Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( ‘a simple tool for a better life‘)
In the week ahead we will:
- conclude our Series of Scenaria ( yes, I just love to use the word, ‘scenaria)
- explore the question of ‘language and presentation’ of the Doctrine in this blog, with an eye towards the cost/benefit equation involve in appealing to the weak-minded Reader
- listen to music vids ( of course!)
- check in with all of the DownSprings and Friends-of-the-Doctrine, in a new Feature: “what are those rascals writing now?”
- provide an update on the book Project ( there are some fascinating things coming from this process)
- a Contest (with a Wakefield Doctrine Tee Shirt as the grandest of Prizes!)
(Experienced Readers of the Doctrine will detect a certain note of…’stem winding’* in today’s Post. This is because we are busy on the book, but it is Monday and we always like to remind people that content (good and ‘so so’) turns up on these Pages most every day.)
The hell with waiting for the week to begin! One of the genuinely cool things to come from last week’s series on job interviews was the insight we got from rogers on one of the ‘choices of action’ presented in Scenario B. In this Scenario, the rogerian Applicant is waiting and waiting for her interview, and is beginning to get impatient. We provided our Applicant 3 actions to take, one of them being: to begin to clear some of the tables to help out the Owner of the restaurant. The reaction of rogers (to this suggestion) was very, very informative! To a ‘man’, they said, “No way! You can’t do that!! They will call the cops, you will be ejected from the building!! etc!!! etc!!!!”
That is so not the response from our clarklike DownSprings! clarks were all, “of course you would do that! Why the hell not?”
Discussion (of the difference between the two followed), the explanation from the rogers: “you would never presume the authority to take such action in the person’s restaurant. No matter how well meaning, you are a stranger to them, you cannot impose your will or take independent actions like this, it can be interpreted only as a hostile action by the Owner.”
A totally different (situation-based) worldview from that of the clarks, who were all, “hey, why not? Someone should help those people out, not asking for pay or even thanks, but what the hell…you are applying to be a waitress! Demonstrate your skills and willingness to work!”
The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we all have personal realities, individual worldviews. While the common reality is same for us all, from the perspective of the individual, the world is of one of three characteristic types: the clark’s world in which they are the perennial outsider, the scottian world of life as a predator and the rogerian world living in an ordered, structured and predictable reality.
With the two markedly different responses cited above we clearly see the respective worldviews of the clark and the roger! Same restaurant, same people, same situation but!…. the outcome of a certain action would be totally different. If the roger did try and clear tables, the Owner would be offended and upset. If the clark cleared the tables, the Owner would laugh and smile. Tell me I’m lying.
About clarkscottroger
Yes, yes. rogers and clarks react differently, uh huh. 3 world views? Duh! Oh. Right. New readers…..
Yo! new readers! It will not take you very long to pick up the thread of today’s post. Honest. Start with the About Page, then head over to the Clarks, Scotts, Rogers Pages respectively. Now, read the last 3 or so posts prior to this one and you have it. Not entirely sure of something? Write a comment and it will be answered. No comment at this blog will go unanswered. Now, back to what I really wanted to say…..
[If you, and you know who you are, continue to persist with the choice of music vids as in these last posts – you risk a certain redirection of a certain someone’s attention. lol I better shut up now ‘cuz something just caught my eye.]
I find it interesting that the different mindsets of people illicit different responses from others, though the actions look the same.
And yet, people tend to respond to us as we see the world (unless they are too caught up in themselves).
@Molly
ain’t it something? (the point I keep coming back to is: personal reality overlaid on the common reality that we all ‘share’)
The real challenge before us in developing easy-to-use tools (from the Wakefield Doctrine) lies in the ‘grammar’! So when you look at 2 people in a common reality (lets say the restaurant in the second scenaria) we might find ourselves saying, “The response of the roger in percieving the actions of the scott in the common reality of the restaurant is informed by the rogerian worldview… (in take of breath…) and further more…”
lol
you bring up a very key point in your observation, “And yet, people tend to respond to us as we see the world” with a little moving around of words, it might be more accurate to say, “people tend to respond to us as our (charactistic) world would have them see us”
and even there, I can hear someone out there saying, “is that us making them see us a certain way or is that them acting in their own reality-specific way”
Luckily we all know that, at least for now, the answer is simply, “The Doctrine is for you, not for them”
I wore my new Wakefield Doctrine t-shirt to go pick up my paycheck and do a little shopping this morning:)
It was not overly busy so I had a chance to chat with a scottian woman who works the front desk and with whom I have a good relationship (of course!)
As she was telling me of some not so good things going on in her life at the moment I said “hey, you need to go here” and turned my back to her. Then, I turned back to face her and we continued our conversation. A minute later my friend expressed she was recently perplexed by the behavior of a particuar family member. Again, I turned my back to her said, ‘here, this is what you need. really”. It was fun!
lol