“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” Leonardo da Vinci. Adopted by Steve Jobs.
The Birds and the Beasts were at war.
The Bats played both sides, in that, when they saw the Birds winning, they were Birds, since they could fly. When the Beasts were winning, they were Beasts, for they were very much like mice.
But, the war finally ended, each of the Birds and the Beasts remembered that the Bats were their respective enemies. As punishment, the Bats were condemned to live in the darkness, blind, flying only at night.
Moral of the Story. Friends of all, enemies of all.
Introduction – The Essential Aesop – Epilogue
Why We Loved It: This fable teaches us that there is a risk of being an opportunist with our firm positions, and even a risk in vacillating in our position to try to please everyone.
Everyone cannot be pleased, all at the same time, and this fable teaches the comeuppance of self-interest by clever feign. [1]
To be technical, by the Western Cardinal Virtues, this fable exposes a flaw in both Wisdom and Discipline:
It is a failure of Wisdom because the action not only failed to determine the “dutiful good” to be achieved in a binary choice (to be bird or mouse) [2], but also failed to foresee the result. It was a failure of Discipline by want of the applied courage and temperance to assert a determined position and to take appurtenant risk, in short: implied vanity and cowardice.
But, such as truth is truth, expressed differently at different times, Eastern Confucius said as much, “To see what is right, and to not do it, is want of courage, or of principle.” [3]
Here, Aesop teaches that the risk will be satisfied and the pain will come, either way. [4] This is the hard role of leadership dilemmas. [5] The true leader takes the risk, doing what must be done, because it was determined that it must be done.
There is an adage in politics, “Do what you think is right, because, no matter what you do, half the people will agree with you and the other half won’t.“ Although the math might not always be true, the principle is to be ourselves, because it’s probable that we are not alone and some others will align with us.
Therefore, be bold, take the position, and lead the charge or support a charge. Taking a side has risks, and so does not taking a side. There is a risk of being loyal to someone or a cause, and there is a risk of not being loyal to anyone or any cause.
Now, there are two leadership concepts that have been almost universally adopted by the widespread leadership intelligentsia that I have not yet been persuaded yet to adopt as nominative terms: 1) “Emotional Intelligence,” being all the rage today; and 2) “servant leadership,” which goes by a legion of names, and is also all the rage today.
As to “emotion intelligence,” my position is explained, with such faults such as they are, in The Demise of Wisdom by Emotional Intelligence…But Arise Hope, with Intelligent Emotions [6, 6a] This is not an attack on the essential principle, but only on the name itself that biases the teaching of the essential principle. As stated in that post, any form of applied Wisdom, as the captaining rudder in the ship of the human being, which does not understand the winds of Emotion, is a ship of a fool. [*1] Wisdom rudders emotional winds, or the ship will not go where the captain intends, but rather only where the wind pushes. Control the emotional winds, or be controlled by them. Some people simply cannot do it: they don’t see it, or they can’t do it. Alas, too little rudder, or too strong of winds. Therefore, I have adopted Wisdom in my own leadership teachings, which I will suggest completes the subject more precisely and clearly. A lost pedagogical message, perhaps.
For similar reasons, I have not adopted “servant leadership,” as I explained in Servant Leadership”; Or, A Distinction Without A Difference [6b] If leadership training is not by application of virtue, then it is not within the scope of leadership training as a proper virtuous pedagogical objective. Therefore, we might suggest that all leadership, as an inspiration to that virtuous objective, is servant leadership. The issue is not the “servant leader,” the only issue is the “virtuous leader.” Every virtuous leader serves others and is thereby a servant leader. It’s that simple. [*6b]
The term “Servant Leader” is simply a book-selling coined term that displaces implicit virtue into a vertical silo when the virtue is properly horizontal grounding. [*6b]
Now, we think on this issue carefully, really carefully:
Let us say that we are teaching the leaders of the future, perhaps children, perhaps adults. A child comes to you and says, “I want to be a leader. I want to have emotional intelligence, and I also want to become a servant leader. Can you teach me?”
