Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
You know the ease with which some of us ‘get’ the core concept of the Wakefield Doctrine, there is an equal ease in missing the point of this thing of ours. We are fond of saying that the first people who come to this blog are among the ‘best and brightest’ that the blogosphere has to offer. They see the incredible insights that this Doctrine affords them, the ridiculously effective tools that allow you to understand why people behave the way that they do…not to mention the fun we (the Progenitors and DownSprings and FOTDs have, what with hats and Drives and videos and all). And yet, sometimes people struggle with the (underlying) principles of the Doctrine which in turn makes it more difficult for them to acquire the full understanding of this thing, limiting their ability to contribute to the ongoing process.
When this happens, we blame ourselves. We accept that, while all efforts are made to be simple and clear in the different Pages illustrating the different personality types and offering examples (of these types) that can be seen in the public culture, sometimes it is not enough! So as Malcolm said, ‘We want to talk right down to earth in a language that everybody here can easily understand‘.
The Wakefield Doctrine is not a theory, the Wakefield Doctrine is a label for a perspective. This perspective is one by which we look at the behavior of another person and make the assumption that (their) behavior makes perfect sense and is entirely appropriate in some reality.
The Wakefield Doctrine suggests that all people live their lives not only in the ‘common reality’ that we all share, but in an individual reality that is the context in which they act and react, feel and make assumptions to base their behavior.
The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that there are three individual realities (or ‘worldviews’) that have characteristics that can be associated with the three personality types: the worldview of ‘the outsider’, the worldview of ‘the predator’ and the worldview of ‘the herd member’.
The Wakefield Doctrine tells us that ‘personality’ is not a collection of traits, a list of typical behaviors or even a self-reported series of likes and dislikes all charted out on a multi-axis diagram, rather personality is simply the repeated reactions and strategies that all people develop in order to get through life as best they can.
The Wakefield Doctrine takes the critical step of saying, ‘hey, if we dropped you at a very early childhood age into the world of the clark, you would grow up a clark‘,
The Wakefield Doctrine takes the bold step of saying, ‘take a child of less than 4 years of age and drop them into the predator/prey worldview of a scott to grow up in and I will tell which person at a PGA championship will yell, “get in the hole!!!” ‘
The Wakefield Doctrine says, ‘what other explanation accounts for grown men wearing authentic period-fabric Army uniforms of the Civil War era and spending entire weekends practicing formations!!!??!”
The Wakefield Doctrine says to all of us the following:
- all of us are predominately one of the three types and yet we retain the capability to act as the other two
- the trick to using the Doctrine is simple, don’t try to make sense of what people are doing until you infer the worldview that they are doing it in
- if you are not sure if a person is a clark, scott or roger, eliminate the most obvious (i.e. the girl with the sequins on her face and the mini skirt over the jeans? probably safe to scratch off ‘scott’
- practice on yourself, you can’t get this thing wrong! If you want to tell everyone that you are a scott, everyone will be polite and nod and say sure as you put on your beret and get your pipe and slippers and sit down to read ‘Genealogy Quarterly’
- it is the world that you are living in, not the things that you do that make you a clark or a scott or a roger
- finally, ‘the Doctrine is for you, not for them‘
About clarkscottroger
This is Spinal Tap? Clark… you lost me! …though the rest of the information is excellent.
The process of elimination is one of the best things I have found for those who seem to readily exhibit characteristics of all three — after all, it is their perspective more so than their behavior that determines what they are.
Though I’m still learning to get a view of the other person’s world. BTW, is it a roger who says, “I didn’t realize this wasn’t normal?” or “Everybody there (in that area) knows so and so.”
a) A most excellent Rob Reiner movie ( the most quoted line: “yeah, but this goes up to 11”
b) clark
c) roger
Anyone got a problem with that?
lol
So the clark beat me to this:)
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbVKWCpNFhY]
Molly, look closely at the Deep Purple vid…..the drummer…..when did he toss his drum stick? :D
This Is Spinal Tap, simply a “must see”.
DS is referring to a simpler time for rock concerts… lol that the band is wandering around the stage getting dinner, while the keyboard player starts the song…and the drummer, (the one who forgot to stop at the dry cleaner before the show) couldn’t wait for the encore to throw the fans his drumsticks…
will not do the old man thing about how in those days they were real concerts, compared to these days when everything is choreographed and the lighting and the stage show and such… it is too easy to forget the dreaded (unless you were a drummer) ‘Drum Solo’ in which the drummer would ‘play’ for 5, 10, 15 minutes… (I could never figure out how they knew when to quit…) it was a simpler day lol
now where are my slippers and warm milk!!
I’m an old man, I’ll do it…
This was way, way before people a) knew about b) cared about c) regulated SPL levels in public ( sound pressure level), so they’re probably up around 120 db or better ( pain threshold). But Blackmore is pulling one of the Marshalls around so it faces the drummer! Why?? He can’t hear him? Probably not, his eardrums were turned to pulp years before…
Arcane RI reference; I remember hearing Deep Purple at PPAC back then ( where the Palace Theatre used to be – LOL ) They sounded pretty good. Thing is, I was at Geoff’s Deli on Benefit St. at the time. About six blocks away.
Oh yeah. I really hate to have to mention the bass player’s name…Roger Glover…dammit…
ya gotta love the production value of the stage set up… what, were they limited to half the stage ( …”sorry guys, Circus coming to town, need the rest of the stage for the elephant cage)…I mean really I think I saw a fan behind the keyboard player hand him a sandwich…
and whats with the drummer getting up when the song starts? (hey, I forgot to vote! I’ll be right back, I hear the lines are short)
and Blackmore…. ( “…this opening lick?, alright, its…this one?!)
LOL….thanks guys. Wonderful commentation. All of us old folks are experiencing a momentary generational drift:)
clarks, scotts and rogers are timeless. It is only the externalization of their predominant selves that vary through the ages. Long live the 70’s:D
…hate to throw Geritol* on the fire but
I was ‘talking’ to AP and she totally gets the Doctrine but, like our Molly, the Spinal Tap reference was a blank spot but thats the chilling aspect.
She (AP) was aware of the movie, ‘This is Spinal Tap’ but did not get the movie itself and it dawned on me (not such a great insight…but I am kinda slow this week) but as a parody, the movie requires that the audience have the ‘thing that is being parodied’ as part of their experience (or ‘timeline’ as we say).
…damn the frickin movie came out in the 80s…predicated on the 60s and 70s…. someone take this keyboard away lol
*don’t even ask
Thanks for the elaboration clark. Suffering a bit of brain atrophy these days.
The point about possessing the experience/timeline of a thing is salient to various presentation(s) of the Doctrine (to the world) in general. There will be “older” folk reading and there will be not yet “older” folk and then there will be the “babies”. (no, no reference to the Lady) Therefore,…..um…..variety is the condiment of life?……
What??!!! Spinal Tap is a parody??!!!!
Deep in the storage vaults over at SecRag, there’s an old post about Geritol. It was kind of funny at the time. Not so much now…stuff tastes like dirt. ( So I hear…)
I didn’t comment before because I didn’t feel as though I had anything to add. I am drawing a blank here on the parody! But I liked the rest of the schtuff :)