Yes, the title is a bad Steinbeck reference of an overrated Steinbeck book. My apologies. But it sounds good enough, doesn't it?
I was reading about stoicism the other day and came across a meditation that asked whether you considered yourself to be a wolf or a sheep. And while this hardly means to ask if you like eating other people for meals, it urges you to think about your stand with respect to your own life. Meaning:
Do you go after your dreams and aspirations like a wolf, or do you think you're only the means for someone else to achieve their dreams, like a sheep?
Because, basically, you're either one or the other - there's no middle ground. A wolf wouldn't think it needs to be anything less than what it is. Either you live your life to the fullest, without stopping to think it makes you a bad or a selfish person, or you don't.
Note, however, that being a wolf by no means indicates that you go and step over people or use them cruelly to your own benefit or manipulate or mistreat them in any other way. If you get sheep to help you grow your business, they are doing it of their free will - because they see it was benefitial for themselves. You give them money. They help you achieve your goals in life. No one is eating or mistreating anyone.
Some people want to lead. Some people want to be led. There is nothing fundamentally wrong about either. You can be a wolf even if you work for someone else - but only if you're the one calling the shots in your own life. A sheep is a person who lets others have power over his life.
Just figure out which model applies to you, and figure it out soon - time is running out. Because if you're a wolf settled for the role of a sheep, you're life is going to waste by the minute.
RK
