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

Thanks out to our friend Cynthia, for her suggestion/Comment from a day or so ago:

“Say…this might be a fun topic: the “sub” worldviews and characteristics that emerge as a result of being 100% clark, a clark-roger, a clark-scott, a scott-roger, a scott-clark, scott-scott, a roger-scot, a roger-clark and a roger-roger. All very interesting. :P”

:P, indeed! It is a fun topic. Albeit a fairly advanced one.

First an update. Chapter 8 of Blogdominion is out in the newsstands. Read it here.  Vidchat end of week. Six Sentence Story mid-week (no! I don’t want to know the prompt! I get until Wednesday to be relaxed and confident. lol)

…so about those ‘sub worldviews’.

The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the idea that we, all of us, are born with the potential to live and develop in one of three characteristic worldviews. That of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) and the Herd Member(rogers). Our finding ourselves* in one of these three worldview, (aka our predominant worldview), seems to happen at around the age of 2 or 3 or maybe 5. The Doctrine also maintains that we all retain the potential to experience the world as do ‘the other two‘. We refer to this potential as our secondary and tertiary aspects. It is a potential in everyone, however, it can be a significant factor, and, as a ‘significant secondary aspect’ can be quite noticeable, if one has a thorough and complete understanding of the characteristics of the three worldviews. The concept of ‘significant secondary aspect’ helps us when, for example, we encounter a person who is clearly, say, a clark and yet, at times, we observe them acting in a manner that is clearly of the scottian worldview.  As a matter of fact, Cynthia, (she who provides today’s topic), is a very good example of what we’re talking about. Cynthia is a clark with a significant secondary scottian aspect**  (I’m searching her website for a vid… she did some excellent vidposts on meditation, see if I can’t find one to re-post).
In any event, it’s understandable to see Cynthia as a clark, but when you see her in the video, there is, (or there should be, if you’re practicing your Doctrine), a moment of ‘wow… nice performance!’  and then the conflict appears: clarks are not lovers of the spotlight, to say the least! Hell, we’re the original photophobes …but video!?! talking out loud and such?  that is clearly the domain of our scottian friends. So, what gives? What gives is that Cynthia has a secondary scottian aspect. So, if all you know of our Cynthia, (“no, please remain standing up here on the stage, Cynthia, we want everyone to stare….” ) (lol… visual of the first and only-in-the-future-Live-Doctrine-Seminar), is the person you see in this video, it would be understandable for you say, “I know! I know!! she’s a scott!! look at how comfortable and effective she is in this!!”

And you would be correct, at least to the extent of identifying the characteristics of a person who relates themselves to the world around them as would a Predator (scott). This is a very frequent question from people when they first apply the Wakefield Doctrine to their own daily world, they will catch someone at a time when that person is exhibiting their secondary aspect. Secondary aspects are transitory and, more often than not, are exhibited at times of stress and duress.

It’s important at this point to know that, according to the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, a person does not jump in and out of (the three worldviews), depending on circumstances. We all live in one predominant personal reality. And, even when a person exhibits a very strong secondary aspect, it is still possible to ‘see their dominant worldview. The way we do this also happens to be one of the primary charges to those of us who would practice this perspective, i.e. that we ask ourselves the question,  ‘how does that person relate themselves to the world around them’

You know what one of the cool things about this here Doctrine here is?  We benefit no matter what!  That last paragraph, the one about how we determine the worldview of the people in our lives?  If you can ask that question, you are already better off than a lot of the people around you.

Anyway. Can’t find the video, will keep on trying.

*no, no answer yet on why one and not the other (worldview), doesn’t seem related to birth order, diet or zodiac, but it’s early yet! Good question, though!

**new Readers? there is a rule that says that no one can tell you what your predominant worldview is (at least not tell you as if they’re designating your personality type)… remember, the Doctrine is for you, not them,  and besides, the fun is in the discovery.