How did you interpret the problem?
When I was interpreting the problem I was trying to look at the whole picture. When in all reality I should have been breaking down the problem into sections so I could concentrate on the issue at hand. I will have to admit that shook my head allot over this because it was hard to look outside the box, as one might want to say. The goal was to get all three animals to the other side of the river without any of them being harmed by one of the other animals. The cat would eat the mouse if left alone, or the dog and the cat would fight if left alone. The strange part was the mouse and the dog could not be left on the other side of the bank either.
What strategy did you use and how did you evaluate your progress? The strategy I took was that to find most common problem between the three animals. When I was evaluating the possibilities of getting them all three over the river it was overwhelming at first. I was able to attain that the main problem was the cat. The cat did not get along with the dog, nor did it get along with the mouse. The only obvious thing to do was to get the cat across the river first. This way the dog and the mouse were safe on the other bank. My problem was once I got the cat across the river and came back for one of the other animals I soon realized that either one I took next would cause a problem with the cat. Did you encounter any obstacles while solving the problem?
I was upset that I could not get my mind to look outside the box. There had to be a reasonable solution to this problem. A few obstacles were encountered along the way while I was trying to solve this mystery. I would take the cat over first which was fine, because the dog and mouse was okay while on the original side of the river. As soon as I would take over one of the other animals with the cat all heck broke loose due to the cat not getting along with either the dog or the mouse. I knew...