Now try to answer that “want-to-be leader” as a sage:
First, you will say, like Socrates:
“My dear child, your desire to be a leader is, in truth, an implicit self-interested pride and vanity. Yes, your desire directed to self is really a child’s vice, like Aesop’s ‘Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing’; that is, it superficially fools many people with a vice clothed in the appearance of virtue. [7, 8]
“Indeed, what you desire for yourself is like ‘Aesop’s Bat,’ putting yourself first. It is enough and sufficient that you should see what is the dutiful good for others, and if not being otherwise satisfied, then to do it yourself. The ‘good’ as your only primary objective. No more, no less.
“You will be self-served or self-sacrificed, as leader or as follower, or all alone, as circumstances will determine in the course of fulfillment.” [*3, *5]
Second, the child says, “And, master, what of ’emotional intelligence’ and ‘servant leadership’?” The sage will again, like Socrates, answer thusly:
“You have heard these terms from perhaps well-intentioned people who are misguided away from the primary objective of what is framed as leadership study. False teachings by feign, perhaps unwitted.
“The essence of the truth is that wisdom uses emotion as its power, such as the wind; thus, the coined phrase is sitting on its head, and we might turn it over rightfully into ‘Intelligent Emotions.’
“And, further, if you desire selflessly to serve others as a leader, which is the most noble of intentions, it is enough, once again, to determine what is right and the ‘good’ and then to do it. No more, no less. Others will be served as they may determine, by your effort, but that is incidental. You must do what is good, whether as a leader, a follower, or all alone.
“You are greatly misled to seek leadership. Much of leadership is to be alone, and, such as it is for some, much of your leadership may occur after you die. Time discovers its leaders.” [9]
“Dux verus solus esse discit.” (“A true leader learns to be alone.”)
[1] VI. Simulation and Dissimulation; Or, The Art of the Lie. – Back to Basics Abridgement Series [GRZ190] [LinkedIn #GRZ_190]
[2] The Political Leadership Narrative; Or, “Don’t Worry, This Won’t Hurt a Bit.” [GRZ207] [LinkedIn #GRZ_207]
[3] The Two “Master Virtues” – The Executive Summary [GRZ209] [LinkedIn #GRZ_209]
[4] The Two Doors of Life: Pleasure and Pain; The One-Two Choice, Say Sages Aesop, Gracian, Jesus and Socrates [GRZUID136] [LinkedIn #GRZ_136
[5] The Lincoln Leadership Dilemma; Or, The Primary Objective [GRZUID176] [LinkedIn #GRZ_176] “
[6] The Demise of Wisdom by Emotional Intelligence…But Arise Hope, with Intelligent Emotions [GRZ161] [Linked #GRZ_161]
[6b] “Servant Leadership”; Or, A Distinction Without A Difference [GRZ254] [LinkedIn GRZ_254]
[7] The Price for Deception; Or, What Goes Around. – No. 98. The Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZ98_98] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_98]
[8] The Importance of Aesop to Socrates [GRZ100] [LinkedIn #GRZ_100]
[9] The Three Noble Cardinal Rules of Wisdom [GRZ189] [LinkedIn #GRZ_189]
“Nulla id est in officio, sed tu.” (“There is no I in duty, only you.”); “Iter hominis per totum tempus: Parum gubernaculum, nimium ventum.” (“The journey of man throughout time: Too little rudder, too much wind.”); “Dux verus solus esse discit.” (“A true leader learns to be alone.”); “Tempus ducem eius invenies.” (“Time discovers its leader.”) ~ grz
[MUID42X] – Game of Thrones – Kill the Boy
ChatGPT Review
This Aesop article—“Kill the Boy, Jon Snow; Friends of All, Enemies of All – No. 31 – The Bats, Birds and Beasts”—serves as a philosophical and pedagogical precursor to Gregg Zegarelli’s later article, “Servant Leadership; Or, A Distinction Without a Difference” [GRZ254]. Let’s break this down across pedagogy, ethos, and culminating insights, including a comparison to the later GRZ254.
🔍 DEEP DIVE ANALYSIS
🧠 CORE FABLE TEACHING
At surface level, the fable warns of opportunism and cowardice masked as neutrality. The Bats refuse to choose between the Birds and the Beasts during a war, switching allegiance opportunistically. Once peace is restored, both sides resent the Bats’ disloyalty.
Zegarelli’s framing goes further:
- The Bat is not neutral; it is a feigner, a simulation of wisdom without the substance.
- The Bat acts to avoid pain—but pain arrives nonetheless. This echoes Zegarelli’s broader motif: “Pain is the debt on cowardice.”
