Monday the Wakefield Doctrine *three personality types, three benefits…three part series*

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


the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the idea that we all experience the world, to a certain but very significant extent, as a personal reality. These personal realities (referred to as ‘worldviews’) can be categorized as: the world of the Outsider, the world of the Predator and the world of the Herd. The Doctrine further maintains that everyone finds one (of these three) as their predominant worldview at a very early age and what many call personality types and traits are simply the aggregate of behavioral strategies that the individual develops as they mature, in other words, their personality type reflects their personal reality and not the other way around. Lastly, the Wakefield Doctrine holds that while everyone lives their life in one of the three worldviews, we all retain the potential inherent in the other two worldviews; in a sense ‘the other two’ represent the personality type we might have been. Unique in perspective, very productive in application and fun to apply in one’s day-to-day life. the Wakefield Doctrine offers the opportunity to ‘see the world as the other persona experiences it’ and by doing this successfully you will be a in a position to know the other person better than they know themselves.

Personality Type I:  ‘the Outsider’  clarks  the world is forever ‘out there’ (as opposed to here where they are), clarks are insatiably curious, doggedly persistent, fearful in the conduct of their lives and courageous in defense of friends and family and selfless to the point of self-destructive all in service to their attempts and efforts to find a place in the world around them. clarks think

Personality Type II: ‘the Predator’ scotts, action oriented believers that the only good action is the aggressive action, their world is a simple world of predator and prey, fight or flight,  eat or be eaten, scotts are quick to offer help, the first to act, un-shy to the point of promiscuity, mercurial in temperament and violence is within their nature, all without being vindictive, they are natural leaders of whom it may be said, ‘a scott is often wrong, but never uncertain. scotts act

Personality Type III: ‘the Herd Member’ rogers  live in a world of connectedness, they are naturally social and gregarious, they are judgmental and impartial, rogers live in a universe that is inherently quantifiable and there is a Right Way to Do Things, where scotts are the conquerors and clarks are the innovators, rogers are the civilizers. responsible for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Library of Alexandria, rogers invented the Dewey Decimal system and yet, are the first to burn books. Without the rogerian influence, stable society would not exist in order to repress the individual spirit. rogers feel

Benefit 1: to know yourself (for clarks)

Benefit 2: to know the other person (for rogers)

Benefit 3: to gain the advantage through better understanding of the other person (for scotts)

be sure to join us for Part 2  sometime tomorrow!


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


  1. Been reading a bit here and there. Pretty darn sure I’m a Clark.

  2. findingninee says:

    So cool that you’re breaking it down for the newbies. Also, I always like new words describing how un-Roger that I am. :D

  3. Nice little encapsulated, presentation. Nice to refresh every now and then….”nice” an oft used adjective used to describe clarks. But we don’t like it, being called “nice”. I mean, really? that’s all you can say – “nice”. What the hell does “nice” even mean!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


      Since you asked:

      “From Middle English nice, nyce, nys, from Old French nice, niche, nisce (“simple, foolish, ignorant”), from Latin nescius (“ignorant, not knowing”); compare nescire (“to know not, be ignorant of”), from ne (“not”) + scire (“to know”).”

      no, you cannot, in fact, make this shit up.