Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
# [/ ~. c- }6 C2 j6 H2 G0 K- ]+ e& e: [7 O

. f$ f  Q! y3 ]( W  G8 X2 c! h我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

: K7 K) |3 F+ H( U8 n1 d& Q# U; p6 N+ j, U
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:6 f6 [; h6 A7 d
5 w: P$ [0 C* u6 [/ \- M$ F8 L; j
, v* x  F; h: p! Z
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

6 O/ ]2 C! F7 i2 d. \4 {: _; L$ I4 l6 \
oh really...! O: Z3 G) G" M; J# ]$ ]
hahhaa, thx a lot^^"2 d* ]: Y) ^' X
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題* J, T- _% h( R: c' g

* h( Y) K. G& x: \! Q( R當然這是個假設性問題
4 ?* b- V0 n/ ]8 A9 B5 i但將人數倍大; n7 D1 F& I% Z+ a  i4 p
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個4 J4 G. L3 Q+ G" w' M7 q
(情況可以換作其他)
- \! l6 Z5 v6 w5 ^# ?始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...) b  o- x- t4 b$ w7 r
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
8 @" s  a. k  Y  O+ w. z! l如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
+ F# f/ W* `- b+ |絕情谷既問題...  _8 g( ^7 Y" O9 ^; W( Y! @7 D
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
2 o0 d; C, t/ Z2 Y1 o7 r如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

9 ?1 `% _5 u, Y. D" j* d3 |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; J9 T) g) t$ [0 C. Q, E
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
7 u9 e' x+ X$ J; f5 ~但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩: R# s% R  F2 B% O* w
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6 u! i! E# d8 J; g* J
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢" I/ ]8 a6 }1 O8 g8 E
9 ]8 v+ H& z: w' 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
+ M6 \$ c- c3 w& }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:
+ \( g  ]% G* E3 v7 t$ Z其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

% o1 A9 ?% S# F) q0 |# C( E
: H3 O4 f  b+ _  S+ L; u) @5 `8 [5 y4 Ahaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
6 g/ F' |3 W; f' X/ G5 m, F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....9 _; ^& Q* T# g

- n7 s2 {6 i% J; T1 Np.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
6 c& x; W# ?* A$ ]yes, my reason is helping more/ l% |8 L8 _0 r3 }4 _
for this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!4 @6 U. B4 T7 K" [& x
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child$ G6 W" C9 {) b9 y" ~
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
; P) j$ ^+ E/ m) X2 `& d+ 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!!!) u' g: z6 N! [, ?" y
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!
- w6 _  Y* A! Hunder 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~~# `. P( ^2 V6 B* b) E
當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~  c1 o' q8 U5 p. d- k( H7 v
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~
4 A; l( \3 R9 Y9 l: z2 m/ w正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~9 B7 z3 d5 y5 C0 m' L
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~~
) @& I: d0 P* @( Y9 s2 O  a* A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~~
6 j& V8 {' e6 y6 y但如果o係當時o既情況中~~+ u  o( g: ~* p( S6 T+ @, ?
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）