the Wakefield Doctrine: ‘you’re already practicing the core Principles, you might as well get something for all your efforts’ (…yeah, even some fun!)

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

The reason we say,  you’re already practicing the Principles is that, as a personality theory, the Wakefield Doctrine does not start with a person answering questions, filling out a survey or questionnaire, reporting likes and dislikes, lying about weaknesses and strengths, exaggerating the things others like and hate about us. No. In a funny, you-guys-really-are-weird kind of way the Wakefield Doctrine doesn’t really care what the individual thinks their personality (type) should or could or might be. Nope. This here personality theory here does not need to know that.
…as a matter of fact! You don’t even need to involve the person that you are about to know (better, in a way) than they know themselves. You see, the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not for them.

But I’m getting ahead of us. We’ll come back to this ‘you mean I can know my boyfriend’s, my Teacher’s, my wife’s, my boss’s, my kid’s personality types and I don’t need to ask them to help?’ in just about a paragraph. First, the Principles that the Title of today’s Post says you are already practicing.

The Wakefield Doctrine is all about how a person relates themselves to the world around them. Notice the odd wording, I did not say, ‘how a person relates to the world‘. Because that’s only one dimension, in a sense a description of  what happens as the person goes about their life. We say, ‘how the person relates themselves to the world around them’ because it is not simply a choice (about how to act, what to do, how to feel about it), it is reality. What we refer to as a worldview.
In the context of the Wakefield Doctrine, we all live in a personal reality, aka our worldview. This means that my reality is different from yours. No, nothing weird… no screaming vegetables, nothing shooting across the sky, no flying without the help of technology, but different nonetheless. And it is the way our worldviews differ that we find the value and utility in our personality theory.

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we are all born with the potential to experience the world from one of three ‘perspectives’, living in one of three worldviews, if you will. And what most people call ‘personality types’, we know as the appropriate behavior, given the world that a person finds themselves experiencing. (Remember!  personal reality as in ‘real’ and ‘reality’  not  “just ’cause you felt like it, or I think I will choose to act like this, she deserves it….”) The three characteristic worldviews are:

  1. the reality of the Outsider (clarks)  not ‘because’, not ‘well, you should speak up more’, and definitely not ‘well if you didn’t act so weird, people would get to know you and  you would have an easier time in life’  this reality is simply one in which you are here and ‘the world’ is out there. (For our clarklike Readers this last statement is sufficient, the rogers and the scotts might nod and look understanding, but will never get it)
  2. the world of the Predator (scotts) of the three personality types, scotts can be the easiet to deal with- they are energetic and active, enthusiastic and mercurial helpful and very dangerous… the saying here is: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’.  scotts are the life of the party and the reason the police get called, scotts are your best friend until someone who they look up to shows up and then your life will be miserable , scotts are the neighbor who will lend you anything in his garage and help build your deck without asking and she is the neighbor with the well-behaved kids (at least they are when she is around, when she is not….ayiieee!), scotts are fun and tiring, loyal and seductive  you have at least one scottian friend
  3. the world as seen by a member of the Herd (rogers) are the reason we have civilization and they are the reason we have repressive societies. they are the personality type that lives in a world of emotion… not just moods and feelings, but where clarks think things and scotts act out, rogers manipulate emotion, in themselves and in the people around them. Ever encounter someone who makes you feel comfortable talking?  ...roger  know anyone at work who is always in the center of things and knows all about everyone?… roger  ever find your husband/wife…boyfriend/girlfriend  acting like they had no idea that you had a life outside the relationship?  lol roger  there is a saying around here: without rogers humanity would still be out on the savannah with the scotts roaming in packs, feeding on the giant herds of rogers while the clarks dart among the low underbrush in a desperate attempt to stay alive long enough to invent opposable thumbs

These three worldviews are the ‘core principles’ of the Doctrine that you are already practicing.

Back to the Practical Value….and how you don’t need to involve the ‘other person’ and how this Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not for them.

Today. Observe the people in your life. Infer which of the three worldviews they appear to be acting from, test this against the descriptions of each of the three personality types that you will find throughout this blog. Once you know which the other person is, you will know why they are doing the things that they are and because you know this, you will have the choice of how you would respond, how you feel about what they do, how to shape the message if you need to get them to do what you want. In other words, you will have more freedom of choice than they do.

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. Love it and so true that this has now helped me on more than one occasion dealing with others in my life now. So thank you for that Clark!! :)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      @Janine

      …as Cyndi and Denise and Jennifer were saying this last Saturday Night … the more you do it, the more easier* identifying the types becomes which then makes the other benefits more accessible

      *well, they certainly didn’t say ‘more easier’…lol Editorial Privilege

  2. Cyndi says:

    And with this post I’m thinking about my guest post: “Living Life as a Clark According to the WD” lol
    Awesome as always and I didn’t know that the scotts are why the police get called at parties. Hmm…I would have thought that would be a rogerian thing…you know…they’re huddled at the party someone gets loud, they get loud but then it just occurred to me: the person the rogers would follow who was LOUD would BE the scott. Of course. ;)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      @Cyndi

      and what kind of neighbors would actually get secretly mad enough to call the cops (as opposed to coming over) and at the party, it would be like…’oh dear, there’s nothing I can do to control the partygoers I should involve the Authorities!! they will do something because…. (wait for it….) they have the Authority!! rogers just loves authority in an objective, formalized manifestation…even though, the cops who show up will, for the most part be….scotts!! (consider the job description: must enjoy driving cars recklessly fast, with sirens and lights flashing while chasing people that you are expected to catch… with guns! lol)

      (now if there is a fire, thats a whole different story! fire fighters? rogers! big time…. scotts catch people rogers protect and preserve things, property buildings and such… hell even the way that they (fire fighters) like to rescue humans is…. rogerian here attractive female let me carry you in my arms… smile adoringly for the news photographers (hey!! someone throw that old guy over your shoulder and get him outa here)

      …too much?

