(“a piece of the action…”)

Lady Downspring here.  I’ve decided to suit up again.  I quite enjoy it on occasion but I digress.  My first and last Post for this blog was about a year ago.  “What is wrong with that?” you may ask.  Everything and nothing at all.  I am, after all, a clark.  It is within my purview to procrastinate, take for granted, lose urgency/energy, be fearful, wonder that there is anything pertinent I can contribute, castigate myself – wait, that’s reserved for my “other” friends…..  to the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers.  So why would I think I have nothing pertinent, nothing of value to say? What is it that keeps me reading but not writing? Could it be connected to how I view the world? (with fear CY – with fear.  the clue to your clarklike nature lies within the domain of fear.)

 The question and subsequent question of the day for the veteran “25” and new readers alike?  “How does one learn to view the world differently?”,  “Can I view the world differently?”  This presupposes the desire (“shh… no, not now…”) to change how one views the world.  First, let us assume the position (no glenn. get up!) that one has identified oneself as predominantly a clark, scott or roger. What would be next?  If you identified yourself as having clarklike “symptoms” not to worry too much (yet). You will continue to read the Wakefield Doctrine as long as it amuses and challenges you, you can learn from it; you do not find yourself distracted by something else.  If on the other hand you recognize your primary status as that of a scott, (no!. all egos must, I repeat must….….. check at the door) then it depends on how hungry you are and whether there is enough to satisfy you.  Thirdly, if you lay claim to being of rogerian descent then it becomes a little more complex.  Assumptions have been made.  If the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine aligns with your interpretation, with your world view at the moment, Godspeed.

clarks! This session you may sit.  I will speak of our little scottian friends.  “You!  In the seat by the door!  Go get that roger and drag him back here! ” rogers do not like to be told what to do (unless it is by a scottian female – a male roger will always defer to the scottian female.) For more on how the Wakefield Doctrine can be applied to relationships I will refer you to our very own Ms. AKH.)

 To be scottian is to be dominant or submissive (to another scott only).  One or the other.  There are dominant scotts and lesser scotts. (not in a diminutive way)  Keep in mind: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel, you will no doubt catch on quickly to the nuances of the many ways a clark views the world, how a scott views the immediate landscape, and how a roger views the world as it should be.  scotts are high energy individuals with a short attention span.  They make decisions quickly (because they are so certain of themselves).  scotts can be quick to anger however they hardly ever hold a grudge.  And why? scotts are of the present.  They like to be the focus of attention. (down boy, almost finished)

scotts are often misunderstood.  There is no delicate way to say it – they are often thought of as assholes.  Many of them are but more often than not scotts possess a soft, tender side.  My advice:  learn the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers and you will learn how to handle not only the scotts in your life but the clarks and rogers as well.  It may take a little time but once you catch on it can not only be fun but it can bring positive results to both your work life and home life.  Who doesn’t want to live a less complicated life?

View the vid clip and take note to the scotts attempting to establish ranking.  Take further note to the ultimate, good natured (but do not test me) roger that is our Capt. Kirk. (“No way like the Federation way”.)  

Next sessionWhere there is a clark there is always a scott/where there is a scott there is always a clark.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiAtCD-gIM(a piece of the action….”)

 

 

 

Share

Hey! alguien mejor decirle a Miguel, tan preocupado como él se acerca de los exámenes sorpresa, hoy realmente hay uno!

You will all take out a Number 5 pencil and put it on the desk/tabletop/lap/really-unattractive-roll-of-fat in front of you.

students, yes real or imagined students You will also (imagine) a Test Booklet,which is sealed. Do not Open it! We will tell you when to open it. Simply sit/recline/lean or otherwise maintain your posture while the Instructions are Read to you.

People keep asking us, “when are you people going to come up with a Test that will tell me which one of these three types I am”? (The implied statement that, “I am too mentally lazy/crippled/retarded/restrained/uninspired”, will have to go un-answered until another Post at another time.) Today we have a Test.

Since the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is culture neutral and universally applicable and therefore Readers taking this Test today may be from any part of the world, there will be Monitors available during the Test Period. If your ‘translator application’ produces a unintelligible answer or if a cultural reference leaves you muttering, “Kaj za vraga! Tisti, zahodnjaki ne more mogoče, da je self-absorbent!”   Then raise your hand/click on email/submit a Comment and one of our Monitors/DownSprings will come to you and answer your question.
Your Monitors are: DownSpring#1, Ms. AKH and the Progenitor roger.  (If you simply need to go to the bathroom and don’t mind the risk of being exposed to public humiliation, you might ask Downspring glenn for assistance, but you have been forewarned).

Monitors? Please stand up/Comment Briefly/Digitally wave/or otherwise indicate that you paying some attention to this thing.  And of course, for any extreme stress reactions, Mr. B will be in the back of the “room” with plenty of sawdust. ( Señor Miguel, ¿tomó mi sugerencia de que se saltan el desayuno de esta mañana? No, obviamente no estaba bromeando! )

Alright then, to the Test.

