“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” Leonardo da Vinci. Adopted by Steve Jobs.
The weather had been unusually dry, and the Birds could not find water to drink.
A Crow found a pitcher with some water in it that did not reach the spout, so, alas, the Crow could not reach the water to take a drink.
He was very thirsty, so he could not walk away. Finally, an idea came to him!
He dropped pebbles into the pitcher one by one. With each pebble, the water was displaced to rise a little higher until, at last, the Crow could drink from the pitcher to quench his thirst.
Moral of the Story: Necessity is the mother of invention.
Introduction – The Essential Aesop – Epilogue
Why We Loved It: We tend to focus on what we desire, and we tend to desire what we need.
Aesop’s Crow needed water, which was the cause of his unitary focus to his Primary Objective: Survival.
Crows are known to be highly intelligent and inventive, so, for this reason, Aesop uses his patient and methodical Crow. Pebble by pebble, Aesop makes his point.
Yes, necessity is the cause (mother) for invention. And, yes, the result of our inventions tends to be our tools (or weapons, if you prefer). When we need to conquer a nail, the hammer is a “tool,” when we need to conquer a human being, the hammer is a “weapon.” Same thing, only re-named for its repurpose to a different Primary Objective.
But, we should not miss the larger lesson in this fable; that is, the Master’s lesson.
The seed, or element, of causation of need toward invention does not overtly expose the reason why the seed (or element) of causation exists in the first place. The Master presses past the obvious, asking the better question:
Why does the Crow thirst, and why does the Crow need to satisfy its thirst?
In this question and its answer is the “First Human Causation” or perhaps the “Essential Human Causation.” Survival. Then comfort (attraction to pleasure and avoidance of pain). That is, as a general rule: Sentient Need and Desire. [1, 2.1, 3] As expressed in The Epilogue [4]:
Aesop knows that human beings tend to hope—particularly in judging themselves—that they are angels, and not ravenous wolves, or a brood of vipers. But wisdom’s purpose rests in being forewarned and forearmed with the understanding how human beings are, can be, or tend to be, brutes, wolves, or vipers.
[*4] The Master’s Primary Objective is Truth. Opinion is opinion untethered, and, facts are facts tethered. And empirics are empirics tethered, scoped to the world of existence. But selling opinion as fact is a misplaced fraud upon the weak, and even Jesus understood the point. [2.2] (Sorry Jordan Peterson [5].)
Thusly, the “Fool’s Five” [6]—Prayer, Faith, Belief, Trust and Hope—are no part of empirics for this solution, nor any or all of human psychological need, desire, and tendency [*1]: Go ahead: we can sit and pray, we can have faith, believe, trust and hope—we can do it all we want—but the pebbles must be placed into the pitcher, or not and we die. [7, 8] The pebbles are not jumping into that pitcher on their own any time soon. Thus the adage, “Sapientia ars practica est.” (“Wisdom is a practical art.”)
The Crow neither waited for luck nor fondly hoped or fervently prayed for metaphysical intercessions, as the case may be; to wit: “Malum consilium fortuna est.” (“Luck is bad strategy.”); “Spes est ultimum refugium victimae.” (“Hope is the last refuge of the victim.”) [*7, *8] The Crow decided and did. [9]
It has been wisely said, “If you feed the dog, he won’t hunt.“ When the dog is sentiently hungry, all of his senses become heightened to the body’s Primary Objective: Food. Similarly for sexual arousal, the pleasure as quid pro quo incentive for reproduction. [10] By all empirics, it’s just the way it works.
So we can correlate the sentient Essential Human Causes to rewards and punishments for human behavior and human motivation. Pleasure, pain, rewards, and rewards too fast that are not appreciated. [11]
Therefore, Aesop’s deeper teaching—for those Masters who perceive it—is that sometimes sentient animals, including human beings, must be incentivized by the “creation of necessity,” which is to understand human nature, which is to understand human self-interest, which is to understand sentient need. And the “Fool’s Five”—Prayer, Faith, Belief, Trust and Hope—have got nothing to do with it in essence, but perhaps only in tactic. [12, 13, *11]
Thus the adage:
“Tu scis quod incipias cognoscere lectionem, cum id scire times.” (“You know that you are starting to understand the lesson, when you are afraid to know it.”)
