My thoughts on "The Goose that Laid the Golden Eggs"

I hate this story. I think this story and its moral shows how much humans apply double standards. and how much humans judge things in retrospect. 
to me, why do we call this farmer that killed this goose or hen foolish and greedy and short sighted. for thinking of a risky idea to make money faster. but when companies spend fortunes, when adventures die in their adventures, we call them brave and pioneers. why dont we consider the farmer chasing knowledge too. he wanted to see if the inside of the goose, had gold in it. isn't that chasing knowledge? if he was right? didn't he give us further insight on this mysterious animal's anatomy? arent we told that knowledge is more valuable than money? or do we only say this for researchers and scientists
when researchers die from radiation or explosions while working on their research, didn't they lose way more than gold? their health or lives? but do we call them foolish for doing that? do we call them greedy or shortsighted? no we say they chased knowledge and that is noble, what if they chased salaries and awards and glory and prestige of discoveries and inventions? we cant know what their intentions were, but we assume we do for the farmer, because the farmer we look down upon, this is our arrogance, the author of the story and the reader, we are arrogant and subconsciously want to think of farmers as stupid and foolish especially when they get a fortune randomly, we hate that. but when a scientist gets a good salary and then loses it for failing his next high risk costly project, we dont look down on him
I would say, any brave, curious man from the time of that story, someone who values knowledge and understanding the world. would actually also kill the goose and look inside it too. but if we started the story with a scholar instead of a farmer. we wouldn't call him foolish, we would find excuses for him
also if the farmer found gold in the goose? would we still call him foolish still? or are we basing this on the result and not the action?
also the story says the goose lays a golden egg everyday, why dont we assume the farmer had this goose for a long time, collected a large sum of gold. gold that is equal to generational wealth. and then after waiting, he still wanted to chase knowledge, to see more of the mystery of this peculiar goose
i find it annoying how we tell stories of valuing money, and then we tell other stories of valuing knowledge over money, and then we pick and choose, we apply the first on the farmer to make him stupid. and we apply the second on the researchers and scientists to defend them for spending a fortune on their research
if that special goose was real. wouldn't it be among the high priority research projects where spending a crazy amount of money on it to get any knowledge from it would be considered worth it?
the farmer did his best, he didn't have high tech labs, he just had a knife. he got the observation that he can get from it. we should salute him from chasing that knowledge if we were to be consistent. or we should call anyone who spent money on unprofitable research, or failing business, a foolish person too
even if we do the numbers, a goose that lays golden eggs daily. how much money can it really lose, we dont know how long it would live, what if the farmer let it live for the duration of a normal goose life expectancy and then he thought if it dies soon there wont be a big loss anyways. he would only lose a handful of eggs compared to the hundreds he already got from it.
but even if we pick the worst case scenario and say he lost a years worth of daily golden eggs. would it be equal to billions that get spent today on failed research or business investments? i am not going to do the math, but if the answer is no, then we should be consistent and all of these research and investments foolish too, but because they are of the intellectual class, we dont do that, and because the farmer is for the non intellectual class, we blame him first. if anything, someone who is an expert, who got education, who is considered an intellectual should be blamed harsher, not less harsher. but this is probably a case of appeal to authority idk. or we just hate when someone we consider not intellectual makes money and spends money on his own research i guess.
i know this is a long rant. i am sorry. i dont expect anyone to read it anyways so i took liberty in pouring it all out and not considering anyone's time
thanks for reading my blog