Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:3 L$ i% o, ^) o6 w7 L" e4 a+ G

8 m" n; T5 |, `% N
% ~. @' F9 N: X( m我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

3 F/ [8 v2 g% q  H, D& p* v- c
3 E- b2 Y$ }* Y+ d$ r2 ^In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:6 c- s" `" K& Y+ _4 l

( B9 q  h; n" x$ c2 j+ K# \  W8 r
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

, G  x& t/ g# x9 m3 {

4 O1 ~; s% v- [3 ], _; J; ^oh really...9 K% e+ D& g0 d: T. Z
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"" h: }# b: t! f: w1 [( e6 ]
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題
% @+ `  L( O* L* |" s
/ n* V5 g+ e9 g4 \( o2 D當然這是個假設性問題& T( g3 Q3 Q6 |# l4 H1 E
但將人數倍大
4 ^, n( q. f0 Q4 D# q4 Z( j* v例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個" Q7 s4 f6 Z8 [/ m
(情況可以換作其他)& x: M+ o7 R. e
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...' [' c5 H! l, v. K& f. l6 I2 f
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
8 _* d" g) k9 r( T; 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:
( g' u: }- u& S9 \) l, N3 b/ F絕情谷既問題...5 R4 i, G' }) s
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...4 _( f5 B9 A/ t6 {
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

# Y: G, R3 r9 ~5 {8 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
( D. O% L  X8 i  z! v) 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6 M) R. E  R+ K+ C6 l
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩9 x! w0 `0 j9 Q2 q7 H; f  f
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
* P( U' B2 G% H6 w7 G其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
6 W, i( n. C: V1 S/ y
+ g, _. ~. G& _( h5 q( {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- A7 F& v& F- y0 p/ Y0 D
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:) Z; F) Z3 ^1 B  p/ t
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

  P9 A- V6 e4 ^8 {3 U
7 I2 g; k. o. V7 b
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣: b/ G: y$ W0 b+ }* K( t- H) 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....$ h; ]: k9 T3 O
" G* P% R$ f; h  h% R
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; \' U$ f& ~% ^6 w2 X9 z4 j  r
yes, my reason is helping more+ ]; v. T& Y: W# ]
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!$ n5 e% V* v: H4 K' [) Y+ N
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child; x, w) M7 d. G
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
% B) n4 P0 g4 |6 r+ l4 n  ealso 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 x- h7 Q" }* [" Smay 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!2 }: ~( }" |% t% T! Z  x
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~~9 K4 I/ c- j0 c
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
1 |- V/ U3 T  s$ U: U0 U) G* q我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~0 E) v2 Z6 q9 _* c
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~) e5 L9 b5 E. A& a
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~~: e! ?7 |0 u& [+ `# |
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~~" D+ l' O4 J" G; R
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~" M) H& a7 Y% \' e0 ]; c' Y# `
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）