Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:8 k- C. E$ H" k# ^' i

: v. h9 @( \0 l! P0 c
, G8 x7 O5 k# ?/ Y7 I; D! m我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

5 x" F1 \6 |  b- s; q% t6 ?
3 }8 r0 x1 }: y3 S9 G- o" e
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
' i! p: b0 v- x  Q. T0 s7 ?' I3 Z

; J( Q5 U& Z: i5 t9 z' _  I; KIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

9 V6 V7 S/ q) o
# }5 s! |8 o6 @4 h4 Y
oh really...
  F! L: s/ R6 ~/ Dhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
# K  S6 U- f  g+ u% fi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題( O+ y) p* F1 u# v! W3 y
0 C, L1 D" b8 w( V
當然這是個假設性問題
& t  _% y& ?7 a; E- e但將人數倍大
' n2 T( y' x3 y8 y9 _例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
( m  B$ ]( w+ }5 U0 u* n" u: N( H(情況可以換作其他)
7 E' ?8 G. I1 t* O  r8 p9 q7 D始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
+ ~/ A9 v3 ^/ X2 T+ x如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢..." t: q0 V) b' E2 @9 [; m  _- o
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
4 \& O  x$ Z5 n7 F; K, T絕情谷既問題...
! V8 A& A" b7 H. y4 m( X: }如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...9 Z, e* {5 Q! l
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

7 m3 T/ m$ C" ]! G
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+ g1 K3 `, [, Y9 m2 T; ^
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
: O* `* S1 J! E: R; o6 s: A& J但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
6 v: `% b' {' {6 Y' I  n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
) z+ b8 ?! M4 w' ~$ q; [其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢" C& h$ f. }  X
$ b% K3 u$ Y8 J2 e8 Q8 w# 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
% h8 Y2 K4 j* q$ y  F' L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:
3 q# R. H- |& m' u5 X" D9 @* l* [其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

6 ?0 D( n$ o! g
( i/ i/ s0 f9 Phaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
* M' m9 r1 }' o# {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....# W1 p+ W  j6 X) Z3 d1 l+ V5 A
' w( S* I, x" J' q
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
- p" u: U8 h4 Z$ V- j! E# ~4 O0 ^8 Lyes, my reason is helping more3 M2 [: k/ U0 S2 {
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
6 c. H2 K$ F& t6 {+ ^. j& ?if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child; {) j+ x  k! ~  r9 R
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?. M3 ]# e9 j/ c! @) i9 v9 g
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!!!
3 e" E2 u& A' a+ a: q+ }$ T. Dmay 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!; R/ A& g, ^) h
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~~) z, f( \- T5 g, R
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
2 W0 w, l$ x( K) Y$ h0 C6 [+ n我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
/ G! Z/ b! v; I6 Q" W正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
4 `' B( z7 h6 E6 w; n; j, Y. 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~~8 R7 f# C0 C7 c! ]
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~~
6 C2 J% X3 k0 y7 p  n0 s但如果o係當時o既情況中~~: {# p+ j% v: s/ M8 P4 x3 f
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）