Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:3 n% |* M6 n  |. j5 `( `+ V
3 P5 l; [% Y9 {% G0 {+ X
9 s+ f) J. t* m1 `# n, u
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

9 _' `4 V) u% q* ]
6 E/ b) f. Q3 {7 C
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
- Q' e3 h! ~5 _  _4 p3 ~" X6 t# K/ q( e* ^0 ~
% E3 W/ R3 Y3 K
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

# i' w0 N) j0 _* p% q
- V# ?' C) A& ?. ?3 A, o
oh really...
# }) I+ h8 n5 _" `- g/ }hahhaa, thx a lot^^"
! D, k) ?% l4 e* \i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題; l2 R7 Y* ?4 h
, g  ~0 I) z7 c9 }
當然這是個假設性問題0 y& z! p- d/ k1 Z% m
但將人數倍大
' W- |4 u) B7 ~' d( w& t& T例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個1 \( \, O" k8 _5 Q" v2 Q8 l
(情況可以換作其他)
) e! {3 `" S/ U; w0 B2 Y+ S始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..." k' L8 ]" |. A3 L- j
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
7 B( ~. d" u% [9 `* Z+ V如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
" {! V, M. H4 h9 W5 R" U絕情谷既問題...8 X6 ~1 M" w' ?
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
& _6 f- c4 [) }! }( N5 q" X7 O如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

$ W; r: M8 C( z2 q. \2 q( ~' H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
! q! Y# p. R$ ?" p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 s0 u- x$ t$ _9 ~# F5 c- o
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
4 ~2 F$ u) v/ S5 r! 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! t: {) O& W9 h5 ^& G  O
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢$ a- k- L. q/ K3 k* \0 a( ~* q
4 l) C' v) G: P4 `, |' D
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0 U- S( Y- d3 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:" b4 @5 F3 T( m3 A0 U3 W
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

& |2 R: P' `$ }( L9 I
( @0 z7 R# @. \1 Z: i3 c" R
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣2 n8 |1 T/ a, U7 X' v$ \
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....2 _# V7 `5 M+ S) s3 k" L
1 e% z4 h1 l5 j( d/ B4 F4 }
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 child6 D/ |9 t/ ^7 j- ^
yes, my reason is helping more
# G# @( M" Z- i: yfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!
) J7 A+ Y; G3 R2 k6 j, Rif saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child4 W$ P2 `- B7 \. Z! Y
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
2 u/ R* Y. w. [4 Aalso 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!!!
8 ~' {' N' `7 x) cmay 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!/ d8 f7 L0 j. p, T; B9 y
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~~
& L- I3 y- P4 s; G- T當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~
. P4 t$ b7 W' @1 P我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~% ]5 s! q6 h" d" F8 Z2 K4 ]
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
* G4 B, _6 h" S, l* a+ Z# B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~~7 i+ {4 o4 d* f" Z$ w8 k0 Y
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~~$ E7 r1 b! A7 E' e7 ~
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~2 f& d; U& _4 S  L4 t& m
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）