the Wakefield Doctrine<title> (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:54:04 +0000 en-US hourly 1 23rd of 30 the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:52:54 +0000

Related Posts:

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


Surely today must be a rambling and or otherwise pointless Post, non? (as opposed to a Pointillist Post?) Maybe. Maybe not.


I made reference this Sunday past (I love that ‘construction’…. ‘this (whatever time reference) past’  anyone out there know what it’s called? (no, roger…. I don’t believe it’s called ‘cutsey archaic writing style’ I’m pretty sure there’s no such a thing. But thanks for suggesting it.) Hey! speaking of rogers…. a person alone in an empty house: rogers are most likely to have the TV on, not because they are watching it…they might be doing the dishes, paying bills (and yes, rogers ‘love’ paying bills, it’s so orderly and responsible), even vacuuming  the house…the TV will be on (if no TV then the radio….preferably talk radio). clarks? they’ll leave the TV off, but they will talk to themselves… out loud.  scotts…. are you kidding? stay home in an empty house? hell…there’s stuff to do!  people to meet! cars to chase!
(this, btw, is a good illustration of the variety of uses to the Wakefield Doctrine. ok, so rogers like to have the TV on when alone… it’s not just to keep themselves company, it is to ‘be in the Herd’, be a part of the world(Herd). They may not be consciously  listening directly to the TV (or the radio…even the talk radio shows), but they are aware of it and it is describing the world, on some level/to some extent and that’s what rogers are about, being in the world of the known, the tradition, the….continuity of people.)

Issue 2. (I might not complete this, I seem to be a on a bit of a roll, what with describing how to infer the worldview of a person and, more importantly, how to expand the metaphor (of the Wakefield Doctrine) in order to enhance your insight into the lives of the people around you. Yeah… sorry, Lizzi!  postponing the ‘Boy in the Orange Sweater’ story. Thanks for the suggestion, I did find the story among. What I would like to do, time permitting, is tell the story again and then reprint the story as I wrote it the first time. I’d be interested if there are any difference in the re-telling that may serve as indicators of any effect of the Doctrine on me.

Instead of that, for today’s 23rd Post, hows about some quick tips on determining the predominate worldview of a person?

  • look at them (be careful now… some are very alert, might be best to observe from some ‘cover’)
  • scotts: easiest of the three! two words: ‘alert’  scotts you can see on first glance, they’re paying attention, look at the face first, specifically the eyes. there is a look to scotts that are unmistakable. posture is good, very physical, tendency  to move quickly and decisively (even with crutches)
  • clarks: look for bad posture and a distant gaze, listen for low volume-difficult-to-understand-but-distinct-enough-to-think-you-should-listen speech, dress is on the….eclectic side  (guy clarks pretty much will wear what amounts, in a fashion-sense as a tent, unless they decide to go totally contrarian (a clark contrarian?? no way!), in which case they’ll be the high school student in the 3 piece suit and wingtip shoes… the female clarks  look to the face and head, followed by everything else… take a note pad (where the scottian person reveals their relationship to the world around them in the alertness in their gaze, clarks will be trying to hide, amidst so much fashion-dissonnace that they should able to make a quick getaway (if they feel they are being overly scrutinized.) clarklike female…prefers the couture of the House of Androgyny
  • rogers:  they are of the Herd, they are the excel-by-conformity crowd… dress well, not distinctively. If it’s popular, they will wear it. (hey! want to hear a ‘true’ example of the rogerian worldview? woman I knew, whenever there was reason to have a formal sort of dinner, she would find the latest ‘Home Lovel’y magazine, go to the dinner and recipes section and totally reproduce the dinner that is illustrated…right down to the centerpiece… but that’s not the rogerian part! beautiful table, full of what appears to be delicious (if not somewhat exotic) food …and no salt and no pepper and no butter on the table…. (‘why on earth would you need those? if properly prepared, it’s guaranteed to be good… they said’)
    with each of the ‘other two’ worldviews we suggested you could identify on the basis of appearance?  …ever see the TV commercial for Angie’s List? ….lol  yeah
  • Observe the person in real life, preferably in a situation where they are interacting with other people
  • ok? now, Step 1: throw out the ‘no-fricken-way-they’re-a’ and that leaves you with two worldviews. Step 2: decide between the two. (With some of the difficult calls to make, such as between a ‘strong roger‘ and a ‘tired scott‘ you may need to continue observing them interacting with the world. don’t be afraid to go up and talk to them…well, sometimes, be afraid.)
  • the point of this? Simple. You are trying to infer how that person ‘relates themselves to the world around them’. Know this and you will not only be able to predict their actions and reactions, you will know more about them than they know about themselves




