Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) It’s the real deal, a perspective that will let you see the behavior of your friends and family in a totally new light. Try it!
So, about the Columbus thing. We admit that we made up today’s Title. There is absolutely no evidence supporting the contention that Christopher Columbus stayed behind and raised a family*, but given that today we, in the Currently Dominant Culture of the Western Hemisphere (motto: ” were Number 1!! were Number #1!!! ), are celebrating the Discovery of the New World aka Columbus Day( Coming to the Discovery Channel: “New World Men: Kicking Ass on a Whole New Continent!” )
Now that I’ve got that out of my system, we can on with the serious business of talking about the Wakefield Doctrine. ( Alright, if you want a ‘funny Post’, I’ll give you a funny Post! Go to this Post and after you have read it, please come back and tell me what the hell you think is so damn good about it! For reasons not understood, this Post shows up way more than it should in the list of ‘search terms’ (indicators of how Readers come to find the blog.)
You know, in the early days of writing this blog, we would make a point of stating that the Wakefield Doctrine is both gender and culture neutral. What we meant by this is that it does not matter what part of the world you are from, it is the nature and character of your own worldview that matters (personality type-wise). We contend that the worldviews that are the basis of the three personality types are inseparable from the human condition. Further, while standards of behavior may vary from one culture to another, a person who grows up, develops and otherwise matures living in a reality best characterized as the world of Predator and Prey, will be: aggressive, inquisitive, quick to react, action-oriented with a minimum of self-reflection. That reality exists in Zimbabwe and New Auckland as well as Mansfield Ohio. Not only that, but the Doctrine maintains that gender prescribes the capacity/ability (of a person to act a certain way), not their reasons for acting. A female growing up, developing and otherwise maturing in a world where she is the Outsider, will still develop: an insatiable desire to learn new information and facts, be drawn to the fringes of whatever culture she happens to be in and have an abundance of what is referred to as intuition, all that she is permitted (by physiology as well as the local culture) in order to live her life.
The unique insight into behavior and personality types offered by the Wakefield Doctrine is founded upon one’s personal reality. Correctly infer which of the three worldviews the other person is experiencing and you will know more about them than they know about themselves.
Columbus? Not sure which of the three personality types…well, hold on a minute! The following is an accepted approach to figuring whether a person is a clark or a scott or a roger: eliminate the most unlikely of the three worldviews, in the case of Columbus we’re gonna go with, ‘not a clark‘** That leaves us with: scott or roger.
Put me down for: roger! (If you want to know my reasoning, you’re going to have to write a Comment and ask, preferably offering your own choice.)
*”Here’s the story …of a man named Columbo” ha, ha
About clarkscottroger
and let’s not forget the discovery of yogurt. “what?! that’s columbo too?!” damn…..
lol
of course! the first introduction of the innately superior European culture
Hey Molly! We have today’s Lesson Plan half-written for you!
….thousands of schoolchildren across the globe simultaneously begin banging the end of their rulers on their desktops…the sound is deafening…..the air thick with anticipation (but not without a little fear)…..awaiting the appearance of the SchoolMarm from Hell…..she rules with iron fists and childlike wonder…..hoora!
I know what you are thinking Jennifer and…. no I am not!
lol
Oh yeah, one more question… (Columbo)
We seem to have gotten off track here.
Hey Molly! Are you going to use “In 1942 Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue” in today’s history lesson?
Columbus Day — that’s a holiday, which means we don’t *have* to have school, right? I know it was always a school break where I came from.
I watched a documentary dealing with the Pilgrims and the founding of America the other night… I’d say they were rogers with spunk… but why they took off for the new world in September is beyond me. Evidently, the idea was greater than the risk of living through the winter with no shelter.
agree they were rogers… I suspect they just got into ‘a snit’ about the persecution thing an such (“What do you mean we can’t make everyone wear silly hats and goofy shoes?? God likes his creations to dress funny!
…well then screw you, we’re leaving!!”)
And what would that be that I’m thinking Clark?
Because the above-referenced post is funny. scotts, scotts, scotts… but I wonder what the hell the search terms are to get there. Oh yeah! I got it. “Hey you!” Err… maybe not. How about “in your wildest dreams…” Open to interruptation…
Yes, let’s get down to lesson time.
This morning I woke up to a not typical clarklike world. Point in fact, the phone rang a little before 9 am. I was at the computer, the machine picked up and started to recite the ph.#. I heard the first 2 digits and without any thought but with much force/energy (and slight sarcasm) I almost screamed answered “yeah, hello!!!!” thinking I was talking to the person I assumed was on the other end. Silence, a slight hesitation (as a result of my scary greeting) and then the caller proceeded to inquire about an item we have for sale on craigslist. Instant shift on my part only to the extent that I proceed to respond “normally” with “yes, one moment please”.
