Comments? yeah, you gotta problem with that? the Wakefield Doctrine ‘…now that you say that, I think I know what you mean’

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

2863411

You know how I’ve been saying that the progress of the Wakefield Doctrine began to accelerate when we met Cyndi and Lizzi and Michelle and (most recently) zoe? And how, because they have succeeded in ‘getting it’, they have been in a position to extrapolate beyond the current state of knowledge? This, combined with the effort (to increase our understanding and find ways to demonstrate the Doctrine’s value in real world application) being undertaken by Denise and Molly*, is creating new opportunities in ways that I really had not anticipated back even as little as a year ago.  So, lets do a Comment Post…a sampling of the questions and insights being proffered following most Posts are very cool, so lets do this thing!

**************************

 

pictimilitude
pictimilitude.com x

Submitted on 2013/12/03 at 6:15 am

I like what Denise said: self-development, personal growth, responsibility to self. I have a dream of this reality, too. Where one day I just don’t give a shit and I do what I’m going to do without reservation. We wear our hearts on our sleeves and it’s so easy to get wounded…

 ~~~~~~~~~~~

zoe
rewritten-redo.com 
Submitted on 2013/12/02 at 8:59 am

I know you put together (with the help of others) the personality test as it were, but I think the idea of finding the perfect mate would be fun…and combine it with this idea of it could happen (ie the walking into happiness stuff) maybe you could figure out some sort of a pee test like the pregnancy tests… that would turn blue for “find yourself a Clark,” green for “find yourself a Roger,” and Black for” Just try to convince a Scott to take you on if you have nothing to offer them….”

Would love a fri vid chat… saw you were arranging the 6th maybe… I may be able to do that … wont know til wed…. the cupcake thing is goin’ down that night

~~~~~~~~~~~

Denise Farley
girlieontheedge1.wordpress.com 
Submitted on 2013/12/01 at 3:44 pm | In reply to pictimilitude.

No laughing Cyndi. You make the statement about getting a trainor and you’d better be telling us about your fabulous Christmas gift that simply wouldn’t fit under the tree!!
I knew another clark would get that non oxymoron – “clarks in motion” but I’m serious – you are. Lizzi is too although she be crazy in motion. LOL

I really enjoyed the call last night but was a tad frustrated that I couldn’t find the proper words to describe what I have been experiencing these last weeks. Thanks to the Clark for finding satisfactory ones and speaking for me. Just had a frightening visual of me ala Edgar Bergen and Clark as my Charlie McCarthy. AAGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 ~~~~~~~~~~~

Michelle Lieu
gettingliteral.com is her site  go
Submitted on 2013/12/01 at 9:14 am

I agree with Denise, we have to find that common language. Not easy with personalities that are mixed and diverse

 ~~~~~~~~~~~

Lizzi; Considerer  twitter.com/LRConsiderer
Submitted on 2013/11/04 at 1:02 pm

If only, if only our brains allowed those things to sink in and become realities. Ironically, I reckon we clarks consider ourselves absolutely the BEST at seeing the common-sense-undeniable TRUTH of brilliance in other clarks…

*********************

Well!  Given that the formatting involved in today’s Post has somehow consumed all my ‘pre-work’ writing time this morning, let me post this and I’ll return later in the day today.

 

(later  this day )

The intent of those behind the Wakefield Doctrine is to further understand and develop ways that the principles underlying this personality type ‘theory’ might be applied as a tool for self-improvement. Allow me to offer one definition of self-development:

to increase the level of harmony experienced in day-to-day living, decrease the degree that stress-without-return-benefit is felt and to open (the individual’s) capacity to perceive the beneficial effects of changing the ‘status quo’, commonly defined by the routines that we all experience as we attempt to eat, sleep, reproduce and/or create, nurture the family that springs out of our connecting with others…including but not limited to:  blood relatives, friends, the girl-at-the-checkout-counter, our History Teacher, the bully who lives between our house and bus stop, the girl who said, ‘no frickin’ way, it’s ain’t happening’, the scott who was our best friend except when another bigger scott showed up on the scene, the rogerian friend who gave us a sympathetic place to express our fears, the husband who we loved but no matter what we tried he wouldn’t…he couldn’t get over his own limitations, the boss at work who touches us way too much, the secretary at work who has the look of fear in her eyes, the dreams that we gave up on, the nightmares that we ran from, the appetite that draws us back in always promising satisfaction, the pastor and his belief of what we should know, the hopes of our parents, the fear of our children and the belief in ourselves that all of this is inherent in the world today.

that’s the ground, the ‘place to stand’ that we claim in our development of the Wakefield Doctrine

 

what?  sure  a little music

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8ahBqVuT68

 

* (Molly is a pretty cool example, as she has not been in direct constant contact, nevertheless, as evidenced in a recent Comment, is demonstrating this ‘continued effort to understand the world around us’ in a unique, challenging and, frankly pretty cool way)

the photo?   I am no frickin idea!  lol  or as our resident  grammatician  would have me say… I have no ideas

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. zoe says:

    I know its my inner clarkiness talking but why am I the one that sounds like the biggest idiot? A Pee test? Well actually I STILL like that idea….

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      zoe
      (I was about to say, ‘well, being taken out of context…’) and then I realized how… redundant? oxymoronic….? lol

      the thing about clarks is that we hold the past and the future…on hand’ to a degree not seen in the other two, while not a bad thing in and of itself, provides a certain frisson* when seen in print.

      I appreciate the freshness and un-expected thoughtpaths that come from using Comments in a Post.

    • OMG! I LOVE the pee test idea :D That was my favourite bit…which probably means I’m still in scott mode.

      Also, Clark “I am absolutely no frikkin idea”? Aren’t you??

      • zoe says:

        Oh man, I feel so much better! Your comment explains soooo much! Youre in Scott mode! That explains why your comments have been scaring me a bit lately!….lol….no really….leave the scott in….back away from the Clark….lol,lol,lol… really! LOL! Squee!

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

          zoe

          aha!! you have been secretly listening in on our (most) recent chat… when I suggested to Mz L., that what is appearing in the future is the increasing likelihood that (as the system develops) we will not only be increasing our secondary and tertiary aspects but at the same time be ‘turning down’ our predominant aspects. (seeing how much on a roll I was…despite Lizzi’s efforts to get me to stop typing… I also suggested that it might enhance our efforts by developing a model for the ‘whole three worldview thing’…. (to any rogers out there reading: yes, we know that our very expression of this is flawed by the fact that it is a function of our predominant worldview and therefore may not apply to rogers and scotts.

        • Scaring how? Tell me so I can do it again ;)

      • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

        Lizzi

        are you pointing out my syntaxical disconnect or my editing prowess…? lol

  2. zoe says:

    yes.