“a clark, a clark and a clark wash ashore on a desert island*…” the Wakefield Doctrine -Wednesday-

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

iEXDi

…so I said to (another) clark yesterday, “Did you ask so-and-so out, to that thing that you two were talking about?” and this clark said, “yeah, well no, but I think it will work out, I’m pretty sure that we’ll both be there and we can hangout”.

…and that old familiar feeling began to give a certain volume to my thoughts as I said, “what the hell are you talking about?! I was there, it was pretty much set right from the start.”  The response: “well, I was thinking about it and I just need to figure out this one thing….
I will save my subsequent rant for another time. Instead I will add to the Wakefield Doctrine ‘Warning Label’

Wakefield Doctrine Warning Label

  • if you learn the characteristics of the three worldviews well enough to spot (the) clarks, scotts and rogers in your life, you may find that you cannot stop seeing the clarks, scotts and rogers in your world
  • if you are a clark and you learn about the worldview of the Outsider, you may find yourself becoming frustrated with other clarks in your life, when they are being extremely (and self-destructively/defeatingly) clarklike and in the middle of your impassioned (and detailed) and totally correct rant (meant to help them overcome this), you will realize that you, yourself, are still subject to these same…. conditions of the reality of the Outsider
  • …however, with this realization you will find hope, not only for the person you know you can help, but for yourself…somehow, (you’re not really sure how, but you know it’s got to be true)
  • if you are a scott and you learn about the Wakefield Doctrine enough to find yourself thinking, ‘hey! thats one of those clarks, I knew there was something I liked about him/her‘, the next thing you will think is:  ”what the fuck?!  I let them get away!!”  (but you will laugh it off and go find yourself some rogers, they’re easy)
  • if you’re a roger and you learn enough about the Wakefield Doctrine you may find yourself not enjoying the good-natured ribbing you and everyone at your table in the cafeteria are giving that new girl in the sales department (after she’s left and returned to her desk) and even though it’s a fact that she is strange with that hair and those boots and how she seems to talk to herself… it starts to bother you about how all your friends are laughing at her, but you decide that you’re be extra nice the next time…which makes you feel good about yourself…so good that you decide you really should stop by her desk and tell her about your decision to help her

Hey!!  I need to write a Post about the Wakefield Doctrine! (lol, yeah I know)  Anyway…if you were an Editor and I had a book on your desk (this book has everything about the Doctrine that you know and everything as it is contained in the pages of the blog) what 2 suggestions would you make?

Daily A’s and Z’ss  Challenge

Lizzi:  she gots some good stuff going on over at Consideringseses 

zoe:   very interesting (and informative) Post  I really like the kind of information that she’s providing in these Posts… the stuff you never thought to look up, but it will totally amaze the friends the next time you’re all hanging out playing… ‘how long can this roger go on about how intelligent they want every to believe they are‘ …. lol  (yes, this appears to be Filter-less Wednesday!)  Read This Thing!!

Jean  no!  no!  wait!! this line alone is worth the trip,  ”She looks to be around 80 feet tall and she’s only two years old! I wonder how tall she will be when she is TEN?

Dyanne  oh Dy….annnne!!  wakey wakey!!!  (while we allow the time zone to adjust, here is our scott-of-the-Prairie’s post from yesterday:  SSSS

* to be fair and, god forbid we should run the risk of disappointing anyone, following is an actual Desert Island joke:

A blonde, a brunette and a redhead were stuck on an island for many, many years until one day they found a magic lamp.

They rubbed it hard and out popped a genie. He said that he could only give three wishes so since there were three girls, each would get one wish.

The redhead went first. “I hate it here. It is too hot and boring. I want to go home!” “Okay,” replied the genie.

And off she went.

Then the brunette went. “I miss my family, my friends and relatives. I want to go home, too!!”

And off she went.

The blonde started crying and said, “I wish my friends were back here!”