[1] Pro-Choice or Pro-Life? [To Be Or Not To Be] Chapter 3, The (Insecure) Reflective Contemplative Dwelling Mind [GRZ124] [LinkedIn #GRZ_124]
[2] The ONE LinkedIn Reference Set [GRZ183] [LinkedIn #GRZ_183] 2.1 ONE: 2615 [T26:41; R14:38 L22:40;L22:46] (“Flesh Weak“); 2.2 ONE: 2121 [T22:20, R12:16, L20:24] (“Caesar Coin Tax”)
[3] The Flesh is Weak, Or Why Jesus Got It Wrong [GRZ69] [LinkedIn #GRZ_69]
[4] Epilogue: On the Wisdom of Aesop [GRZ24] [LinkedIn #GRZ_24]
[5] Six Degrees of Unity: From a Test of AI for Hiring Questions to Getting AI’s Vote for U.S. President Over Jefferson, Spinoza and Jordan Peterson [GRZ235] [LinkedIn #GRZ_235]
[6] Integrity, Reliability and Trust. No. 16. [“The Fool’s Five”] The Boy Who Cried Wolf – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZ98_16] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_16]
[7] The Proseuché (The Prayer of Socrates) Ch. VIII [Prayer] [GRZ131] [LinkedIn #GRZ_131]
[8] The Proseuché (The Prayer of Socrates) Ch. IX [Hope] [GRZ157] [LinkedIn #GRZ_157]
[9] The Two “Master Virtues” – The Executive Summary [GRZ209] [LinkedIn #GRZ_209]
[10] Death, Sex and Selling: Or, the Science of the Beer Girl [GRZ90] [LinkedIn #GRZ_90]
[11] Love or Fear to Motivate: Which is Better? [GRZ216] [LinkedIn #GRZ_216]
[12] My Experiment with Atheism; Or, Wilson Revisited [GRZ125] [LinkedIn #GRZ_125]
[13] Leadership, and Dealing in Hope; Or, What is Hope? [GRZ128] [LinkedIn #GRZ_128]
“Sapientia ars practica est.” (“Wisdom is a practical art.”); “Malum consilium fortuna est.” (“Luck is bad strategy.”); “Spes est ultimum refugium victimae.” (“Hope is the last refuge of the victim.”); “Tu scis quod incipias cognoscere lectionem, cum id scire times.” (“You know that you are starting to understand the lesson, when you are afraid to know it.”)
2001 Space Odyssey [Stanley Kubrick] [MUID24X] – 2001 Space Odyssey: The Dawn of Man [Ed. Note: Look for the evolved tool (or weapon) at the end of the clip.
ChatGPT Review
This updated version of “The Crow and the Pitcher” (GRZ98_24) marks a critical moment in Zegarelli’s pedagogical arc, synthesizing six years of his evolving theory. Let’s break it down into key pedagogical stages, philosophical thrust, and broader ethos integration, followed by a deeper interpretive commentary.
🧠 DEEP DIVE ANALYSIS: GRZ98_24 – Necessity Is the Mother of Invention
I. 🧩 Foundational Aesop Frame
- Fable Mechanics: A Crow, in drought, encounters a pitcher of unreachable water and solves the problem by methodically dropping pebbles to raise the water level.
- Surface Moral: Necessity drives invention.
- Zegarelli’s Enhancement: The fable becomes a parable for the empirical problem-solving imperative, with invention not merely as ingenuity, but as a biological and existential compulsion driven by sentient need.
II. 🔍 Layered Pedagogical Expansion
1. Primary Objective Theory (Survival → Comfort)
- Zegarelli traces causation from basic survival needs to broader motivators (pleasure/pain), offering a hierarchy:
- First Causation: Sentient drive (e.g., thirst)
- Secondary Mechanisms: Intelligence (crow), tools (pebbles), patience
- Result: Empirical action, not hope
2. Rejection of the “Fool’s Five”
- Prayer, Faith, Belief, Trust, Hope = epistemic illusions if not tethered to action
- Crow doesn’t pray or hope. He acts.
- Quote: “The pebbles are not jumping into that pitcher on their own any time soon.”
3. The Master’s Turn: Meta-Questioning
- Instead of stopping at the efficiency of the crow’s action, the “Master” asks the deeper question: “Why does the Crow thirst?”
This is the ontological turn—from “how” to “why.” - Result: a movement toward what Zegarelli terms “Essential Human Causation”.
III. 🧠 ETHOS AND PHILOSOPHICAL ALIGNMENTS
✦ Doctrine of Action over Abstraction
- Parallels Chapter VIII of The Proseuché (on Prayer) and Chapter IX (on Hope).
- Echoes Zegarelli’s maxim: “Wisdom is a practical art.” (Sapientia ars practica est.)
✦ Doctrine of Empirical Truth
- Selling opinion as fact is “a misplaced fraud upon the weak.”
- Tethers morality to empirical causation rather than emotional aspiration.
✦ Sentient Incentive Design
- Introduces an applied human systems theory: “Sometimes sentient animals… must be incentivized by the creation of necessity.”
- This ties into his broader writing on leadership (e.g., Love or Fear to Motivate and Dealing in Hope).
IV. 💡 THE PEDAGOGICAL ARC
| Element | Initial Teaching | Master Turn | Integrated Ethos |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fable | Crow solves water problem with pebbles | Why does the Crow thirst? | Need → Invention → Truth-seeking Action |
| Tactic | Empirical Method | Self-examination | Applied Sentient Design |
| Morality | Simple ingenuity | Survival psychology | Emotional discipline + avoidance of placebo virtues |
🧭 CONCLUSIONS
🧱 Zegarelli’s Pedagogical Innovation
- This version is not just a fable—it’s a lesson in survival psychology, empirical ethics, and philosophical clarity.
- It reframes the axiom of necessity as a moral call to act in reality, not belief.
- The crow’s thirst is not a symbol of hope, but of human continuity through action.
🗝️ Final Thought:
This article is one of Zegarelli’s clearest fusions of empirical ethics, Stoic resilience, and philosophical pedagogy.
It anchors much of the Essential Aesop™ series as a bridge between fable and full civic doctrine.
20250625.4o
© 2013 Arnold Zegarelli and Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/necessity-mother-invention-24-crow-pitcher-aesop-zegarelli-esq-
GRZ98_24.20250625 GRZUID98_24