‘Friday’ ….the Wakefield Doctrine (odds and ends… like that one book that isn’t just too small, it’s too thick to stack and carry) | the Wakefield Doctrine ‘Friday’ ….the Wakefield Doctrine (odds and ends… like that one book that isn’t just too small, it’s too thick to stack and carry) | the Wakefield Doctrine

‘Friday’ ….the Wakefield Doctrine (odds and ends… like that one book that isn’t just too small, it’s too thick to stack and carry)

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

20140620_061208_resized

I get the part about rogers and expectations being affirmations. Makes sense. It’s the next part: “to a clark, (expectations) are demands and challenges that are inherently a threat of exposure of their Outsider natures…” Say this same thing only differently. Reiterate to illustrate.

Denise (at Girlie on the Edge) says to us, she says, ‘explain what you mean by ‘ clarks experience expectations…(as a) threat of exposure of their ‘Outsider’ natures‘… ‘

Fine. Lets start by remembering the ‘everything Rule’* and re-phrase her statement as, ‘for a person in the worldview of a clark, how does ‘expectations’ manifest? The answer is, very simply, (for a clark) expectations are (experienced) as a form of extortion (and) forcible intervention in the personal life of a clark. The person making the demands…. (see?!  right there! I was actually setting out to say, ‘the person who is the source of the expectations…’ and instead, I wrote…. demands‘! Tell me there is no difference between clarks and scotts and rogers!)
Expectations are, for clarks, a spotlight (and this can either be the ‘stage spotlight’ that follows and highlights our every move….provided, we made the choice to be in the spotlight or…. it’s the spotlight like in every interrogation scene in most movies you’ve watched… glaring, missing nothing…painfully detailing every reaction….  like that).

Not that we clarks always avoid expectations. But, we do not perceive them, (because they manifest differently), the way that rogers1 or scotts2 do.

So, Denise?  Does this sufficiently illustrate your fuckin requirement that I prove myself in front of everyone?

… (lol)

You all do know that the Wakefield Doctrine is gender and culture neutral, right?

Hey!!  like the title says, ‘Friday’… which can only mean one of 3,298,787,244 things… the Wakefield Doctrine presents  Lizzi and Michelle’s Friday Night vidchat   (starting around 7:30 EDST)

* everything Rule:  ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’… very crucial to the understanding and application of the Wakefield Doctrine, i.e. there are no scottian jobs, there is no ‘only-clarks-like-it activities’, the Doctrine does not say anything about all accountants and engineers are rogers. What the Wakefield Doctrine does say is, we all share a common world/common experience, but on a personal level we experience the world differently. The emphasis is on ‘we experience’.  Take the job: carpenter**  Lets go to a building site where a new house is nearly ready for occupancy. Of the people we see working there, we (can) find clarks and scotts and rogers.  No requirement that only one type will be able to build a house. Of course, if you have been studying your Doctrine, you could tell the other Readers what the clarks will be found doing, how to identify the scotts on the site and where the rogers are… but that’s for another Post.
** please!

1) as we now know, thanks to Kristi’s artifact, rogers perceive/manifest ‘expectations as part of the structure of their world and therefore can only be good

2) scotts and expectations?…. not so much a conscious perception as it is a part of their drive… the lioness trotting (in that cool, semi-slow motion way they do), towards the passing herd of wildebeests does not factor in how hungry her cubs are…does not care a bit about how fast most of the herd (that is beginning to go into ‘run away’ mode), is and totally is not thinking about how to apologize for not bringing home the supper, if she fails… she is in a state of …. joy/excitement/anticpation…. no, expectations are not a negative or a positive for scotts

… music video has the score so you can try and follow along (sort of like a 17th Century video game)

 

 

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. lrconsiderer says:

    FRIST (two days in a row)

  2. lrconsiderer says:

    Expectations suck. Don’t have any. Ever.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      perfect setup for one of my favorite Doctrine sayings, ‘clarks eat their own futures’

      • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

        and, needless to say, the emphasis is not on ‘their own’ or, even, ‘futures’… it is way more subtle than that… it is simply that we have somehow come to have an appetite for the energy contained in ideas…. the way that scotts have an appetite for the life force of their prey and rogers have an appetite for (the) affirmation of the Herd…
        we have developed a taste for ‘anticipation’… yum yum

      • Denise says:

        And often eat with great gusto! lol

        “it is simply that we have somehow come to have an appetite for the energy contained in ideas…. the way that scotts have an appetite for the life force of their prey and rogers have an appetite for (the) affirmation of the Herd…
        we have developed a taste for ‘anticipation’”

        As I sit reading, coffee within reach and Mr. Bach in the background , I think “yes, yes”. Thank you for framing the concept in terms of understanding. (for this clark)

  3. Kristi says:

    Though you are using that piece to illustrate scottian attributes, Bach is this roger’s favorite classical composer. (Must be the structure of his compositions!)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      Kristi

      absolutely! (that Bach appeals to the rogerian worldview) excellent ‘get’
      (there’s hope for me yet… my having a fairly weak, tertiary rogerian aspect… not certain why, but I am sure that the goal of the Doctrine (for me) is to develop the attributes of all three worldviews and such)

  4. RCoyne RCoyne says:

    Yes!! The structure of his compositions! The Rules of Contrapuntal Harmony! He invented the whole system, and then wrote the freaking book on it. Biggest baddest roger ever.
    Every I- Iv- V progression you’ve ever heard in your life ( you hear them all the time) will always follow Rule #1- it will come back to the I chord to finish. Just imagine a blues or country song that didn’t come back to the home chord- you’d never know when it was over.
    You’ve literally been hearing this stuff all your life, and it all traces back to Bach.
    ( Sorry. Music guy.Huge red button in my world.)

  5. jny_jeanpretty says:

    I liked Grieg and later Stravinsky and Bartok as a kid All choices I listened to because of my mother or her mother. Thank you so much for the beautiful music. Music is one thing that really makes my world go around! jeh

  6. jny_jeanpretty says:

    which cathedral is that? in the second vid clip?

  7. jny_jeanpretty says:

    who likes Thelonius Monk, specifically “In Walked Bud” ? jh

  8. RCoyne RCoyne says:

    Got to respect a girl who can hang with T. Monk. He was a very, very Bad Man.
    The Toccata and Fugue is awesome. Opens with a minor chord, to an augmented chord, to a major chord. Who does that?
    The Toccata makes me think of Yngwie Malmsteen- Bach-style scales and arpeggios at lightning speed. He definitely owes his living to Uncle Johann.