Share

send your Comments and Complaints to the Wakefield Doctrine (“it’s only Tuesday… we’re just getting warmed-up”)

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

 

you have zoe to thank for this visual….

you have zoe to thank for this visual….

I am very liked this site. Its an insightful subject. It help me really much to solve some troubles. Its prospect are so fantastic and functioning type so fast.*  

Hey speaking of clarks, I ran into the clark at my gas station yesterday and he said, (without my asking), ‘I went to that website you mentioned.’ And I was all, ‘well, what did you think?‘ and he said, ‘it’s interesting but the site is kinda hard to figure where everything is‘ and I then said,  ”yeah, my writing is not all that good“.

Hey, speaking of clarks, Lizzi did her ‘S’ Post (as part of her participation in the A to Z Challenge) and went with ‘Stream of Consciousness’ as a Theme… (jeez)

Have I said it recently, that, of the three personality types, clarks are the only ones likely to come up with something like the Wakefield Doctrine, which is kinda cool, but clarks are also the only one of the three who needs to come up with something like the Wakefield Doctrine?**

In case anyone gets to thinking that this is all, ‘nobody knows the trouble I seen‘ here today, the answer is ‘No’ (unless you’re a clark, then the answer is ‘not no’, but then, I didn’t really need to say that, did I’)

don Juan*** speaks of the danger of routines, in the sense that our capacity to grow is a function of our success in adapting. In a weird sort of way, rogers represent the strength of stability and scotts demonstrate the power of action and moving forward and clarks,  us ‘gee-clark-you-sometimes-start-to-make-so-much-sense-and-then-you’re-off-somewhere-I-just-can’t-follow-it’s-almost-as-if-you-are-doing-it-deliberately’  we clarks have the creativity that allows for genuine change and improvement, not just re-arrange the parts ‘improvement’. Once again, I believe I see the necessity to develop the attributes of all three worldviews in some sort of dynamic balance in order to fully exploit the potential of this here personality theory here.

(lol  yes, I will have to go out into the world and function in the normal, ‘real’ world today.  hell, no one ever said that the worldview of a clark was comfortable! But what the hell, right? I saw Lizzi in one place in her clarkcycle yesterday and another clark at a different in his cycle. Some clarks at this very moment are in the I-can-do-this-reallife-thing! phase  and other clarks are at the very bottom of the ‘here-you-are-again-back-at-the-bottom-alone-how-can-you-doubt-it?’ part of our worldviews. The point? I can identify with other clarks. They survive the bad and they earn the good. So can I.)

Friends in the Ether… the continuing  ’A- who- Z? Challenge

zoe:  I’m not even gonna try to describe today’s Post  other than (in a good and loving way), what tha fuck??  (2 things: a) who has the skills and and the manuel dexterity; 2) the first thing that came to mind was my youth, when I would often hide in a book when my own brain or the real world was too much and the visual was: I get into the safety of bed to dive into a book and I open the book and like the iconic scene in Alien  the flowers spring out….  lol  hey, it is cool but you have to go to her blog and see it for yourself…. Reader?  do me a favor, after you read zoe’s post write a Comment and include either: I love this idea or I feel like Harry Dean Stanton!

jen-ay:  (no, no one here thought that you may have actually eaten that sandwich that day…. lol)

Dyanne:  (hey! Dyanne!!  hurry!! we’re one letter ahead again!!)

Lizzi:  what can I say? If you think this post is best responded to with a:  ”Hey! you should cheer up, your life ain’t so bad! If you want to hear how tough it can be, let me tell you about what I went through”  then you’re  a roger   if your reaction is one of puzzlement that is over-ridden by protectiveness (looking around daring anyone to take advantage) you are a scott.
Pretty simple, isn’t it?

 

 

*(not a real Comment. I found this in the Spam folder when I was looking for Dyanne, who was, like, writing Comments and such, but never having them get through… it was the strangest thing.)

