blogspot visitor counter

luni, 23 martie 2009

The Goat and her 3 kids - an unorthodox perspective

Praxiology, or action theory, is supposed to investigate the general concepts of individual and collective action, as well as the conditions of efficient action regardless of its moral value: (von Mises, 1949; Kotarbinski, 1965; Bunge, 1998). In this regard praxiology is nothing but the philosophical counterpart of management technology.
Examples: the investigation of the means-goal or input-output relation in general terms, and the search for general principles of efficient action, such as that of "satisfying" instead of maximizing.

The story of the “Goat and her 3 Kids” is a classic story for kids, but if praxiology is applied it becomes a instrument to analyze action patterns where a wolf kills 2 goat kids and he is then killed by the kids mother “the Goat”. Beside the militaristic view that I will try to create, there is a factor found in programming: in game programming a command line, leads to an action. How well the action behaves during game play depends on the line. But there are ups and downs to all commands.
I will first separate the story in characters. The Wolf who will guide his actions based on his strong points: Strength and Cunning, The Goat who will base her actions on Intelligence and Rage, the Old Kid whose actions are based on stupidity, the Middle Kid again well raised to stupidity and the young kid smart and cautious.
As the story begins we have the 2 sides the wolf on the attacking side with the mission to kill and eat the kids, the goat who has to gather food for her kids and the kids who will be taken as a group and on individual basis, their mission is to stay locked in the house where they are safe.
The first action is this: the Mother Goat leaves and tells the kids to lock the door. It is the best way to be taken in this situation as they are not able to defend themselves otherwise. The action was correct then. To strengthen the first option of the action a password is chosen, this is action 2 of the Goat; it is still just a plus to action 1. Action 2 is followed by instructions: the treat is possible so the need for further security is needed. But action 2 is flawed as the password is not secure because it is said outside in the open field. Action 2 is the breaking point of the first part. If the password would have been secured the wolf would have been left without a plan and unable to enter the house. The mother Goat leaves and the Kids to behave as they are told in the beginning (the) action 1. At this miment the Wolf has the upper hand, he is in possession of the password and the logical and best option to get entry in the house is to use the password, other actions are not viable as the door is locked and no other way in exists. The plan will fail in the beginning as the young Kid recognizes that this is not his mother’s voice. He is so able to stop his older brother who failed for the first attack. The door remains locked and the first plan of the wolf is rendered useless. In order for his second attempt to work the Wolf needs to do some adjustments. The Wolf will change his voice so that is lighter and will imitate better the voice of the mother Goat. The second time the Older kid will gain the upper hand in the struggle whit his younger brothers and open the door.
To analyze the actions of the Old kid is easy, he is lead by stupidity all the way, the first time instead of checking the door or to take some evasive action he is so eager to do it. Only his younger brother is able to convince him that is not wise to open the door being helped here by the wolf’s voice. The second time the changed voice of the wolf gave the Older Kid the upper hand in the house and took away every sense he had giving him the assurance of the validity. The second action is the only good action that the wolf does. The first was a failure and the next to come are either luck or unwise. At the moment when the door is being opened the two other kids are taking the story inside the house to the personal level as so.
The middle kid hides under the bed and the young one in the fireplace. As a repercussion of his bad decision making the Older kid dies once the door is opened, the other two being separated and bringing the action to the individual level are unable to help or support each other.
At this moment The Wolf shows that he did not had a plan all the way. His plan was to get in but he had no idea how many kids were inside. Stupid for him that he didn’t see them outside when the Mother gave them instruction. Moreover after a superficial search he decides to rest. This action is not planed and gains no points for this. Only by luck he decides to rest on the bed, the same bed that hides the middle kid also by luck the wolf sneezes.
The next action belongs to the middle kid, he could have chosen the logical path to keep quiet but he decides to politely respond to the wolf and to give away his position. The younger kid kept quiet and said nothing, the action that would have been the best in the case of the middle kid as well. For taking the wrong decision the middle kid dies as well.
The search for the third kid is in vane as this one sticks to his original logical plan of hiding as he has no other viable decision to undertake. Action 9 is the wolf’s personal sadistic action, to place the severed heads of the two dead kids in the window frame and to cover the house in blood. This is an unneeded action, an action that was not needed neither by the wolfs primal needs [hunger] nor by someone else, this is an hatred rising action, it will not give the wolf more victory points, for it is not going to intimidate the Goat. As a decision it is a bad one for it is not only a waste of time but will enrage the Goat even further. Now with his plan almost accomplished he wolf leaves but the makes the great mistake of the second part, he lives the young kid alive as witness. The death of the third kid would have gave him invulnerability and then action 9 the covering with blood would have had a meaning
The revenge starts as soon as the mother Goat comes home. Action 9 enters in effect but the effect at first is the opposite of the intended, only after the discovery of the massacre the effect has the predicted effect and not the intended. Military tacticians have stressed the idea of using the best asset in war as soon as you know the weak point of the opposite force. The goat decides to take vengeance on the Wolf. The reason that generated this was the fact that the wolf made a critical mistake as he left the third kid alive and due to his testimony he is found guilty.
She knows the weak point of the wolf (food) and she has a reason to call him to the table (commemoration of the dead kids). She prepares using the best asset (intelligence), this action of cunning and falsity will render the best assets of the wolf (strength) useless. She decides to prepare food that will be placed on a fire pit full with burning wood covered with some sort of weak material that will give way to pressure and a wax chair to trigger the pressure built once melted by the falling of the wolf. The final action is successful as the Wolf is to arrogant or stupid not to realize that he has been found out. He plays the Goats plan well not even suspecting the outcome. His death comes as in the cases of the other 2 kids because of his own stupidity, and mistaken decision.

3 comentarii:

  1. can you blame the wolf? No. The wolf as we all know eats. He eats raw meat and in our case goat meat. He is not to blame. Not even ata the end of the story when he accepts the goat's invitation to the dinner/trap. Who can resists to "sarmale" and "mamaliga"?

  2. As for the goat's kids...They are really stupid except the little one. Can I say:"You sheep!!!"

  3. Well if there is anything the wolf can be blamed for then its the fact that he didnt have a plan for what he will do after he gets in the house.

    But this is not the point here. What i tryed to do is to show the this kids story form a praxiologycal point of view.


baga comment