That is such a great question. I think, instinctively, our dread of wolves is greater. So if a wolf wants to avoid the fate that the story-wolf met, they must somehow keep people's perceptions in suspension.
For this reason, though wolves are wily and quite powerful, a wolf is also susceptible to people's shifts in perception. "They fell upon the wolf..." What a job, to keep perceptions in suspension! Wolves benefit if they can keep people from talking—really talking—to one another. The more we stay in our own kitchens, so to speak, the less we can see what's happening in our fields and our neighbor's fields. And we only have so much bandwidth anyway, so we might not be able to either see or care about fields besides the ones right beside us. Human limitation.
Of course, the story doesn't end there. Which brings up the issue of what happens when we call *everything* a wolf. It dulls our edges.
What I love about the story is that it can't be straight-up applied as a parable for anything. Rather it seems to raise more questions the more you read it.
I read it as a parable, but it's also kind of another one of those lenses I'm always going on about. I like that way of looking at the world- shifting my own perspective from time to time, so I can end up with a more complete version of events.
I think this also limits the proverbial wolf's ability to keep us from perceiving, as you call it. That's the right way to think about this!
Also: I am trying my best to communicate to everyone who wants to listen with my writing. I hope to connect more folks in this very way.
I'm especially interested in your lenses concept. Can you say more about how perspective-shifts limit the proverbial wolves' ability to keep us from perceiving?
The more lenses and mental models, the more clearly you can see the world, I think. I also STRONGLY feel that the better you know yourself, the better you are capable of judging the world. I've taken it upon myself to be nostalgic in my writing. I indulge not for the fun of it, but because it's a great learning experience, and a way to refine my view of the world just a tiny bit.
I answered at your place, but I want to add here: Yes, you may be so bold (at least with me :), and if I could be so bold, I might offer this question:
what, if anything, on either side of the aisle, might *either men or women* (or any other group, for that matter) be embracing simply because it feels like freedom when, in fact, it makes them feel icky inside—if they are honest with themselves? This is a question I have posed to myself. :)
Regarding lenses as you define them, that has SO been on my mind. One of my personal and professional (through TS Poetry) goals this coming year will be to choose different lenses to look through. I jumped back into the book 'The Blue Sweater' as a beginning last night. Talk about different lenses! :)
My friend and I are experimenting with a different mental model every week (or longer if we want/need to). Useful stuff! I'm sure you can find some good lists of different ways to think, but we've found a few as well if you need a place to start.
You asked a great question, and I think it's really about how long it takes before forced social behavior starts to feel like your own behavior. At some point, cruelty no longer feels like cruelty, but more like self defense or some other type of attempt to fit in. I think that's exactly what I was thinking when I wrote about the Pledge of Allegiance - did you see that one?
Sorry to keep sharing links to stuff I've written, but that's the part of my mind that stores some of this info now! Cognitive offloading, here I come.
I can't believe how many thoughts this tiny story has stirred in me. Truly, it's the stuff of a whole book.
Go, little boy. Happy to sit shoulder to shoulder with her, surveying the questions together.
💜💜💜💜
That makes me think. Thank you for sharing it with us. Pouring you a cup of tea--
Do you think our dread of wolves is still greater?
I'm not so sure.
That is such a great question. I think, instinctively, our dread of wolves is greater. So if a wolf wants to avoid the fate that the story-wolf met, they must somehow keep people's perceptions in suspension.
For this reason, though wolves are wily and quite powerful, a wolf is also susceptible to people's shifts in perception. "They fell upon the wolf..." What a job, to keep perceptions in suspension! Wolves benefit if they can keep people from talking—really talking—to one another. The more we stay in our own kitchens, so to speak, the less we can see what's happening in our fields and our neighbor's fields. And we only have so much bandwidth anyway, so we might not be able to either see or care about fields besides the ones right beside us. Human limitation.
Of course, the story doesn't end there. Which brings up the issue of what happens when we call *everything* a wolf. It dulls our edges.
What I love about the story is that it can't be straight-up applied as a parable for anything. Rather it seems to raise more questions the more you read it.
I read it as a parable, but it's also kind of another one of those lenses I'm always going on about. I like that way of looking at the world- shifting my own perspective from time to time, so I can end up with a more complete version of events.
I think this also limits the proverbial wolf's ability to keep us from perceiving, as you call it. That's the right way to think about this!
Also: I am trying my best to communicate to everyone who wants to listen with my writing. I hope to connect more folks in this very way.
I'm especially interested in your lenses concept. Can you say more about how perspective-shifts limit the proverbial wolves' ability to keep us from perceiving?
Well, explicitly, this can be about propaganda, and there are certainly parallels with early US efforts to talk women into smoking, for instance: https://goatfury.substack.com/p/truth-is-out-of-style
I see a ton of parallels with the 2024 election, if I may be so blunt.
Here's where I went down the lens rabbit hole:
https://goatfury.substack.com/p/lenses
Dan Nest and I had fun with that one!
The more lenses and mental models, the more clearly you can see the world, I think. I also STRONGLY feel that the better you know yourself, the better you are capable of judging the world. I've taken it upon myself to be nostalgic in my writing. I indulge not for the fun of it, but because it's a great learning experience, and a way to refine my view of the world just a tiny bit.
I answered at your place, but I want to add here: Yes, you may be so bold (at least with me :), and if I could be so bold, I might offer this question:
what, if anything, on either side of the aisle, might *either men or women* (or any other group, for that matter) be embracing simply because it feels like freedom when, in fact, it makes them feel icky inside—if they are honest with themselves? This is a question I have posed to myself. :)
Regarding lenses as you define them, that has SO been on my mind. One of my personal and professional (through TS Poetry) goals this coming year will be to choose different lenses to look through. I jumped back into the book 'The Blue Sweater' as a beginning last night. Talk about different lenses! :)
My friend and I are experimenting with a different mental model every week (or longer if we want/need to). Useful stuff! I'm sure you can find some good lists of different ways to think, but we've found a few as well if you need a place to start.
You asked a great question, and I think it's really about how long it takes before forced social behavior starts to feel like your own behavior. At some point, cruelty no longer feels like cruelty, but more like self defense or some other type of attempt to fit in. I think that's exactly what I was thinking when I wrote about the Pledge of Allegiance - did you see that one?
https://goatfury.substack.com/p/the-pledge
Sorry to keep sharing links to stuff I've written, but that's the part of my mind that stores some of this info now! Cognitive offloading, here I come.