      Looking forward to your Guest clark Post!

  3. Cover your ears! (me screaming)
    Someone needs to write a post with this title: “The Wakefield Doctrine: The Mechanics of being a roger – The Art of Asking Questions”.

    As Cyndi might say, here’s the “30 second” version: Went to a 2nd job interview this morning. (the make or break one). Went in predisposed the guy (attorney, first time meeting with him) was a scott. BUT, he turned out to be what I first thought (based on his website) he was: a roger. Damn! Was too slow on the uptake and missed the particular cues to connect with him on…..an emotional level! Barely touched it. But could have.
    I saw in retrospect as soon as I left the office the points during the interview in which I could have connected and exchanged “emotional currency”. I recognized the cues/openings too late. Had I been quicker on my rogerian feet, I would have had a more succesful interview.
    It’s obvious I need to cultivate my rogerian aspect more specifically. Who said this was easy? LOL

    P.S. The suggested post title above came to me after relaying the interview with my male counterpart who is a roger. As I told him about the segment of the interview where we were talking more personal stuff (hobbies), he had all sorts of questions he would have asked the guy! “Did you ask him ___?, did you ask ____? what about_____….?”

  4. Stacy Harris says:

    WHAT??? No screaming vegetables. You must not have stopped over by my reality! ha ha ha! I still think I am a Rogscoclark! :)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      @Stacy

      lol no… you are a scott! (with what we call a ‘secondary clarklike aspect’ which just means that you have the incredible energy of the scottian personality but you have the capacity to stop yourself and think: “ok, Stacy…there’s a herd of rogers grazing over at the water cooler…should we run and scare most away or stealth up and pick a nice, tasty one for dinner” (your) clarklike aspect is the little voice that (sometimes) interfers with your totally reliable and dependable instincts…

  5. I could never know too much about these personalities and love reading up on them with your posts. It feels like there’s always something more to learn about them, but I especially like reading up about Clarks (obv!) Thanks for sharing and happy Tuesday!

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      @Melanie

      thats good to hear! (actually that is where the conversation sort of ended on the last Saturday Night Drive…) we were talking about something and I asked Cyndi if she has (yet) had the experience of spotting another clark and having her ‘head swell up and her face fall’* (which is, of course, the odd, clarklike like reaction of vicarious, self-identified embarrassment upon seeing someone else do something embarrassing). And she said, ‘not yet, but I am still learning/practicing to spot the three types'(or words to that effect). And the consensus of the others was that that is appropriate to how it goes…learn the general characteristics, spot some scotts and maybe some clarks, then run into one that is real tough (say, possible strong roger or quiet scott) and bring in some questions, get additional ways to make the identification (in this case, you might listen to the person speak… a lot of personal pronouns ‘I’ and ‘me’ and you should be thinking roger… and so on).
      So it is good to read about the characteristics so that you will be able to try and match them to the people you encounter today. And totally write us a Comment if you are having any trouble making a call… that is how your skills develop so that id becomes almost automatic…someone, Cyndi or Molly or Jennifer used the concept/term ‘fluency’ in this context, as is, the more you practice seeing the world and the people in terms of the DOctrine, like learning a language, the more fluent you become and eventually you become able to ‘think in Doctrine’ and it is virtually automatic.

      *this experience is about seeing a very clarklike clark, acting in a excessively clarklike manner…at work or school or play and you will know them to be a clark and you will feel/think to yourself. ‘oh! man! don’t do that!! you don’t need to be so very different/weird/strange/self-defeating at least not in this situation!’ and your head will swell up and your face will fall**

      ** credit to the Progenitor roger for this phrase…rather good

  6. Rich Rumple says:

    Interesting how this philosophy now seems to be providing a “what’s in it for me” concept of being able to enjoy freedoms while somewhat controlling others by knowing how they’ll react to stimuli.

    How long have you been teaching politicians this philosophy? lol

    And, in doing so, could you actually be working to control the comments you receive? My God, I’m dealing with Kreskin! lol Great job, my friend!

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      @Rich

      a very interesting point! and the statement/perspective of ‘whats in it for me’ really foes to a whole ‘nother place, at least in the context of the Wakefield Doctrine! We look at the world as a place that is (largely) shaped by how we relate ourselves to it, which would make one think, ‘everything is as it should be!’ but for some of us, there is much about the world as we live in (it) that could be …’improved’. Mostly in the area of the limitations we place upon ourselves. What is proving interesting, as this blog develops and follows new paths, novel approaches, is that, of the three personality types, clarks not only tend to be the first to ‘get it’, but are the one (of the three) …that really sees the benefit to applying the principles. And this is not a lack on the part of the scotts and rogers, rather it is a statement about the character of the worldview that accounts for the clarklike personality type.
      One might argue that a drive for self-improvement is, in and of itself, an indication of a flaw or a lacking (of some quality) and I would not immediately deny that (at least not in such simple terms) but the fact of the matter is, scotts and rogers have a ‘completeness’ a …sufficiency to their worldviews that, without a secondary clarklike aspect tends to result in a competency that precludes a major need for something like our little personality theory.

      the Comments!! the history of this blog has been one of thinking I see the path to be taken…writing and writing and then suddenly see the path it (the blog) is taking, suddenly veer off in one direction (or another)…lol the Comments of late have been an example of this serendipity that I have been the beneficiary of all along… having Readers and Friends offer their perspective and insight has been a total gift, letting me put the Doctrine to the test, no longer sufficient to simply ‘hold forth’ on the whys and wherefores, everyone’s Comments have given this thing a very productive direction… or something.
      Good to hear from you, as usual Rich!