NOW HERE’S THE LESSON FOR THE CLARKS: I had a sense, but not fully, that I was way more scottian than clarklike when I woke up today. My ultimate proof came about 5 minutes after this phone call when I caught myself thinking, “geez, I hope that guy didn’t think I was too rude/a jerk” which produced a huge smile on my face. I was close to experiencing typical clarklike embarrassment at having “acted like a jerk” on the phone. But luckily, because I am trying to evolve to a more balanced place, I quickly dispensed with that thought. Serves no purpose in my world today.
You, Jennifer Wilson! formerly Ms. AKH, we’ve been having a conversation over at GirlieOnTheEdge about the difference between a clark’s world and a scott’s world. About simplicity, details, memory. Was my example today simple enough to get my point across? Will scotts get what I’m trying to explain here or just the clarks?
Wow. It would be nice to see more than two comments before responding… “In Fourteen hundred and Ninety-two Columbus sailed the ocean blue… Does anyone know the rest of that poem? I am sure it can be found online, but that is the only part I have ever heard quoted.
And surely, I can’t be the only one who teaches with Metallica providing the rhythm?
DS — how do you keep from silencing that scottian part, before it has a chance to come out?
…as to that persecution thing — it had been 16+ years of dealing with the English king who thought he was God.
You know, a literate society is a very dangerous thing for oppressors.
…true and when it comes to appreciating persecution, rogers are the true connoiseurs! lol
@DS1:
I got it loud (ha ha) and clear! That was too funny! It’s actually making me laugh visualizing you screaming sarcastically “yeah hello” You should try it sometime… lol
Anyone in the mood for deadly serious?
The Pilgrims bailed out of England to escape religious persecution. And yet once they were established here, they very promptly started to persecute everyone around them. Why?
Because they were absolutely convinced that they were absolutely right in their convictions; that’s how you can tell that they were rogers. They felt perfectly entitled to persecute anyone else.
I’m a roger, and I can see quite clearly what their motivations would be based on. Disturbing and very unsettling.
But that’s also very, very simplistic. You know damned well that they weren’t all rogers.
So here’s my question;
When scotts or clarks engage in persecution, what does that look like?
And can you cite an example? Or will you have to change the subject?
And BTW, if we didn’t have nasty Pilgrims, we also wouldn’t have Rhode Island….
@ the Progenitor
scotts in persecution mode: Attila, Alexander, Ghengis the thing about scotts is they don’t need justification… they want it, then provided they have the resources, they will take it. One scott: takes a little; a scott with an army: takes a whole bunch
(here’s a ‘guess’ scottian-lead armies take (or at least keeps) a lot less prisoners of war)
You are illustrating the key difference between scotts and rogers: scotts lead by (personal) strength of Will rogers will lead by (and from) personal conviction (which is almost always grounded in some form of belief, opinion, politic or Etiquette but is certainly ‘external to the Persecutor’)
Another way to say this (yeah, another way!) a scott: “Do this because I want you to” a roger: “Do this because you should” a clark: “I heard that a lot a people were doing this thing, not to say that you should, but I was thinking about trying it and they say it is fun and good for you and maybe we could all try…”
@Molly – I do not ignore you. Last evening I was suffering from “cranial retarditis” commonly referred to as a case of the “stupids”. There is a response waiting in queu (spelled correctly?!?! LOLO)
In my formative years I would be awaiting it’s publication this morning with dread…..at the thought that I would sound like a complete idiot. In front of the WORLD no less. But that was then and this is now.
Amazing how the smallest grouping of words (to a clark) can be interpreted so differently depending on mood etc. Often (the) interpretations simply reflect my own (damn) self.
Yes, I seem to be stalling……..clarks silence their scottian aspect by? 1) the “propriety police”? or perhaps 2) the “keep the reserve rangers”?….we do it to ouselves by being in our heads and not quite “in the moment”. A spontaneous outburst by a clark is to witness a clark “letting go”. Letting go of the reigns of resignation that resound within our brainiac heads.
Now if this isn’t encouragement to new readers to leave a comment…..I don’t know what is! LOL
@clarkscottroger:
LMFAO!!! regarding your recent comment.
But in all seriousness you neglected to mention some of the more famous scottian FEMALE warriors. The list is quite impressive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_warfare_and_the_military_in_the_ancient_era
interesting notion… however do we know that all female-type warrior-ettes are scotts?
(Don’t forget, the thing with the Doctrine is, it is not that a thing/job/interest/job/hobby/likes/dislikes/how-did-I-end-up-here(s) are particularly clarklike or scottian or rogerian! The cool thing about this is that everyone does everything, but some are more inclined than others to be good at it.
And…..and! everyone does any-thing but! in a manner that reflects their personality type! The progenitor roger was hinting on that yesterday…)
So, sounds like an interesting project to me! Famous women-ettes and which of the three personality types of the Doctrine is they!
Put me down for: Joan of Arc ( hey clark!! yo! your undergarments are ringing! I think it’s god calling )