]]> 10
Post 22 the Wakefield Doctrine (‘so…tell us again about how each of the three types live in a different world’) Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:18:17 +0000

Related Posts:

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


Finally! this 30 day challenge has become difficult! Prior to this morning, I haven’t had to sit and stare at the blank computer screen, any longer than would be normal,  until this morning.

Wait!  (ticker tape noise in the background)…. this just in!!

["Your list clearly has many a story behind it.. stories which I hope to hear one day. And then there is the lingering thought of what titles, names and experiences would populate my own list. I love this! Love it as only a Clark trying to pass as a real person could love it!"]

“Your list clearly has many a story behind it… there is the lingering thought of what titles, names and experiences would populate my own list. …as only a Clark trying to pass as a real person could love it!”

…comment on yesterday’s Post from writer of Achieving Clarity

Above are two versions of the quote (of a Comment), that forms the basis of today’s Post. Both are included that I verify my status as a clark (predominant) with a secondary scottian and weak tertiary rogerian aspect.

Sorry. I’ll try to be more direct, more scottian, if you will.
Reading ‘Achieving’s’ Comment on yesterday’s TToT Post made me feel good. What makes (the Comment) the basis for a Post is not what she wrote, rather it is in how I related myself to it.
I read the Comment. I thought, ‘I should use that Comment to start a Post’… I read the Comment again and I thought, ‘yeah, but I gots to edit out some of it or I’ll sound like I’m being….’

cha-ching!  That, that part about, how, I imagined, Readers would respond, were I to simply cut and paste the entire Comment (into a Post).  That’s what today’s Post is all about.  My primary concern about using the Comment was:  what would Readers think of me if I put in the entire Comment? This little/subjective/totally-in-my-head assessment of a future event in which un-specified people would react in a certain way?  that is an example of me ‘relating myself to the world around me.’

(You know what I like the most about you Readers? It’s that no matter how different you are from me, you have that quality. Curiosity and self-confidence when you come across an odd idea… an idea that would make 80% of the general population immediately ‘turn the page’ while muttering something about “…frickin wasting my time.”
you Readers, on the other hand,  will either laugh or smile or raise an eyebrow and  think to yourself,  “ok… I got a little free time. show me something weird/fun/interesting.”  ( Now, some of you will say out loud, “hey!! come here look at what they’re is trying to get away with today! what a riot this Doctrine it… I love this guy!”)

So. Today we have a real world example of the core principle of the Wakefield Doctrine. The reason we make such a big deal out of learning to recognize the characteristics of the three worldviews (clarks/Outsiders and scotts/Predators and rogers/Herd Members)  is it puts us in a position to appreciate ‘how the other person is relating themselves to the world around them’. The Doctrine is not about ‘knowing about the other person’… hell! any personality types systems will let you do that! The Wakefield Doctrine is about ‘appreciating the world as the other person is experiencing it’.

What happened to me this morning is that I saw a Comment that complimented me, my writing, the Post, the effects of applying the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and I instantly/instinctively/naturally thought about it’s effect on the Readers in ‘the world out there’ and created what I thought was the best strategy.

that is the Wakefield Doctrine. for me, a clark (Outsider worldview), the world and everything and everyone in it is ‘out there…apart-from-me’ and (as an Outsider), my primary concern is to not be too noticeable, to not standout too much (my secondary scottian aspect is what will make sure I’m not ignored…lol). And so, I thought of the best way to edit Achieving’s  Comment. That is an example of my clarklike strategy.  This, of course, applies equally to those of you who are scotts or rogers, consistent with the character of your personal reality.




