Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:! P1 I1 ], v' H; O5 ~* X
! T  w% b% f& X

  s9 _9 T4 E  W6 P9 n5 Y我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

! L4 p9 d5 g) o+ h$ b7 W2 w3 H, H) H4 W" L1 N
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:8 B; P- e2 U* Q, Z

9 H* @/ w8 o+ O; u/ _, F8 K0 U
. K4 H; A) x2 N/ c5 O( rIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

; w! f% t+ g  h! _
( v$ A- q, S3 D1 n6 s+ W# @8 Loh really...
* X  p3 u1 i6 K) dhahhaa, thx a lot^^"
" g) U4 e# h8 P. L  L3 M- p1 B- Yi didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題5 F9 e8 m  _$ i4 @6 F
' Q3 p5 K8 M, e+ Y
當然這是個假設性問題
& Q! K4 l# c9 ~7 V' X! U8 U4 G+ c4 r但將人數倍大
1 U5 A: ?4 R- P# z例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個* U2 G3 l6 e. @9 Y( M
(情況可以換作其他)3 w7 @/ |3 @5 Y/ u" X3 x
始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題...
# B9 r/ \% m$ u& M6 u* [如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...1 f2 ~* C7 I# r6 L* d
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

easonwing

Originally posted by easonwing at 2005-4-27 12:12 PM:
& i. l5 f: T; O* P9 Q& l絕情谷既問題...+ c2 E3 Q& r9 x: Q/ ?
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...
) w5 F6 A2 Z# o( q6 t5 ?5 w如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

- H" u- \9 w4 J( u( L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) m7 n- Y/ p- U. w
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$ [' O1 l, R! ?) p# z0 W
但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
; L5 m: `& Z: }5 b, i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. [% n. K. }0 R4 Y3 W6 c
其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢' A2 }2 C6 c+ e5 t

8 N8 {4 n: U, n% \0 d- i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; N( H7 G) p3 K+ g
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:) B( k+ c. k7 B5 o3 L) Y8 H: h
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

# y' ?; o+ q+ ^- m
3 t. o3 S; @( \7 v6 j
haha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣* a- V  J) ~  V, K
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....) S% j$ P2 \& y& g, q  J
; O$ \( \, k, k1 K" y3 K
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
+ U2 i" w5 Y* G% o* W  V5 myes, my reason is helping more
8 k* J- C) _: m. i. j7 efor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!6 R( M: q+ y3 t  ~) `- J
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child9 X" V% O* f$ S
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?: y, P7 }) t, A8 E% J' l
also 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!!!+ H9 ^6 C% T/ P: f7 I
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!
& _. A/ Y  Y% s+ |9 @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~~
2 R. t2 f8 ?# D8 {- i/ c( m當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~! m- ]: V8 T6 ~7 b: ?4 B
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~4 A! d0 w$ w; W4 g: c4 F
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~4 t- p7 N: \0 m4 ?
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~~+ h7 M3 A6 z( A/ ^. Y- x
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~~
' @8 F" a5 L( B! L1 L2 `. [' u" `2 L但如果o係當時o既情況中~~
( B. V/ y5 V. 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）