Which wolf wins?

The alagory goes there are two wolves that live with us.

The blogger, Dean Yyeong described the two wolves in a story as a conflict between the two, "...One is evil–he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.”

“...The other is good – he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith. The same fight is going on inside you–and inside every other person, too.”

When asked which one wins, the wise addage answer is:

"whichever one you feed"

However when I heard this, I was curious how you can starve one and feed the other. The evil wolf perhaps would want to starve the good wolf. But would the good wolf do the same? That would defeat the purpose of doing good. I came to the same conclusion as another blogger, Dean Yeong, along with other online authors.

The allegory tells the story of two wolves that coexist within us, representing a conflict between good and evil qualities. One wolf embodies negative traits such as anger, envy, and greed, while the other represents positive qualities like joy, love, and empathy. The outcome of this inner battle depends on which wolf we choose to "feed."

I am intrigued that one can starve a wolf, particularly the evil one. The evil wolf might want to eliminate its counterpart, but that would defeat the purpose of balance. Instead, both wolves are needed to achieve equilibrium since both wolves are valid aspects of ourselves.

This concept is reminiscent of Shirzad Chamine's Positive Intelligence teachings, which provide an example involving someone accidentally touching a hot stove. The immediate pain serves a crucial purpose as it prompts us to protect ourselves. In this scenario, the "angry" wolf's reaction aligns with the need for self-preservation.

Feeding both wolves in our inner struggle brings balance. The good wolf can offer empathy, emphasizing that the pain was caused by an unfortunate circumstance. Without this balance, the good wolf might suffer more harm, while the evil wolf would persist in its anger, blaming and lashing out at others.

So, how does this relate to leadership?

In leadership, this allegory underscores the importance of balance and self-awareness. Effective leaders recognize that they have both positive and negative qualities within them. They understand that in certain situations, assertiveness and decisiveness (akin to the "evil" wolf) may be required, but in others, empathy and compassion (akin to the "good" wolf) are more appropriate.

Leaders who embrace both aspects of themselves can adapt to various challenges and lead with greater authenticity. They can make decisions with a balanced perspective, taking into account both the needs of the organization and the well-being of their team members. This approach can foster a healthier work environment and more sustainable leadership practices. Ultimately, leadership is about finding the right balance between the two wolves within, using each when it serves the greater good.

Also the lesson for me doesn't end here...

Although a great exercise to reflect on, it is also good reminder about biases and stereotypes. The Two Wolves is not of Cherokee oringin. After researching things a little Wikipedia clearly documents that the Two Wolves story is a well-known legend often incorrectly attributed to Cherokee or other unspecified Native American origins. The earliest sources strongly suggest that it is actually a Christian parable, in which Indigenous peoples of the Americas have been portrayed by non-Indigenous authors.