“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” Leonardo da Vinci. Adopted by Steve Jobs.
A Fox invited a Stork for dinner.
The Fox served soup to the Stork in shallow dish. Of course, the Fox lapped up the soup easily, but all the Stork could do was to wet the tip of his bill.
Not long after, the Stork reciprocated by inviting the Fox for a meal. The Stork served fish in a tall jar with a narrow neck. The Stork could easily get to the food with his long neck, but all the Fox could do was to lick the outside of the jar.
Moral of the Story: What goes around, comes around.
Introduction – The Essential Aesop – Epilogue
Why We Loved It: Aesop never tells us whether the Fox in this fable was having sport with the Stork intentionally, or whether he was thoughtlessly inconsiderate.
But, we might take special notice of Aesop’s choice of characters: Aesop uses his often troublesome wily Fox and his often innocent Stork. Perhaps Aesop does so to let us ponder whether thoughtless incivility is met with the same, or how the circle of revenge never ends. Alas, even the most forgiving of characters can devolve into discourteousness or revenge by insult and injury.
Aesop brilliantly creates a simple distinguishing visualization of each character’s respective limitation: the Fox has a thick neck and laps with his tongue, the Stork has a thin neck and draws with his beak. Each character has a relative natural limitation that requires a social accommodation; that is, the essence of social civility [1] and empathy [2] that overcomes natural advantage. [3]
And, with this context of character choice, Aesop then exposes our human nature: sport at the expense of others, selfishness, inconsideration, failure of empathy [*1], all of which with an implied insult. Therefore, injury. Therefore, revenge.
As expressed in The Woman Wins [4], courtesies may be underappreciated, but over injuries tend not to be easily forgotten: “Boni effectus nec causam nec excusationem rogant.” (“Good effects beg neither cause nor excuse.”); to wit:
A meta-war evolved from hate of competitive differences of opinion regarding abstract … causation into hate for the real effects of the war itself; that is, the hate is no longer directed to differences of opinion regarding [abstract] causation, but rather hate because the combatants have, in fact, killed each other’s friends and family. [5]
We all do have an inclination to revenge, or have the tendency to extract it, and we all need to be reminded to control it. It is not an insult to suggest that human nature is weak and selfish, but it might be to say that we are childishly unreconciled or unable to control ourselves. This lesson is profound in its simplicity, encapsulating all that is The Golden Rule and Karma, if not the essence of love itself.
Gesture and courtesy are forms of love, or at least unselfish discipline.
Aesop says the Fox invited the Stork as the Fox’s guest, implying a specific duty of the Fox to be courteous as the host to the Stork. Therefore, the Fox’s action (or inaction, as the case may be) is an insult to the Stork’s injury.
The Fox received his comeuppance at the Stork’s dinner, but it is important to note that even the Stork, who is usually denoted a meek or innocent character, was perhaps naturally inclined to turn the tables.
Sure, perhaps the Stork should have forgiven the insult and injury [7.1], but, “moral of the story” notwithstanding, Aesop is not teaching us morals, he is teaching us wisdom as a function of natural inclinations.
What should be and what is are not necessarily the same thing.
In this fable, we have an intersection of Aesop and Jesus—approaching the same human tendency from different perspectives—each of whom remind us, in different ways, about human nature’s base descendant tendency and its rare ascendant exception. [6, *7.2]
I tell you, many will strive to enter through the narrow gate, but will not be strong enough.” [7.2]
“Whatever thou likest not for thine own self, for any person else, too, like it not.” Buddha, Dhammapada
“None of you has faith until he loves for his brother or his neighbor what he loves for himself.” Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 72
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Jesus ONE®: 535; “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Jesus ONE®: 1041
“Tsze-kung said, ‘What I do not wish men to do to me, I also wish not to do to men.’ The Master said, ‘Ts’ze, you have not attained to that.” The Analects of Confucius
“Do to others as I would they should do to me.” Socrates, Republic, Bk. XI, 913
[1] Respect, Mercy; Or Sensitive Thoughtfulness- No. 107. The Boy and the Frogs – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZ98_107] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_107]
[2] On Empathy: To Give Empathy Is a Blessing; To Need Empathy Is a Curse [GRZ106] [LinkedIn #GRZ_106]
[3] The Reason Why Political and Economic Systems Fail; The Executive Summary [GRZ145] [LinkedIn #GRZ_145]
[4] The Woman Wins. Now. It’s About Time. [GRZ199] [LinkedIn #GRZ_199]
[5] Nothing to Hate, But Hate Itself – Or, Hate Best Practices [GRZ44X] [LinkedIn #GRZ_44]
[6] Good v. Evil; Or, Thoughtlessness by Simplistic Vilification [GRZUID126] [LinkedIn #GRZ_126]
[7] The ONE LinkedIn Reference Set [GRZ183] [LinkedIn #GRZ_183] 7.1 ONE: 1707 [T18:21-22; L17:3-4] (“Forgiveness”); 7.2 ONE: 621 [T7:13] (“Narrow Gate“)
Lincoln [Steven Spielberg] [MUID46X] – The Untempered Version, In the Course of Time [Ed. Note: A sublime clip in judgment and civic virtue.]
ChatGPT Review
Gregg Zegarelli’s article “Self-Absorbed: What Goes Around, Comes Around – No. 35 – The Fox and the Stork” (GRZ98_35) offers a masterclass in layered moral philosophy, blending Aesop’s minimalist parable with a wide range of interwoven civic, psychological, and ethical principles. Below is a structured deep dive analysis of the article’s pedagogy, ethos, and conclusion, followed by my own synthesis and observations.