]]> 12
#21 #thewakefielddoctrine #3worldviews #clarksscottsrogers #itsforyounotthem! Sun, 21 Sep 2014 14:15:47 +0000

Related Posts:

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


Grateful for:

1) Books that connected within the child that I was at time in life that I read them:

  • Tom Swift Jr
  • Bullfinch’s Mythology
  • Stranger in a Strange Land
  • the Teachings of don Juan (a Yaqui Way of Knowledge)

5) Records that connected me to a world that I really thought was out there:

  • Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries
  • Herb Alpert ‘A Taste of Honey’*
  • Led Zeppelin  ’Led Zeppelin’
  • Jimi Hendrix Experience ‘Are you Experienced?’

10) People that connected with me…at a point in my life that,  I did not have a prayer in the world of appreciating the long-term effects of my interactions with them:

  • Nancy Jackson
  • Sister Mary Imelda
  • Miss Hiester
  • Coach Collins

3) Situations (that we all encounter) the effects and repercussions are still felt:

  • Swimming Lessons at age 10
  • Stuck in a car in a snowstorm on the Bourne Bridge
  • The boy in the orange sweater
  • Tufts Small Animal Hospital

2) this has been one of those TToTs that cause me to push back from the keyboard and say, ‘no frickin way!  don’t even think about hitting publish.’

4) lol…. (oh, yes I did!)

6) this Post today does, in fact, serve as an illustration of one of the principles  of the Wakefield Doctrine i.e. ‘manifesting’. We all have similar experiences as we live life; you buy gas at the 7/11, you study really hard for SATs, you get turned down by the girl of your dreams, you feel amazed at the person that your husband as learned to become, your child makes you wonder how you managed to be so fortunate….all the countless parts of a day-in-a-life. However, there are three personality types (in the Wakefield Doctrine) and there is no dividing up/off all these events and feelings, hopes and a-damn-good-job-for-a-guy-like-you, we all experience all of them. It’s how they ‘manifest’ for us, as individuals, that tells us the character of our worldview.

7) (New Readers?) 3 worldviews of the Doctrine:

  1. the world of the Outsider (clarks) in which the world is out there and we are here left to figure it all out, not really introverts as much as people who are trying to ‘pass as real people’…. funny thing about clarks, ‘we do not seek the spotlight, but we do not tolerate being ignored’
  2. the life of the Predator (scotts) the world is here, not next Tuesday and notbecause she said she never wanted to see me again, I can’t go on‘, scotts act quickly and decisively and often correctly, they are mercurial in temperament, yet totally social. At a party the scottian man or woman will ‘work the room’ (or if they want a rest) they will be entertaining the people gathered around them
  3. the reality of the Herd Member (rogers) the term Herd is sometimes read as being a mindless drone… nothing could be further from the truth…rogers are independent, action oriented, emotional….members of the Herd. rogers wake up every morning with a-certainty-that-does-not-allow-or-require-or-stimulate-a-question that there is a Right way to do things and that is their primary mission, to carry on whatever tradition of correct action shapes their individual lives. They are social the way that books in a library could be said to be social, i.e. there is a connection between and among them all, not necessarily one book on shelf A (2nd Floor Antiquities Collection) and Shelf E2 (Auto Mechanics for the Hobbyist)

8)  Man… you know how on some Posts you write and you write and you enjoy it and all…. (then) you stop and you think, ‘damn! gots to be 2000 words better stop here‘  I did and looked and said,  ”600 words here?!!”

9) If I wasn’t sincere in my efforts to write about things I am grateful for, I wouldn’t stop at Number 9….

