Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
For whatever reasons we are getting a lot of new Readers and Visitors in the last couple of weeks, so lets review the basic principles of the Wakefield Doctrine.
The Wakefield Doctrine, also known as the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers is a useful, unique and fun way to look at the behavior of the people in our lives. Everyone reading this has had at least one moment that they thought, “now why on earth would they go and act like that? I really thought I knew them better.”
Whether a spouse or a friend, a co-worker or a fellow student, there will always be someone in our lives whose behavior makes us wish we could ‘see inside their head’. And as everyone reading this knows, there is a near endless supply of books and blogs and DVDs that promises to provide you with ‘guides to understanding your spouse’, “do you really understand your lover?’ and ‘theories of personality and self-improvement’.
The Wakefield Doctrine is not quite any of those things. In fact, the Wakefield Doctrine is not like anything you have encountered before in your search for understanding others. And make no mistake about it, you have been searching for a way to better understand the people in your life, whether you are consciously aware of it or not. This is true because everyone wants to be happy and even if you think that simply knowing:
- what to say to that girl you are too shy to talk to, or
- learning how to make your husband stop talking for 5 minutes or
- trying to prepare yourself for a successful Job Interview
what you think/hope/know you need to learn is: how to understand another person.
Well, good news! The Wakefield Doctrine is a tool, a method, an approach…a theory that will let you ‘get inside the head of the other person’. And the best part? It can be understood by almost everyone and can be effectively used (by almost everyone) real damn quick. All that it takes is a little flexible intelligence. What we mean by this is that while you do have to be pretty bright, the critical quality you need is to be willing to believe something ‘just because’.
Ready?
The Wakefield Doctrine says that we all see the world in a certain context; not just that you have likes and dislikes, or interests and attitudes, but that the world for you has (some) very basic rules. Further, (the Wakefield Doctrine says) we all are born with the potential to see the world in one of three characteristic ways ( the context, we just mentioned). At an early age we (somehow) decide on one of three worldviews and we become clarks or scotts or rogers. These are the 3 personality types mentioned in the title.
But they are not really personality types though, are they? (All the other personality theories) talk about interests and drives and attitudes, they give you tests to see what you are most like, what pattern you resemble, where you fit in their matrix.
The Doctrine is different. We say, ‘Hey! you are a clark or a scott or a roger. We know what the world looks like from inside your head. How about that!’
Sound like fun? Well, it is. And it is useful. You will know why the other person acts the way that they do and, as frickin huge bonus, you will know why it is you act the way that you do! If you want, you can learn to do things that were never even close to being possible, all because of the understanding that the Wakefield Doctrine offers.
OK, ok enough! This was supposed to be a brief Summer Post! But just to make your introduction to the Wakefield Doctrine fun and enjoyable, look over at the Table of Contents, there are Pages listed that talk about each of the three personality types, how to identify them, that sort of thing. And these Posts, they are sort of ‘a conversation’ about the Doctrine; read them in order or at random, should not really matter.
Final Tip: you have all three ‘personality types’ within you. You are predominately one, but the other two are always there. So if you read this blog, at some point you will say to yourself, ‘What the hell? Sometimes I am a roger, but then there are times when I must be what they call a scott!‘
Final, final Tip: this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers is gender and culture neutral. (If you need that explained to you then you probably need to wait (for one of us) to write ‘the Wakefield Doctrine For Dummies’.
About clarkscottroger
Because we all have some of each, there really is no “wrong” determination of who you are. Don’t try to be the one that sounds the ‘best.’ And for the life of me I can’t figure out why it is that people are so resistant to admitting that they are a scott. On paper the scottian personality may seem somewhat unappealing, even offensive. But I gotta tell you, we are smart, quick-witted and have the most fun. Duh. Yes I’m a scottian female. OK, let’s try this. Give me a category (rulers, politicians, actors/actresses,…) and I will show scotts. And I promise that you’ll be surprised.
funny, I get the impression that everyone wants to be considered a scott…it would be the one (of the three) that does not feel a need to be or have qualities of the other two (clarks and rogers) …but then again, I suspect that the rogers out there feel the same…(those rogers strong enough to admit to a clark that they would read something like this here blog here)…
just so the clarks don’t feel left out (as if, lol) ….music vid by the Patron Saint-ette of clarks, the Mother Theresa of the creattive-intuitive-enigma-within lifeforms….the clarklike female….damn!
