-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of clarks and pre-emptive denigration’

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


(Note for New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine is about nothing, if it’s not about understanding ‘the way that we relate ourselves to the world around us’.*)

This concept of pre-emptive denigration initially emerged from a conversation about how clarks tend to laugh too often. No! yeah, I did so say that! And I mean it, even though I suspect that making this statement will generate multiple  parentheseses and feet notes…*

clarks laugh too often and, these events of laughter, are (often) the manifestation of preemptory denigration. We (clarks) laugh, (and self-denigrate), to take the pressure off  ourselves. A clark will, at times, take on a responsibility that becomes the focus of attention of the people around them. It may be at the job or in class or perhaps even calling out a teacher who appears to be singling out our child in a negative fashion. No matter what the individual circumstance, there are times that clarks find themselves the center of attention. Somebody out there want to tell the Readers what the biggest fear of a clark is?  Anyone?  lol…. no, don’t worry! I won’t insist on a Comment. lol.  Z?  no, I know you know! lets give the others a chance.  Christine?  (well, yes… fear of failure is close, but we’re going for something a little more personal.)  Kristi? (  being wrong?  very good and quite close! but still something more… or less specific).

New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we live in one of three worldviews (personal realities). The personal reality that we grew up in is referred to as our predominant worldview and is sorta what others call personalty type. We have clarks (the Outsider), scotts (Predators!!!) and rogers (people who live in the world as a Member of the Herd). The really tricky part of this Doctrine is that these personal realities are real. They are not: interests or inclinations, (they aren’t) tropisms or sub-conscious drives, nor phobias or likes and dislikes. The world I woke up to this morning is the reality of the Outsider. And my way of relating myself to the world today is the most efficient and effective in terms of successfully navigating the course of my Monday, May 4th. Oh, yeah!!  one other thing. You’re born with the potential of all three. You live in only one, but have the potential to have the behaviors and strategies of ‘the other two’ at times and to certain degrees (most often at times of duress).

ok! times up! the answer? ‘scrutiny’.  What clarks fear the most (well, not quite, what they fear the most, but the way that clarks express to themselves, what they believe they fear the most), is commonly called scrutiny.

….where does the time go?!  Quick wrap up:

  • clarks laugh too often in order to ‘hedge their own bet’…. (ex: I will write a book about the Wakefield Doctrine. No, don’t worry I won’t mention names or addresses… ha ha)
  • clarks do not do this hedging because they don’t take themselves seriously enough, but because they take themselves too seriously
  • clarks, being Outsiders, have way too little sense of acceptable risk of failure (as defined by themselves, but ascribed to everyone around them)
  • the pre-emptive denigration?  ‘I’ll give my best shot, hope you’re not disappointed’  ‘I don’t know, yeah I can try’  ‘Look, if this doesn’t work out…’  ‘Before I start, maybe I could ask a few more questions, you know?’

You know, this book writing isn’t as easy as it seems. (ha ha)



* and this concept is so key and so easily misunderstood, that I’ll point out that what was just said was ‘the way that we relate ourselves to the world around us’ not ‘how we relate to the world’. This is a very common mis-something…but that one little word, ‘ourselves‘ totally makes all the difference in the world.

** I will make this my last footnote, someone out there is absolutely correct. I do sometimes underestimate my Readers and do not have to explain everything. Although, in  my own defense I’ll say, “I’m still striving for the Perfect Post, which, by definition, will be directed at the New Reader. But you’re right, I need to stop with the extra explanations.


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. Kristi says:

    So, Friday night John and I went to a show where the actors took suggestions from the audience for made-up song titles. The actors would turn those suggestions into songs from made-up musicals. After 4 songs were performed, the audience then voted on which song should be the inspiration for an entire play–which the actors then performed.

    Channeling inspiration from one of our children, I put in the song title, “Tootsie Rolls Dislocated My Jaw, but I Won the Bet.” Wouldn’t you know it, but that slip of paper was drawn out of the bowl as one of the 4 songs. HOWEVER, somehow in my writing down of the title, my mind wandered, and I wrote down “disclosed” instead of “dislocated.” That mistake became a running joke throughout the night, and I was mortified. (Luckily, the song did not take top honors, so I didn’t have to endure an entire musical production inspired by a misspelling.)

    I laughed at my mistake, and simultaneously wanted to disappear. Oh well, just another night of fun for a roger/clark. (Except, of course, I’m still not sure I’ve arrived at the “oh well” and “that was fun” stage. Pun intended.)

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      there’s a rather amazing expression coined by (your) progenitor roger that aptly describes the feeling you may have felt… ‘your head swelled up and your face fell’

      lol…. no! strike that! I will not denigrate my own sincere empathy for you in that situation… but the only thing I know that makes it lesser is to know (identify with) that others have had similar experiences and have felt similar feelings

      • Kristi says:

        Oh, yes, that phrase fits very well! :-) Knowing that everyone was laughing at me (or at least at my mistake–no one except John actually knew I was the author of the title), really the best choice was to laugh, too. That way they were laughing WITH me, not at me.

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

          …and that, I would submit is (an) expression of your rogerian worldview (personal reality). (rogers are not immune to feeling embarrassed/self-conscious etc, but they are willing (and able) to accept the benefit of the Herd concomitant with the ‘cost’ of association with the Herd. i.e. ‘they’re laughing at me, but they are like me is most ways’)
          as with Denise’s Comment, the key to effective use of the Doctrine is identified!

  2. ivywalker says:

    I was gonna say exposure. …I suppose scrutiny is a form of public exposure. ..the worst kind cuz it comes with fear of judgment.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


      yeah, I get that… the scrutiny (for me) implies a more ‘directed’ and, as you imply, a judgement-based inquiry…. and, as we know, clarks know that there is something to hide (at least we’re pretty sure…) well, sure enough to risk depriving ourselves of ridiculously large portions of our lives!

      (a lol is trying to get out of my keyboard here at this point and I will beat it down mercilessly and not laugh about the unfortunate way that out people give up the better parts of life… you know how it is)

  3. Yes. Our people do give up the better parts of their life. Young clarks (hell, the old ones too) need to rein in the fear and find a way to simply not care, go with the flow, lose the self conscious, holy shit don’t call on me even though I know the answer and more holy shit don’t make me stand in the front of the class to answer all those questions.

    clarks need to learn to take (as well as give). clarks need to learn how to demand to balance what we compromise. clarks need to learn to live in the present and not the future..

    Scrutiny. Yeah. I get it. Here’s the sad part. As clarks, we set such high standards/expectations of ourselves we often lose sight that others most likely do not have those same expections (of us). Therefore we’re not really in danger of “failing”. Only in danger of “failing” ourselves.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      totally agree.

      worse (and this is not being negative*) it’s not that we set overly high standards for ourselves in (the) performance of a single act, it’s that we attribute a value to (our) acts that is totally un-realistic and not only doomed to failure, but a part of the perpetuation of our self-doubt

  4. Yes. And at the core of that self doubt? The rotted center of the apple. Or so a part of us believes….

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      not so much a rotten core (but to stay with the metaphorical fruit)…. an original sin.

      hey… messed that up! ain’t no metaphorical fruit, rather biblical allegory!