Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
) q3 H  d2 _- u9 o. s
) T2 S# w+ y6 X, y+ I/ w% h1 ^1 A5 b" Q2 h0 ^
我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

: B% r, D( C* Z

3 X8 M6 x& Z( ^, j7 D6 v& xIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:
" J5 J, o3 {# u+ n: S
- V; _, a* o3 ~7 a4 U7 ?$ |  }5 {: }& i7 p* g
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

/ [" ?: _. x; P; q3 u1 T/ O& P  T1 O" Z3 ~
oh really...0 C4 b, K& Q5 \$ ?+ T2 @
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"% Q4 K% R$ H9 x
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題* v/ k, v) J) I; C5 a& p) n3 |0 @
. b7 {$ L  j6 |6 f; C! e. y
當然這是個假設性問題
6 z0 o- t/ c* V5 t# d! i但將人數倍大
0 P. z3 t9 U9 j) W- v  U  q4 Z& ^例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個) Z, x$ ^: w. r8 e  X  n
(情況可以換作其他)
. K( N0 z0 Y9 N% |始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...# Q2 N  }, ~. e0 M
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...3 ~6 n% |, T) u3 }6 k& E
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:. l# g" h, \6 y
絕情谷既問題...
6 t( d$ f6 m" ?如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...& P/ \  {* X- v3 a5 }" w
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

; a  T5 y0 F4 k+ N: |. z1 x% 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
! v) \0 w5 x$ u4 D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
/ h: x6 \( {8 N& b但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
9 F9 a- w( M3 c/ O* s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) D3 S3 P; r. {其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢
4 g. J: ?" F( N9 P9 s" T: k8 k9 M# u! {7 U, D. X5 F3 g+ ?0 U
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
5 b; v( ^1 q1 U* i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:
0 S( a/ i( Y  b2 i7 C0 {其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

5 q, A/ i7 t1 j! \2 I0 G0 P& ?

6 j5 h. `$ u. H0 ]7 l- |( Nhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣0 c3 v" y  a. g: k& w
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....& E" u$ G4 X7 q) X  f9 R

! m$ X8 e) H7 Y- w3 r6 ?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 child9 V& E, ^3 `- d; W- [+ i6 v
yes, my reason is helping more
- c1 k+ m1 l+ ^- p+ G# g6 Zfor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!6 ]4 Q  r: I8 f
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child% n6 v! U& j$ K# c8 J, c# }+ g# K
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
( \* w- v& C  w+ ?2 c1 T* ualso 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 @) I6 \& L( ^, j* O" P/ v+ }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!
8 Z* {1 ^+ q4 A4 E+ L8 kunder 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 {6 \& n5 c% Q, {# z0 }當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~+ F% H+ z( F- w& s$ N% H
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
. k$ c! ^9 o! s7 h+ v8 Q% ~正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
2 Q' s. q. R: D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~~
. {2 D& f4 |  L" G$ E0 K3 s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~~5 C; p0 N+ e2 ^" ?
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
% H; v, b  e# d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）