** I said, something like the Wakefield Doctrine… rogers

** Carlos Castaneda’s character

Share

M Day the Wakefield Doctrine (insert philophobic saying here)

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

Blausen_0644_Mitochondria

Brief Monday morning Post (to be annotated in the afternoon, during a planned break from appears to be a rather busy day).

the Wakefield Doctrine is a way to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. The goal of this exercise is to know better how the other person (or ourselves) ‘relates themselves to the world around them’. If we succeed in recognizing the worldview of the other person, we will know more about them than they know about themselves*.

Friends of the Doctrine_A-to-Z Challenge_First Day of the Workweek

Lizzi:  Are is for Review (or Revue)

zoe: oddly enough she has Reveal as the are

Jean:  bringing it all home, our Jean’s Fictionary entry

Dyanne:

 

*unless, of course, they are followers of the Wakefield Doctrine! In which case they will make us in the first three minutes of our trying to understand them… ya know?

Share

TT-oh-T the Wakefield Doctrine ‘so a man comes on and tells me, how white my shirts can be’

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

DawesGlacier-TongassNationalForestAlaska-istock_1

It is TT Saturdee, the sun is shining (which is good), the temperature are in the life-supporting 40s and there is a full day of work waiting for me, like gym class when it rains and the horrible ‘bad-worse’ possibility races towards you:  dodge ball or square dancing. Talk about lose-lose.

But this is a grat list Post, so a list of things that I am/feel/should-be/try-to-encourage-the-feelings of gratitude in my life is what I am damned and determined to write, this morning.

1) Vidchats.  Every Friday night since, like forever it seems, we have been doing video chats. They are always worth the time I spend there.

2)….  ok, it’s here… I know it’s in my head*  wait! no yeah  lets come back to Number two

3) Now, I know I’m in trouble… I just Numbered out 1-10 what is almost always a sign of being ‘on the ropes’  gratitudistically-speaking that is  (my honest self-acceptance is surely something any reasonable person would feel grateful for!

4) the freedom to end a sentence on a preposition. I will, in fact, claim this as an Item because I’ve just spent the last 10 minutes (in ‘non-typing time’ which, as we all know, is the variable equivalent of time reading  to time writing, in my case 1 minute of reading time equals 8 minutes of NTT (non-typing-time)

5) I need to list my ‘work’ as it is something that I am grateful for even when the stress levels get to the point that make standing on the deck of a boat in the middle of the ocean, picking up dead fish seem like a much, much better way to earn a living.

6) My vfriends  (who I may need to list individually in order to complete this list any time before the 4th of July) they are good thing.

7) time and necessity require that I invoke the dreaded, all-conversation-in-the-room- suddlenly-stops Rule 9.3 (of the Book of Secret Rules**) and present what I have written so far as TToT #44.5 (of course, 90.3 does require that the ‘second’ ‘half’ be completed within 24 hours or a visit from (one of) the SevenGuard Virgins  (and it’s no likely to be ‘Sleepy’ or ‘Happy’) can be expected.

8) ” …Indoor plumbing……”

9) “….a car in which to do vlogs and annoy vfriends with your lit seatbelt light”

10)  and friends like Christine to provide the ‘note from home’  to get me through todays Post!

 

Friends-A2Z-here’s what they up to:

Lizzi  this

Dyanne:  where the hell are my car keys…

zoe: that

Jean  …that’s right!  2 clarks and 2 scotts! damn, hadn’t thought about that

* like a clark spends an inordinate amount of time anywhere else!

