Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
  k/ K$ k- [! s' N; O+ g% b- G3 h: `4 u* h& l  D6 f
0 _3 T1 T" ]/ F- t  |) f
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

/ Q: W- S9 @+ s: i  j. \- n, H1 ^- x
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:% M# L9 s) F" c- V8 g( U

& _8 n8 T! f0 k2 c0 A$ K9 d
% ?1 q) ^& _5 U- G1 qIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

  h* Z! e- o) {, |5 ?

: n* w9 W, |( a, poh really...) @0 O1 l9 L! U8 J5 p
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"5 u7 b) k% Y& b7 C) ?7 Q( |9 Q* |
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題4 ~( e& ?3 _* |4 x& ?
8 R+ ^7 p7 f4 J
當然這是個假設性問題; i2 }$ v: c1 J. ^5 R) U2 D" P# d
但將人數倍大
" P3 A7 i7 v/ P3 ~- u# \例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個3 k4 T8 K+ `! a
(情況可以換作其他)' {: Z0 z# E. o$ N
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...3 ]& E# i! y# ~* f4 r! l
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...6 ^' A5 [- P# h+ v5 ^
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
! N" x* @$ Q: i/ t$ @. {5 W絕情谷既問題...1 _4 E' P8 X: e" d
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...6 X' L" H: p" k5 U
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

& C" g7 J) w; }* G6 k3 D
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
1 R$ n& \, k+ Q  _' e2 }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
5 p5 J9 U4 J0 i# e" [4 [1 ?( I; e* ^但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
$ K' U" ?7 j& t6 E# e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( W+ S7 T* g: o+ g( p
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢7 i8 H& _; ~0 M& A

# K! |3 c+ n( s- d4 k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
$ \! X7 i2 M$ `! V1 i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:2 Q$ Z# p' u7 [- S# w0 V
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

6 L5 F3 m1 w6 q" U# d

% N/ P7 e! d5 Y" `. Phaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣+ `  `# E+ [5 @2 k7 g
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...." @: |% p, m$ D4 j& ?
* N" ^$ c% x9 K1 {
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# w: Z0 W, O- {% S
yes, my reason is helping more
' |, m4 ]( \% O6 B+ V/ wfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!. K* e  n9 @% e% r4 c  @
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
- i$ g; F* @' F  fbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?8 H! v. g: \& F& K+ `
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!!!
" h6 d$ y, w: a3 n+ @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!" o5 H, J9 v  ?$ h6 e
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~~$ {" L4 w4 m. S: l% g& ^# X
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~1 M- ^2 W5 c' Q& b/ R
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~2 b" i+ K& ?" t
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~; v8 L1 c7 c( {& ^( Y# w
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# Z. W0 J4 k2 H% V; R, O+ g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~~
$ Y4 P: e- |' S4 Y但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
- {7 b6 A7 \: b& X3 Y  G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）