Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
8 w3 |6 j, w7 H
; ?: {% W8 \! ~+ a5 F) x) D: |) \7 C7 d3 x& Y8 f; X0 \  L9 H- D3 T" F
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

! S; X( V4 ]( U6 E* [# h& H0 X

2 [- R: Z; [/ _5 Q: LIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
7 X7 E4 {4 P* L' i0 c* u- }' _) q) k9 k2 Y( v
1 c0 W  U. f, [, b! b8 D' R
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

- Z: y8 a) J% V2 I! W; N4 J
6 w% p  L% `1 z8 m2 m
oh really...
: L4 t; o* o1 N1 Ehahhaa, thx a lot^^"
/ ~0 \: n( b$ N9 ]i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
$ w8 M7 f8 [+ p' Z+ ~* |
  S$ s1 j% p5 G6 C! n當然這是個假設性問題
4 `/ u1 @' E. g9 L6 n但將人數倍大) _/ n+ S" A1 S' ]" ~: _! Q# p
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
9 e" q7 E1 a. z0 _(情況可以換作其他)7 z* n7 F# a9 w6 E6 E
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
" s9 N! G  }; `/ Y& d如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
  ~" @* A5 V. C% I& f如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:+ p& ~4 l+ g' d0 c
絕情谷既問題...% n. f* G. {) x8 X2 Q1 c1 i
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
( b* H  B8 Y: N: z如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

& V- Y0 i) s, z$ W- [- ]* \0 p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
. y; u* n) k) V. v' C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 r# D6 `- I- Z+ [$ }
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
* u2 ~+ e2 A% D  Q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' T# K$ d8 M- y- Z' h
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢$ c' }* b0 U9 I6 k8 o
5 V; B5 a3 q  R4 J
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! p" N. ^  V5 D# {9 X5 L1 A) L$ T' ^
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:# X$ ^" M: A* M( U) q) @/ F2 a1 V: x
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

* s8 t; D. c; L
7 M& {# p' j# r) I/ e( b, m
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣/ T! Y# n" q8 j3 j4 S
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....
" J! W# C5 X4 ^# Q: N1 a) ^2 H& z7 `( i
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
' m: M0 E! m) [  jyes, my reason is helping more+ s$ [( I0 `( J2 n5 E: |
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!6 M( Q$ ^( ~! \6 b
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child
1 R3 ^9 E2 W5 ^  j9 `, q  dbecause no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
" q( m+ t9 @% ^0 R7 N7 x: e4 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!!!
$ F8 ?) R1 {7 R$ w" {! r9 X8 Amay 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!
. ^5 t( ^7 [8 t: G7 P; bunder 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~~5 }, Y) u* `* O, w
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~" z; p: K9 `& F
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~6 o; i' T1 [4 B3 K
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
3 j' y  I+ C2 k0 ~; f6 n9 c. ]- k  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 q/ Z: O* K8 `& L2 ~4 i- b. N
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~~% F5 a! s8 K8 e& I  F
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
8 z' u& q; q2 |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）