** Secret Book of Rules

Ten Things of Thankful

 

 Your hosts


Share

Fairly Good Friday the Wakefield Doctrine …random thoughts and observations and such

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

(…ha, ha)

(…ha, ha)

Hey! just as a Treat for our Readers… lets just go with a bullet-point Post today!  (yeah, that way you don’t have to read anything that is not:

  • funny
  • clever
  • insightful
  • did we say ‘funny’
  • yeah,  ’ha’  ’ha’

Apparently I forgot that there was no FTSF this week. (Holy shot! Did you hear what I said?  The manner in which this simple admission of forgetfulness has been expressed? If you can identify with it, (as in, ‘well, of course, how else would you say it?) then you are certainly a clark. Of course, if you cannot or have an immediate objection to it, then you might must be one of the other two, in which case, you would be more likely to identify, if we phrased in one of the following two ways: a)  ”damn! totally forgot the FTSF, hey you wanna do something?”   2) “what? no I didn’t!  you were supposed to remind me! how could you let this happen?”

Apparently it is Easter this weekend. Being in the business I am and being a clark, I am not overly aware of holidays, secular or religious. However, being a clark, I am willing to offer a perspective on holidays (religious or secular), which I do in a reprint/re-phrase/mash-up/block-quoted Section at the bottom here.

 

Friends of the Doctrine who are still doing Battle with the Alphabet

zoe:  it’s about her dog, how could you not like it?  a Skip by any other name….

Jean:  today, from her excellent Fictionary a thing about stars and sisters and (though she did not intent, an oblique reference to Castanda…)

Dyanne: out of the Plains, riding a fiery…. sorry!  wrong fictional metaphor   our scott in the Midwest has a fairly depressing cautionary-ette tail (ha ha) (well, you have to read the post to get it)

Lizzi:  last, but hardly least  our own Sammantha Johnson…  (the first covert operative of the Wakefield Doctrine) lets give it up for  Lizzi

 

Tonight is Friday. That means it’s vidchat night at the Jetsons!!    as in…

the Wakefield Doctrine presents

Lizzi and Michelle’s Awesome bloggers Vidchat!

on google+ hangouts

the link to the party will appear just before the start time of 7:30  right here:  https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/7ecpirr699b0n1ltv57mn9qrhc

YouTube Preview Image

Hey! what’s the deal with the double-neck Strat?!  New Readers asking this question are advised to address their inquires to the Progenitor roger  (while not necessarily an ‘expert’, he is a roger, therefore will speak with such conviction (and supported by voluminous footnotes that are focused on real people in the real world having real emotional experiences with the issue) and authority,  that you will surely feel that your question has been aptly and amply answered!

In honor of the Easter holiday, we offer,  a ‘reprint Post’ that has footnotes and corrections and abridgments.

 We say with complete authority that the Wakefield Doctrine never challenges or otherwise criticizes  (an) individual’s religious beliefs, unless it forms the basis of a really good Post. But since you raised the question, lets look at what the Wakefield Doctrine  tells us about religion and it’s appeal to each of the three personality types.

When it comes to religion and the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, the answer boils down to two words:  rogers!  It is not just that rogers are the personality type that is drawn to religion, they are the one who invented it!  The link between the rogerian personality type and religion is so strong as to form the foundation of the description of the rogerian worldview.

As we do know, that it is integral to the rogerian worldview  there be organised religion. This is true simply because rogers have the need not only to establish rules and order for everyone, but to have these rules posess a degree of moral imperative that can only derive from a deity or deities

(The rogerian nature of organised religion is so clear and well-established, we will not spend any further time in today’s Post examining it. The  link (‘we do know’) will take you to a Post that goes into more depth on the subject; if you have questions about rogers and religion, write us a Comment and you will be answered.) (Ed. “we have come to be more….er,  ecumenical about religions and our rogerian brethren. Simply put, rogers are religious, clarks are spiritual and scotts… well, that’s kind of a long story… lol) (no!  not a bad thing, it’s just that for scotts religion and spirituality are more about the features of the environment and therefore can be good or bad. We also need to address the life of the pack, when trying to understand scotts and religion. (the Doctrine is gender neutral!) …we usually will see religion (as encountered as a feature of their environment) being perceived as positive more often with scottian females than scottian males. and the reason you are all surely jumping ahead of us… her pack!  Exactly! scottian females are ridiculously/ferociously protective of her pack* and this protectiveness extends well beyond the simple ‘against outside threats’… it includes what she perceives as learning to be a good….lifeform.  (Yeah, you’re right!  we have stumbled upon a topic of scope that really needs to have a Post devoted to expressing the idea, remind us in the week upcoming to write a Post: scotts and their own packs)