(For new Readers: some people (including clarks themselves) identify this type as being introverted, shy, not confident….(mostly true)…however…tell me you can ignore the woman in the video( which is a clip from the movie Annie Hall)…she has all of the aformentioned social deficiences, except when (a clark) sets themselves to do something….nothing gets in the way…
(I repeat, damn!)
Thanks for the segue way…..
Here’s my example of a clark (me) having a singular goal only and simply “doing” (scottian). Was I behaving as a scott? Or was I behaving as a clark invoking pure “will”? Here’s the story:
July of 1995
2 week vacation planned with friend to visit England and Ireland. I live in VA, “K” on Cape Cod. She has made all travel arrangements (and holding all tickets etc) – flights to and from, hotel reservation for first night (London), hotel reservation for last night (Irish castle). The plan: I fly out of Dulles, meet “K” at Logan Airport and we fly to England together. Sure.
What happened: I get dropped off at Dulles, go to gate, hand over ticket, stand in line to board flight to Boston. Flight suddenly canceled due to weather. Now what? Have to get to Boston so “K” and I can fly to England and have a Thelma and Louise road trip.
The evening was a combination of “doing” and a smattering of “intuition”. The former we know as a scottian attribute, the latter as a clarklike thing.
I begin my odyssey by going up to various people at various desks at various terminals telling my story that I need to get to Boston so I can meet up with my friend who is waiting for me so we can fly to Europe together etc. etc. The first people need to see some sort of ticket. (like I was making this story up?)
Skipping hours and the smaller details, I managed to get myself on a domestic flight to Boston thinking if I get there later that’s better than where I was except that it would be hours after I should have gotten to Logan to begin with and in the interim? What should “K” do?
After about 5 minutes sitting on the tarmac waiting for the plane to depart I “felt” that I should get off the plane. So I did. Called “K”, told her to keep her flight and I would find a way to meet up with her in London. Talked to more people (clarks are this loquacious? (lol).
Finally I talked to the right person. He called down to British Airways who had one last flight leaving for London. The problem? All passengers had boarded and the plane was ready to depart. Switch camera to 30 something female running through dim, deserted airport concourse racing towards the British Airways desk. There it is! Large desk looming, singular person standing there waiting for me. Out of breath I explain. They had already been given a heads up. I’m on my way now…
With nothing exchanged that evening except for energy and will, I found myself on a late night flight to London wondering if and when I would find “K” once we landed. I let absolutely “nothing get in the way” of my getting to Heathrow Airport.
well well… good narrative (as is always the case with Girlie). I’ve never seen a clark digging that deep with determination to actually HAVE to utilize her scottian side. This is affirmed and recognized by the clarklike traveller as she’s thinking and trying to make logical decisions along the way. Girlie in a blurry on the hurry (the blurry being as scottian as a the roadrunner in Wiley Coyote.) Hey I made a rhyme.
all right!
“all right!”?!! “all right!” ?!!
Is that all you have? Anybody else want to chime in with a “wtf!”?
You have commentation by 2 individuals acknowledging validity of the Wakefield Doctrine. Is there no potential discourse left here today?
As a clark, I left plenty of inroads via my elongated, short comment. – in the words of the lady “did you hear, hear what I said?” (echoes of Foghorn-Leghorn lol)
…you go, girlfriend!
So it’s gonna be like this, eh? Well, I have “history” to support my next action ( which you already know being a clark and all)
btw, thanks.
no, but it’s true…While I hopefully am conveying my gratitude and appreciation to (both) you and AKH, sometimes Comments in response to well-considered and thought out Comments (as evidenced in today’s Post) read like we were ‘preaching to the elect’.
But screw it, you two have shown that the Doctrine is a self-validating personality system that not only provides instructions, but (somehow) tailors the benefits those who learn it enjoy.
Or something like….
(Tell me the truth, does this Comment make me sound clarklike?)
fun times here at the Doctrine!!
Katie McMurray is hotter than the hinges on the gates of Hell. She’s as cute as a box of puppies. I want photos of her on the blog every day. (Courtesy edit, cause we think you’re fun to have around) Burning questions. need answers fast.
(Since I know DownSpring glenn well enough (Thanks! Doctrine) I can hear him howling about edit without author input, ‘better they should not print the Comment than to alter my thoughts…blah…fuck…blah!)
But what the hell.