W  w3 j* P
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
) U/ {$ C. V9 y8 m; a0 f/ f- j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~~
2 R# p7 Z) G4 x8 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~~, t7 }7 p1 S, c" |% l
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
# \, \* m; a9 A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）