If rogers have the baseline lock on organised religion, where does that leave our other two personality types? The genius of the Wakefield Doctrine, is found in the fact that the answer…lies in the perception of the world that clarks and scotts. If you consider the nature of the world that the clark or the scott is perceiving, you will apprehend the value and role that a major life feature such as religion holds for them.

clarks?
, they’re easy! clarks believe in the unbelievable. Unfortunately this capacity prevents them from ever having complete faith in anything. In regards to religious dogma, clarks will give convincing lip service, particularly the clarklike females (who have a slight edge over their male counterparts in terms of protective coloration);  a clarklike female, especially those with a family unit will conform to the local norms for religious activities. But the odds are, even these devoutly religious clarkmoms will be filling their downsprings heads with all sorts of apostolic nonsense at random points in their upbringing. If backed into a corner, most clarks will confess to a definite spiritual tropism, but you better have a thesaurus and a comfortable chair nearby! If you read the page on clarks, one of the primary characteristics of this type is the love of knowledge…useful knowledge…useless knowledge, knowledge for good and knowledge to anger people, does not matter to your typical clark.   So as to organised religion, lets put the clarks in the woman’s auxiliary section.

scotts
 now,  they totally relate to religion, even organised religion! scotts relate to the ‘product’/ the result/ the ‘output’, if you will, of organised religion. (Ed note: this section is written more to the male scott, though not inappropriate, as the Doctrine is gender neutral, it might leave a new Reader with the impression that all scotts will view religion simply as an opportunity, as opposed to a skill, which in the case of the female scott, it can be… I’ll leave the bullet-points in place, but check back for a Post on the scottian female and her pack.)
There was a ‘restaurant’  called The Automat, it was sort of cool for us suburban kids in the early 60′s to hear about a restaurant that was totally mechanised. (This was all pre-fast food as we know it today). The Automat’s ‘hook’, was to offer a variety of choices of foods to customers with no intermediary such a waiter or waitress, everything there was available and purely the choice of the hungry customers.
….Throughout history, organised religions have basically served as Automat for scotts.

  • hey scott! bored and want to stir up some excitement?….we got your Crusades, right here!!
  • hey scott, stuck in a agrarian culture, nothing to do…why not pitch a tent and have a ‘ole down-home’ revial meetin
  • oh, scott! you are soo stuck in a modern civilized society…had you given any thought to perhaps joining the priesthood?

OK…  damn! I so need to go back and re-write a lot of the Posts… not for content or anything, but just for directness and readability. oh well, I read once that the Beatles thought that they should go back and redo ‘Revolver’ but everyone screamed and, besides, the acid started to kick in and so they forgot about it.**

 

* not that the other two are not also very strong in this regard, clarklike mothers especially!  but there is a characteristic difference ‘tween scottian and clarklike and rogerian motherthings… the scottian mother will be wary from the beginning and therefore less likely to find herself surprised and then her response is simple: fight or flight  fight being, of course, no holds barred…. the clarklike mother will often be caught by surprise, especially if ‘the attack’ appears to be directed at her, but if the children are involved there will be a ‘no cost too great response’ up to and including her own well-being. (there is a distinction: a scott will be willing to suffer injury or death in the process of defense/attack but  the clarklike mother will consider guaranteed self-destruction as simply one of the options… it’s a distinct of style as opposed to substance).

** yes, yes you read that right… I did compare the Wakefield Doctrine blog to the Beatles

 

Share

© 2009-2014 Francis Clark Farley All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright