Chingy

Originally posted by crap at 2005-4-27 01:20 AM:
" _' w4 B. U' e1 J, L) P8 D- _" k, j) Y( t6 h# [" C+ c* O

) f, O& s' L4 w我都覺得錯不在他們, 是他們的父母 ...

  i0 K* y7 i' G  F

$ W: k! W9 l0 n7 q% X/ `! hIn Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

crap

Originally posted by Chingy at 2005-4-27 07:12 AM:4 [/ O; {) h6 p* o) r& K# o4 n0 w
( l( W, K8 k' |* E7 x( m+ `1 z1 s: {
( ^. R. S5 v5 \% J0 K; u
In Spider-Man 2.Spider man did stop a train

* y# m; f0 F' C8 [6 j- m) G* ~

! t: G# P# z9 I% ^0 g$ Q9 ^oh really...
- q  g; ^3 M# h4 l5 jhahhaa, thx a lot^^"0 J. c6 _4 o. s
i didn't watch ch.2

springspring

挺出名，在偶理學的問題; ?# b# C8 ~, E+ G  j' p6 {# }
* N2 M& L& e% t6 r
當然這是個假設性問題
+ X6 `0 t( |% V2 q但將人數倍大7 Z3 u1 e2 J/ i* H& Q% U+ L
例如是十個一個，到一百個一個，到一千個一個
/ z/ {# v- X2 W, T(情況可以換作其他)
/ _- h6 F5 }; ~6 R$ c& p( [1 g始終有條界線

easonwing

絕情谷既問題..." z7 i! u" a! T
如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...+ U% M) \! q+ G- y- [1 k% i
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$ j2 Q& d7 x& `% U1 j絕情谷既問題...
! R/ S9 a# e$ _% f% T如果一個人個邊係我親人,我會好自私咁求佢...( f& {* v# i# [: k3 e/ l% S
如果唔係親人,我會殺人警百...

. E; `/ S1 d8 |
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
: B2 ^# l6 q. d) M3 Z+ {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
2 _5 n5 @2 B+ }2 T7 Q但是諗深一層,咁樣真係好像唔係好o岩
/ C: g- [) Z& @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
" ]- ^- q. C8 @& k9 Y. w其實到底人數的多與少值唔值得去考慮呢- `; z7 e6 B! T
1 c/ h- n& C3 c* V. n' O) h
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
) g% p7 }6 ?8 g; i, N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:) R1 g% Z& G7 f5 Q0 T+ r, X
其實我最初係即刻諗要救多d人,救得愈多 ...

: Y: e2 z$ W9 D! h
* \1 D$ c7 V( C. _1 _5 xhaha, srfqt1兄, 我們終能於球場外達成一致的睇法, 哈, 相當有趣
2 v5 K  [5 \4 U: j9 _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....
5 r. O% V  \+ z& q) f" W
% f2 K& j& L& Tp.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 child5 W3 @0 v6 L8 U' n
yes, my reason is helping more
5 k/ a/ b% {* e6 p7 M! n) ffor this sudden and short period, i dun think i can have so much time to think the background!) D( t. Q) n+ J& A4 J( r; u+ |9 u
if saying that child obey the rule but others are not, i think this is not a very good reason to help that child# y$ e, l$ c& j6 X* u, G( j
because no matter the rail is using or not, i think also no gd to play in that place, right?
8 q0 R8 x, N8 X" M4 {7 c4 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!!!
) I& R+ @- t/ wmay 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!) j) k+ |' J. i( D  q; u) G: S
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~~
; v2 G3 t7 E7 \3 t6 |* X& R6 h當我見到呢D咁危急o既事情~~/ x2 V& @- Q6 J* X# C- D+ Z
我冇可能可以好理性去諗個後果~~" h2 h) R8 Q1 }  L$ |3 v6 ]
正常黎講一定係以人數為先~~
* i( D* F& O( n; q& i: @; T% u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~~9 s% D1 l% I7 c
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 Z! R* T( G7 H. j
但如果o係當時o既情況中~~: q% y) y  j$ U
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）