Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Lets mark today as the imaginary start to a hypothetical new approach to writing this here Wakefield Doctrine blog here, ok? (As zoe put it, in a Comment yesterday, “…am I to infer from this post that you are rounding a corner of starting the maiden voyage of writership of this here Doctrine? How very exciting….” ). The ‘writership’ she alludes to is my renewed effort to organize the presentation of the Wakefield Doctrine in a form that will make it more user-friendly and more accessible to a wider demographic of Reader. These Posts will remain essentially the same, targeting the new Reader, I will always include a definition of the Doctrine and an example of the nature of one (or all three) of it’s worldview.
The biggest ‘change’ is that I am going to have people writing Guest Posts here! And, …and! as is obviously appropriate, to start us off will be Jean from ‘There’s Beading to be done!’, writing tomorrow’s Post. she is one of our favorite scotts, here in the ‘sphere and I’m totally looking forward to it.
I had a Post that I wrote Sunday, I kept the draft form of it, intending to post it today. Unfortunately, drafts have a built-in ‘spoiled-by-date’, pretty much one chance to sit down and complete/edit/add-something. If the draft doesn’t turn into a published post, it ends up in the trash. So anyway, I had this draft Post going into yesterday, I still liked it, even found a music vid that I really liked for it. But, this morning I sat down and looked at it and thought…’nah, gots to go’. But I did keep one line and the video. Both are at the bottom of this Post.
before that,
hey! new Reader!! no, I mean the person behind you… of course I mean you! You’re still reading and it’s been about 300 words. Guess what? We know something about you already. (yeah, yeah, of course this is a trick to keep you reading… no! I don’t mind, that thought just confirms what we already know.) Still here? great. While I don’t have time to tell you what it is we know about you, I will say this: either you are a clark or your secondary aspect is clarklike.
pretty cool, no? (yeah, I know that doesn’t mean anything yet.) …the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we all are born with the potential to grow up, develop and live our lives in one of three characteristic worldviews,** that of the a) the Outsider (clarks), b) the Predator(scotts) and c) the Herd Member(rogers). While other personality theories will be asking you at this point about your likes and dislikes, favorite colors and worst nightmares, the Doctrine is different. All we do is say, ‘here are the general characteristics of the three personality types (clarks, scotts and rogers)’, they act the way they do because of how they relate themselves to the world around them’. Figure that out about a person and you will know more about them than they know about themselves. Lets put it another way: using the descriptions of the characteristics of the three worldview as guides, try to ‘see the world as the other person is experiencing it’.
..ok one more and that’s it! ‘clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’
Interested? Sure try going to ‘the About page‘ or… given that the chances are you’re a clark, try this page.
better yet, you think you’re a clark? then you’ll know all about the post I didn’t publish on the basis of the following:
“…and I embarked on a path that is terribly familiar to my people… I began to worry about fear
( what the fuck is wrong with me? ) “
* that is the way you’re pronouncing, right?
** personal reality… you know “hey! how was the party? a) it sucked b) it rocked c) it could have been better
About clarkscottroger
Frist !!!!!!!!!
Second!
Is the saved line
( what the fuck is wrong with me? ) ”
or
don’t forget to ask questions in the Comments!
??
ha ;)
thank you… will block quote it…make it clearer
I am still working on the difference between rogers and everyone else. at first it seemed to be so simple, clarks I get, rogers…I need more bullet points!
Thanks for an elucidating post. And a freaking insane video! That is one for the books. Never saw it before. Yikes! jean<–taking herself seriously this morning
don't worry it won't last
rogers can be the most difficult to identify
try this: eliminate the ‘no way!’ one of the three that leaves you only two to put ‘side by side’ for comparison…
a clark and a roger: clarks use a lot of impersonal pronouns…rogers a lot of ‘I’ and ‘me’
a scott and a roger: this can be the toughest one… just remember it’s about how the person relates themselves to the world, both (scotts and rogers) can appear to be ‘socially adept and confident’… charming etc… but a scott does not take it personally and a roger always takes it personally… a roger is focused on being appreciated and a scott simply wants a reaction (from those around them…good or bad reactions….doesn’t really matter to a scott totally matters to a roger)
a scott acts and a roger feels…. a scott will make you talk about yourself and a roger will let you talk about yourself
I knew I had some clark-like traits. I was still reading at that point! Until I got distracted by the side-bar saying someone from MY SAME TOWN just read the Doctrine.
(Yes, I now realize that someone was me, but it took a minute. Or 3. Is that the Scottish side peeking through??)
I look forward to a Scott-ish post tomorrow from Jean! And yes, this one was okay too ;)
especially this part which I can TOTALLY relate to: “drafts have a built-in ‘spoiled-by-date’” so true! I’m surprised my laptop doesn’t reek from all the spoiled draft posts in there.
Joy
(I don’t care how over used some people tell me lol is)…most of our (clarks) responses to scott is to laugh… this is both an appreciation and identification (with your people). Yes, I’m comfortable saying, ‘anyone who ‘gets’ the Wakefield Doctrine, at least in it’s present day, not-overly-easy-to-understand form has a significant secondary clarklike aspect.)
the scottian worldview results in a person who is active (in all the external ways) but not in-active (in any of the internal ways), we’re all ‘quick’ around here, it’s that scotts respond/react quicker which can be a good thing and… maybe not always a good thing.
yeah, I have seen Jean’s post and it’s very cool
*****ohohohohohhhhhhh Hand up in back of room****** I know this one!!!
Joy, if you laughed at yourself after your revelation re your home town, you’re suffering from an acute case of Clark disease…
Why that is correct Ms. Z, however, the preferred term is “enhanced clarklike worldview-related humor”
lol
more fun …less stuffy!
Er….fourth? Lol! Happy Wednesday, Clark!!
Michelle
4th it is!!
28th!!! woohoo me!!!!
“…and I embarked on a path that is terribly familiar to my people… I began to worry about fear…” so , what seems to be frightening you, Clark???? Should I be worried? What the fuck is wrong with me?
oh yeah, WOOOOHOOOOOO!!!! jean, jean the posting machine!!! Tomorrow, tomorrow,
**** insert sickeningly sweet musical score…***
Jim just heard me laughing at all the comments (starting with Joy and her home town pal who “also reads the doctrine!”) and said, “Sweeeeetie!!! NO HAPPINESS!”
SO one question. what does a clark do when the listening thing is going on. How is a clark reacting / allowing it–in what manner?
and zoe, which sickening musical score? the one from Oliver–“who will buy this wonderful morning” or the one from Annie–“Tomorrow, Tomorrow, I love ya tomorrow” ….?
only the cloyingly sweet Annie will do!
5213th.
So there :)
lol
(Finally a Comment that I have a clue about!)
Totally Five Thousandth Two Hundred and Thirteenth Comment!!! Boom!
YES I WIN!
Looking forward to Jny’s post :D
Why did I start smiling at the 3 minute mark? lol