There will be three sections in the form of Polls. Take each of three and note your point total for each, it will come into play when it is time to score. (…Very funny, Jimmy, I am sure Ms. AKH will be quite amused...)

Pencils Down!

That was just to warm us up. Before we continue the Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day,  consider this:  Whether it is at school when we are young or in the workplace as we are older, even  in advanced age, we have to take Tests.  If there is a time when each of the three types are at ease taking a test, which are which.
Lets rephrase that: Tests in school and tests in the workplace and tests in the retirement homes, who does best in which? A clark, a scott or a roger. (Now it would hardly be a Test if I give you the frickin answer right here, would it?) While you are thinking it over, lets take another Poll. Pick up your “pencils”…now!

 

 

How are we doing?  Monitors? Anyone seen Miguel? Alright  one more Poll then you can go to your homes and write us a nice Comment and maybe you will get your Test Results in time for them to do you any good!

Mr B? Some “file-out-in-an-orderly-manner” music?

 

 

Share

About: the Wakefield Doctrine

     Once upon a time, in a land not very far from Clark’s house… there were three atypical college friends who engaged in many of the atypical activities of their day. They went to school; they played guitars at ear-splitting volumes in dorm rooms, and sneered derisively at those who objected; one drank too, too much; one not at all, but subsisted on Oreos and Coke. One became a Baptist with a capital ” B”. They played in rock bands, worked all sorts of jobs, one got married way too soon. They all wrestled with the Issues Of Their Day, with varying degrees of resolve and/or success.  And in spite of all the atypical ups and downs, they managed to form a very unique bond. And , to their surprise, the bond has lasted much longer than any one of them might have thought. Longer than some marriages, jobs, bands, or Baptist dogma. And after many hours of conversation about just about everything turned into years and decades of same, there came to be what was, and is now, referred to as … the Wakefield Doctrine.

     Psychology and psychiatry texts  make constant reference to type A/B/C personalities and their interactions. We are somewhat along those same lines. For us, those references have evolved into our Wakefield Doctrine, which we have found to be much more palatable. To err may be human, but to create a categorization system that explains all of human behavior in a somewhat cryptic nutshell is absolutely divine. And, we have noticed along the way, a heck of a lot of fun. In an “improvisational academia” sort of way, we gleefully invent terms as we go along to describe conditions and situations that may not have existed previously. And yet, our system also works perfectly well when taken perfectly and totally seriously. 

     The basic premise is that there are three fundamental personality types; and much can be known and discovered about oneself ( and any other aspect of life ) by learning to identify your own basic type; how to identify the types of others; and then consider all the ramifications of the interactions. In short…this explains everything, but only from a point of view that holds human dynamics as the prime component.

 

The Wakefield Doctrine is built upon the idea that everyone experiences the world/reality differently, from one of three overlapping but distinctive perspectives. It also proposes that our personalities are but  a result of our perception, of our habitual responses to the world. The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that this characteristic perception of reality can be grouped into three distinct types, called for reasons stated elsewhere, clarks, scotts and rogers.

Born with the potential to view the world in one of these three ways, all people possess the characteristics of all (three) but soon (by age 7 or so) ‘become one of the three.  Put another way: we also possess the potential to see the world as a clark or a scott or a roger. It is only the predominance of qualities from one (over the other two) that makes us what we are. No one is only clarklike or scottian or rogerian.

The value of the Wakefield Doctrine is that once you can see the world ‘through the eyes’ of another, behavior becomes understandable. If a scott sees the world as a predator (would) then all action is predicated on interacting with the world as a predator. This is distinctly different from a roger, who seeing the world as a social being, predicates action and reaction on the basis of a world in which the intereactions of the herd is the dominant theme.

The above notwithstanding, following is the ‘eureka moment’ for the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers (the Wakefield Doctrine): 

At one time in the past, Scott (the progenitor scott) worked at a music store doing, among other things, repair on equipment. Visiting him one day I witnessed an interaction with a customer that was to be my eureka moment.

A customer came into the store and presented to Scott a ‘double cassette recorder’  This machine had dual volume tone controls (for each cassette) and it had one master volume control.   The customer said to  Scott, “this thing is brand new, it worked for a couple of days, then it stopped working entirely, I can’t figure out what is wrong”.

Scott looked at the recorder briefly, took some electrical tape from under the counter, carefully put the tape over the master control volume (which he turned back up), slid the recorder over the counter and said to the customer, “there its all right now”.

The customer  tried the recorder, ran it through it’s paces, saw that it worked like new and walked out of the store without another word; totally satisfied that his cassette recorded had been fixed.

From this point to the present day, I have been watching the behavior of others with the thought in mind, “What kind of world does that person live in?”

Share