Recently, there was an interview given by Ms. Priyanka Gandhi to a leading television channel. There was one noteworthy point stated by her, made in the context of present crisis in Sri Lanka, "There is a difference between the cause and the method one follows to achieve the same. It is this difference which decides who is a terrorist and who isn't".
Let us put this hypothesis to test- 'the difference btw cause and method makes all the difference'. 'Cause' being synonymous to 'end', while 'method' synonymous to 'means'.
Let us put this hypothesis to test- 'the difference btw cause and method makes all the difference'. 'Cause' being synonymous to 'end', while 'method' synonymous to 'means'.
Herbert A.Simon seems to be first social scientist to elaborate on this topic when he wrote about the 'rationality of decision making' and the ambiguous synonimity between 'means-end' and 'fact-value'. He stated that in so far as decisions lead to selection of final goals they may be treated as 'value judgements' and decisions implementing such goals are 'fact judgements'. Thus, he tried to place 'decisions' between total rationality (facts) and total irrationality (values). Therefor, according to him, 'means' comprise of irrational/value judgement while the 'end' is a rational/factual judgement.
Let us consider another viewpoint, one of Chris Agyris, the strongest critic of Herbert Simon to date. His main critique of this fact-value proposition is - 'Consequence of intendedly rational man concept is ... to give primacy to behaviour that is related to goals (sic end)... to assume purpose without asking how it has developed'. Thus, Agyris brackets Simon as a traditionalist as he has not considered/given much weightage to the emotional/behavioural aspects of man.
The usefulness of the ME theory is well-known and we have wide-ranging applicability specifically in automation. However, as far as it is known, in order to be able to build an 'intelligent' system, 'value/irrational' judgements also need to be accounted for. As of now, however, we are far from identifying all the rational variables themselves and have a long way to go before identification of irrational variables in a system as well. 'Irrational', again, should be looked at from present context wherein as per the definitions put out by 'humans', certain behaviours/attitudes/judgements have been classified as rational and others irrational.
Who knows what the future will hold? Probably certain traits seen as irrational today may be perfectly understood as a rational concept tomorrow.
Let us consider another viewpoint, one of Chris Agyris, the strongest critic of Herbert Simon to date. His main critique of this fact-value proposition is - 'Consequence of intendedly rational man concept is ... to give primacy to behaviour that is related to goals (sic end)... to assume purpose without asking how it has developed'. Thus, Agyris brackets Simon as a traditionalist as he has not considered/given much weightage to the emotional/behavioural aspects of man.
The usefulness of the ME theory is well-known and we have wide-ranging applicability specifically in automation. However, as far as it is known, in order to be able to build an 'intelligent' system, 'value/irrational' judgements also need to be accounted for. As of now, however, we are far from identifying all the rational variables themselves and have a long way to go before identification of irrational variables in a system as well. 'Irrational', again, should be looked at from present context wherein as per the definitions put out by 'humans', certain behaviours/attitudes/judgements have been classified as rational and others irrational.
Who knows what the future will hold? Probably certain traits seen as irrational today may be perfectly understood as a rational concept tomorrow.
No comments:
Post a Comment