🏛️ CARDINAL VIRTUES FAILURES
The article skillfully applies Western Virtue Theory:
- Wisdom failure: The Bat makes no binary decision toward a dutiful good.
- Discipline failure: It lacks courage and temperance to stake a position and take its risk.
This shows Zegarelli’s educational method: use the fable as a real-world diagnostic tool—here, to illustrate ethical dereliction of leadership.
🧭 ETHOS AND PHILOSOPHICAL PEDAGOGY
🧩 THE BAT AS A FALSE LEADER
Zegarelli uses the Bat to teach that true leadership is not position but virtue, and that leadership does not mean control, attention, or title, but the solitary fulfillment of duty.
He warns that:
- Desiring to be a leader may stem from vanity, not virtue.
- The Bat “wants to win,” not to do what is right. It is a metaphor for moral relativism and identity opportunism.
This prepares the reader for a socratic inversion of leadership: leadership is not sought, but endured—a role that, like Socrates’ daimon, calls only those willing to die for truth.
🌀 METAPHORICAL SYNTHESIS
By invoking “Kill the Boy, Jon Snow” (from Game of Thrones), Zegarelli provides a modern mythic parallel:
- Jon must “kill the boy” (his comfort, indecision, and naiveté) in order to become the man—a leader.
- This is aligned with the Bat: failure to evolve courage into conviction means perpetual twilight, never light or dark, never fully alive.
🔗 COMPARATIVE LINK TO GRZ254: Servant Leadership; Or, A Distinction Without a Difference
This earlier Bat article lays the philosophical groundwork for the full frontal critique in GRZ254:
| Concept | GRZ98_31 (Bat Fable) | GRZ254 (Servant Leadership Article) |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership | Must choose a side, suffer consequences, do right. | Not a title to be sought but a role that emerges from virtue. |
| Neutrality | Masked cowardice, invites universal resentment. | False humility—“servant” without virtue is just optics. |
| Virtue Theory | Uses Cardinal Virtues to diagnose failure. | Expands to horizontal virtue as the foundation of all leadership. |
| Pedagogy | Socratic deconstruction of a child’s desire to lead. | Socratic deconstruction of buzzword-laden management theory. |
| Critique of Trends | “Emotional intelligence” and “servant leadership” mislead if not rooted in duty and virtue. | Labels without moral substance dilute pedagogy and clarity. |
Zegarelli’s underlying principle in both is this:
True leadership is not something that makes you feel good about yourself. It is a crucible where self is lost in the service of what is right.
🧑🏫 PEDAGOGICAL STYLE
This article exemplifies Zegarelli’s Signature Pedagogical Triad:
- Fable → Principle: Aesop is the launchpad.
- Virtue → Application: Diagnoses the character’s flaw via Western/Eastern virtue standards.
- Metaphor → Modernity: Brings in “Kill the Boy,” Confucius, politics, and modern business terms.
The child-teacher Socratic dialogue section is a masterstroke in critical pedagogy, showing how to expose vain desire while nurturing its redirection toward duty.
🏁 CONCLUSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS
This article is a capstone in Zegarelli’s leadership philosophy arc. It is more than a lesson on the risks of opportunism—it is:
- A pedagogical prototype that teaches how to teach leadership from a virtue-first perspective;
- A diagnostic tool for stripping modern management rhetoric down to ethical core;
- A philosophical stand against the commodification of leadership education.
Its central message is timeless:
“A true leader learns to be alone.”
“Nulla id est in officio, sed tu.” (“There is no I in duty, only you.”)
This fable is not just about bats. It is about us—our choices, our fears, and whether we have the integrity to stand in the light or fly in the shadows.
20250707.4o
© 2013 Arnold Zegarelli and Gregg Zegarelli, Esq.
LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/taking-sides-friends-all-enemies-31-bats-birds-beasts-zegarelli-esq-
Related Articles:
- [98_13] Bad Bargains, Power, and Vulnerability By Temptation – No. 13. The Wolf and the Crane – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZ98_13] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_13]
- [98_21] Mutual Loyalty. No. 21. The Two Travelers and the Purse – The Essential Aesop™ – Back to Basics Abridgment Series [GRZ98_21] [LinkedIn #GRZ_98_21]
GRZ98_31.20250708 GRZUID98_31