Presented by Lauren Glickman, based on a story by Angeles Arrien
A grandson is speaking with his grandfather. The Grandfather says he has two wolves within him.
- One is always speaking of the best of things, all that is good, all that is possible, overcoming obstacles, learning and growing.
- The other is always speaking of the worst of things, all that is bad, why nothing can change, avoidance of risks, and general pessimism.
The grandfather goes on to say that they are always fighting with each other, tearing each other apart. Finally, the grandson asks, “Which one wins?”
“The one that I nourish,” replies the grandfather.
The purpose of the exercise is to make these two wolves, which exist in all of us, more overtly visible, so that we can get a better view of the power they have over us, and which one we really wish to nourish.
- People get into groups of three.
- The first person tells the other two the “issue” which the first is dealing with, giving enough detail for both of the other two to get a basic understanding.
- Then, one of the other two plays the negative wolf, and the other the positive.
- The first person becomes a mere observer, while the two ‘wolves’ speak to each other about the issue from their respective character roles.
It really only works if both sides REALLY get into their roles. Most people find it harder to be the ‘negative’ wolf, and go too easy on the observer. It works best if the negative wolf is more ‘real’.
- Who won?
- What actins are you going to take?
- Related to appreciative / critical eye
- “Be mean like you would be mean to yourself”
- We all have similar conversations inside our head.
- In the exercise — which wolf played the role better?
- Which was easier / harder to play