Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:! \8 b2 p6 ]8 B  q1 n! b
9 s4 u7 T0 f7 S1 G, v
5 X; i0 G" j6 Y& }: W$ A
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

* B# |4 P3 p* K' }! x1 W/ I# @4 r6 `+ C* ]% E9 T& p0 ~
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
* [6 H& `: V: n! z* C
; s+ E* o$ Z# k0 n* f  ]; w8 q& @  r# Z
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

! t9 }) V. N8 A5 R8 ]

1 a' J, k2 x8 yoh really...' l- Z+ B" }8 E$ t
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
, ^0 l9 d! _; j9 Si didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
0 R7 _- k) ?. d8 s/ E# K' a5 d$ f/ {" V
當然這是個假設性問題1 q  P5 T& A/ @3 K' N& I
但將人數倍大
) u0 W0 `1 c1 U9 D, K9 ]& \例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
  d* X) k4 N1 U9 |+ K$ a, u(情況可以換作其他)9 t2 S' O( r' ~$ F
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
5 g5 q$ o2 E7 l1 `- w如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...6 j( u' P' r: y# i5 Y4 i  J
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:2 P" w5 ?" ?- C, U
絕情谷既問題...
5 u6 Y- d+ R+ h6 o% ]; Q6 u; S如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
5 z5 r6 V; ~( x) w如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

0 \1 @$ s# P& |/ k% E. n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( A% J4 i2 s+ ~8 w1 T. H! A9 ]8 R
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
) `3 Z2 N8 y( P/ n但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩7 j$ r. C. L, L+ |5 D8 B
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
7 K0 O* X; m: ]: T+ g* ?2 A& g其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢3 o2 s0 x% t$ {; o, ~& U

  S; F/ M# `" q% z2 H# x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; o: A; Z7 b/ s
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:
5 R0 ^/ u0 y/ l其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

3 o; u4 y* c, |* Z9 B; g3 i$ p- m; a" u, e: z8 p
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣" I, I  X; w$ \4 }  x
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 u2 B+ E3 Q* E( W+ r0 F, I. [
# t0 l6 l3 ~1 j6 Z8 yp.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 child5 U6 X- @1 s$ W0 A% _
yes, my reason is helping more6 X. M% ]  K* L2 V/ u6 K) `5 f
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
$ {) N7 d) M4 d7 ]- d' z" Rif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child7 u1 }6 I; F! l
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
1 y: ^- u5 p: y* z5 talso 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!!!5 y0 l" I/ x/ d1 d
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!
  o/ _) H! u, a- 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~~/ J1 l. z+ j2 b  F
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~5 P7 P, i# q, `% m
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
! }8 ^# @) i$ g: ?6 _0 l正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
& f0 D2 J7 F+ g4 D: _: p& Q, G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~~4 l0 Y9 d) l: m& L" D
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~~
9 G4 I: k) w- P! C3 x但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
8 w8 O) {  }1 o+ ?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）