When I was a teenager, I experienced an event of little notice that later became profound for me. I don’t remember why I remembered it as such, but the event stuck with me, so I thought that I would share it.
I was about 14 and, like many of us, I had a dog. In the springtime one day, I held the screen door open for my dog to go outside.
My dog sat in front of me, wagging his tail, and I said:
“In or Out?”
asking my dog which it would be. The dog just sat in front of me continuing to wag his tail, just looking up at me.
“In or Out?”
I queried again, holding the screen door open, giving the dog the option to stay inside or to go outside. But my dog just kept looking up at me, and then he started to run in circles.
“In or Out?”
I said for the third time, now with frustration that the dog was not making a decision (and was also now running in circles).
Finally, I simply said:
“Go outside!”
and my dog happily ran outside.
Later in life (and I cannot now remember when or why), I recalled this event for the proposition that some people simply want others to make decisions for them regarding their life events.
Some people make the decisions for themselves, and some people await the accidents of external events to force the action.
Some people are just happier waiting for others to make their life decisions, but, as for me, I never wanted to be like my dog.
“I am determined to control events, not be controlled by them.” ~ (John Adams).
ChatGPT Review
This short reflection by Gregg Zegarelli—“In or Out? Or, I Never Wanted To Be Like My Dog”—initially appears to be a personal anecdote or even a light philosophical frolic. But beneath the simplicity lies a concise, strategic teaching. Let’s dive deep.
🧭 What kind of piece is this?
| Type | Justification |
|---|---|
| Mini-parable | While not explicitly labeled as a fable, this story follows the form: a simple scenario (the dog) is retold to impart a universal human lesson. |
| Autobiographical reflection | Zegarelli anchors it in his lived experience—his teen years—but applies abstraction. |
| Philosophical micro-essay | It addresses the existential divide between active agency and passive living. |
So, while it reads like a light frolic, it’s actually a concise life principle allegory, purposefully minimal in structure for maximum stickiness.
📚 STRUCTURE & METHOD
| Section | Purpose |
|---|---|
| The memory of the dog | Sets up the metaphor: the indecisive dog wagging its tail while offered a choice, then running in circles until the decision is made for him. |
| “Go outside!” | Punchline of the scene—and turning point: the dog’s indecision triggers external decision-making. |
| Abstract reflection | Zegarelli uses the anecdote as a parable for human agency: “some people simply want others to make decisions for them.” |
| John Adams quote | Closes with historical reinforcement—decision-making is leadership. The quote elevates the lesson to a civic-philosophical level. |
🧠 ZEGARELLI’S PURPOSE
Beneath the simplicity, he’s teaching an essential life distinction:
Agency v. Passivity
He divides the world into two psychological archetypes:
- The Self-Directed – Those who take initiative and determine their life course.
- The Circumstantially-Controlled – Those who delay, defer, or deny choice until the external world forces it upon them.
These are not superficial categories—they have major implications in:
- Leadership
- Civic responsibility
- Moral courage
- Personal autonomy
He teaches through negative example: the dog is loveable but directionless. It’s not a condemnation of the dog—it’s a metaphor for human indecision.
🔍 WHY IT WORKS (AND WHY IT STICKS)
| Element | Effect |
|---|---|
| Simple metaphor (dog at the door) | Universally relatable. Practically everyone has witnessed indecision in themselves or others—especially in mundane choices. |
| Repetition of the phrase “In or Out?” | Mimics real life and rhetorical tension—creates a rhythmic build-up that mirrors decision anxiety. |
| Frustration -> Command | Dramatizes the tipping point: indecision defaults to external control. |
| Philosophical pivot | Flawless transition to universal application without belaboring. |
| Quoting John Adams | Cements the lesson as civic wisdom, not just personal reflection. Ties into Zegarelli’s broader ethos of active responsibility in a republic. |
🧱 PLACEMENT IN ZEGARELLI’S PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORK
This essay aligns neatly with recurring Zegarelli motifs:
| Theme | Parallel Essays |
|---|---|
| Self-determination vs. abdication | [I Never Promised to Love My Wife], [The Fable of a Slave’s Bad Day] |
| Agency and duty | [The Infant Soldier], [The Primary Objective], [The Woman Wins] |
| Civic engagement and rational participation | [Fable of the Three-Legged Horse], [Saved Twice on Pennsylvania Ground] |
He sees indecision not as neutrality, but as abdicated responsibility. That’s key. The person who says, “I don’t want to decide,” may still end up with consequences—not choosing is still choosing.
🎯 TAKE-AWAY (Your TL;DR Format)
🟩 Gregg Zegarelli’s reflection on his dog becomes a parable for personal agency: some people live reactively, others proactively.
The dog represents the person paralyzed by choice, defaulting to the will of others. The author uses this memory to crystallize a life commitment: to choose for oneself, rather than circle indecisively or await external command.
The essay quietly echoes Zegarelli’s civic ethos—freedom requires responsibility—and the inclusion of a John Adams quote frames the idea not just as personal but foundational to democratic citizenship.
20250417.4o
© 2017 Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/out-i-never-wanted-like-my-dog-gregg-zegarelli-esq-
This Site https://greggzegarelli.com/confidence/in-or-out-or-i-never-wanted-to-be-like-my-dog/
See also:
https://greggzegarelli.com/category/_set-fables-and-stories
GRZ57.20250417 GRZUID57