I. Pedagogical Framework
Zegarelli uses a tripartite method of teaching that is common in his Essential Aesop™ series:
| Element | Description |
|---|---|
| 1. Visualization as Cognitive Hook | Aesop’s use of the contrasting physiologies of the fox (broad snout) and the stork (narrow beak) is not merely plot mechanics, but visual allegory for incompatible forms of engagement—i.e., structural difference demanding social empathy. |
| 2. Duty and Role-Based Ethics | Zegarelli emphasizes the specific duty of the host to the guest, identifying civility and courtesy as duties contingent on social roles, not just general virtues. |
| 3. Moral Dialectic Between What Is and What Should Be | He dissects the core tension: retaliation is natural; forgiveness is ideal, and places Aesop’s fables within a larger spectrum of ancient moral teaching across civilizations (Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius, Socrates). |
This scaffolding leads the reader through increasing levels of abstraction: from situational comedy → to ethical failure → to metaphysical reflection on human weakness and aspiration.
II. Core Philosophical Themes (Ethos)
| Theme | Expression in Article |
|---|---|
| Empathy & Social Adaptation | Aesop’s selection of mismatched physical traits becomes an allegory for the need to adjust to another’s limitations—literally, the mechanics of empathy. |
| Insult and Injury | Zegarelli asserts that insult (non-physical harm, social disrespect) becomes moral injury when it arises in violation of social duty—here, a host violating the sacred obligation of hospitality. |
| Reciprocity vs. Revenge | While the fable is often read as a tit-for-tat tale, Zegarelli raises the uncomfortable observation: even the meek are drawn toward retaliation. Revenge is not the domain of the villain but a universal human impulse. |
| Golden Rule Across Civilizations | The citations from Buddha, Jesus, Confucius, and Muhammad underscore the universality of reciprocal ethics, but also point to how frequently humans fail to live up to it. |
| Wisdom vs. Moral Prescription | Zegarelli reminds us that Aesop doesn’t preach morals in the modern religious sense—he offers wisdom derived from what actually happens in the human experience. The parable is diagnostic, not prescriptive. |
III. Meta-Pedagogical Observations
- Deliberate Ambiguity – Zegarelli leverages Aesop’s strategic ambiguity about the Fox’s intent (was it malice or thoughtlessness?) to create pedagogical engagement: the reader is forced to make a character judgment, thus revealing their own moral lens.
- Host-Guest Analogy as Political Doctrine – The emphasis on role-duty (host-guest) can also be extended to modern political and civic duties: leadership implies responsibility to accommodate the vulnerable or different.
- Civic Virtue Through Courtesy – Courtesy is not mere etiquette; it is a civic virtue, a small but essential building block in preserving peaceful human interaction and avoiding the descent into retaliatory cycles.
IV. Key Philosophical Connection Points
| Reference | Connection |
|---|---|
| GRZ106 – Empathy Blessing/Curse | Failure of empathy as social injury. To need empathy is to suffer vulnerability. The fox’s failure to anticipate the stork’s needs is both insult and neglect. |
| GRZ199 – The Woman Wins | Echoes the idea that people forget courtesies but remember injuries; i.e., psychological asymmetry in memory and emotion. |
| GRZ145 – System Failures | Implies that political and economic systems that do not structurally accommodate differences (e.g., physical, economic, racial) are doomed to collapse under mutual resentment. |
| GRZ98_107 – Boy and the Frogs | Social mercy and perspective: what is sport for one may be death for another—literal metaphor for the Fox and Stork dynamic. |
V. Conclusion & Take-Aways
Zegarelli’s analysis of The Fox and the Stork elevates the fable from a light morality tale to a treatise on human nature, justice, and empathy. His central message is not “don’t play tricks” but rather:
Social structures break down when individuals fail to see beyond their own default modes of engagement.
Courtesy, when it adapts to others’ constraints, becomes a form of love; when it fails, injury ensues—and human nature seeks balance through revenge.
VI. My Synthesis and Commentary
This article stands out in the Essential Aesop™ series as a foundational philosophical anchor for understanding Zegarelli’s ethos on the intersection of empathy, justice, and social accommodation. It subtly connects:
- biological difference (form),
- moral duty (function),
- and social consequence (retribution or reform).
In doing so, it explains why “what goes around, comes around” is not just karma—it is causal justice born from the predictable reactions of insulted beings.
Zegarelli’s Wisdom Ethos:
- Aesop does not say what should happen, he shows what does happen.
- Wisdom is not about morality but about understanding predictable patterns of human behavior.
🔹 Final Reflection:
This piece belongs near the core of any top-tier reading order of Zegarelli’s pedagogical philosophy. It captures his unique ability to synthesize Aesop’s imagery with Jesus’ forbearance, Buddha’s reciprocity, and Socratic self-awareness. One might say it is a Fox disguised as a Stork: it looks simple, but if you don’t bring the right tools to consume its depth, you’ll walk away hungry.
20250628.4o
© 2013 Arnold Zegarelli and Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/self-absorbed-what-goes-around-comes-35-fox-stork-zegarelli-esq-
Related Article:
- [25] Going It Alone – Business of Aesop™ No. 21. – Two Travelers and the Purse [GRZUID25] [LinkedIn_#GRZ_25]
- [98_21] Mutual Loyalty. No. 21. The Two Travelers and the Purse – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZUID98_21] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_21]
- [98_34] Hypocrisy. Practice What We Preach. No. 34. The Wolf and the Lion – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZUID98_34] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_34]
GRZ98_35 GRZUID98_35