10) 1.3 y’all …. (despite or maybe because of  the très weird Post and all…lol)



Ten Things of Thankful


 Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group


]]> 17
TToT #20 (in the 30 Day Challenge) the Wakefield Doctrine “a day through the passenger’s side window” Sat, 20 Sep 2014 12:07:40 +0000

Related Posts:

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


The week we will start both with the first Item (of thankful) and the ‘raison d’être’ for this weekend’s TToT Post. (Well, I’ll explain just what the hell I mean by that, and no, I cannot simply say ‘here’s 10 things and a buncha pitchas’)

1) I’m grateful for the symmetry of the worldviews, (for those of us aware of such things).  I’m referring to zoe’s Pictorial Post of last week that. It came to mind as I was, not-quite-consciously-trying-to-figure-out-what-the-hell-I-was-going-to-do-for-a-TT0T-Post-this-weekend.  I thought, ‘well here I am, driving around for the entire afternoon, maybe I can do something clever with photos’. ..and I was all, ‘hell yeah!’


2) the subtitle to this TToT Post refers to the various bodies of water you would have been able to see out your window if you were with me yesterday afternoon.


 3) I’m not certain that this Post is going to work quite the way I envisioned it. If it does… I’ll be rather grateful to z (and the others in this ‘hop who regularly employ photos to enhance and support their TToT posts)

4) Nope! ain’t gonna work!  I’ll be out of gratitude items way before I run out of pictures of the view through the passenger side window of my car.


5) Might as well get ten items down, then I figure out what to ^*^# do with this forma…. oh, damn! yeah!  …I am very grateful for the technology, both hardware and software, that allows me to take interesting photos as I drive around in the course of my work day.

6) I am actually quite grateful for either a) hardcopy maps or, 2) my brain that did not let itself be pulled down a frustrating path. (Yesterday, my travels took me to East Overshoe, CT. A town I last visited about 5 years ago. Before I set out for the day, I looked at google maps online…(right down to street level, cool in a creepy way). I thought I knew where the house was. It wasn’t. I drove around a bit (which in a rural area can surely use up the time), no luck. I thought, ‘that’s why I have a phone (and a tablet) ! lets just pull up the map’. No Signal.  So I drove in search of a signal. No Luck. Feeling chagrined (and a bit pissed off), I resigned myself to having to make the trip again the next day.  As I was looking over my shoulder out the back window, in the only driveway for miles around,  my eye caught sight of a large-format, plastic-spiral-bound book on the backseat floor.  My old map book! A once indispensable tool-of-the-trade in the real estate business, there it was, looking a bit tattered and frayed…. I had a way to find the house and I didn’t have to drive 35 minutes back to cell range.


7) I am also grateful for the quality in my brain, personality, or clarklike worldview that resulted in;  my taking the book (from the back seat), opening  it to the appropriate Town, and before I started squinting to read the tiny street names,   doing that odd 2 finger spreading thing that enlarges the print. At least 5 times. I started swearing at the book (while laughing…there in my car, alone, by the side of the road, on the outskirts of East Overshoe, CT) god, I crack myself up, sometimes.

8) The Home front yard landscape project is complete. At least the part where someone else does the work. Now we have to keep the dirt watered so that the grass, hidden underneath will grow and turn the front yard all green and such.

9) Very grateful for the discussions that have been popping up around the Doctrine (in the Comment threads). It is both challenging, gratifying and enjoyable.  Often surprising, (to me), how well-grounded in the principles of this here Wakefield Doctrine many Readers are.

10) I thought to end today’s list with a hypo-grateful item. Specifically, my disappointment in not being able to format my ‘passenger side window’ photos, the way that I had originally imagined it. This is a rather clarklike form of disappointment. No! wait! This week’s video post tried to explain the concept of ‘manifesting’ as an integral part of the Doctrine, lets use this disappointment as an example to illustrate this concept.
So I had plans (for the future) and I was disappointed. Happens to everyone, right?  Of course it does! The importance of ‘manifesting’ in the use of the Doctrine is predicated on accepting that this ubiquitous emotional-circumstance  is a different thing for each of the 3 personality types. Not simply: a clark reacts to differently or a scott responds to the let down one way or even the roger feels such-and-so about it. It is the same, but different for each of the three by virtue of ‘how the three personality types relate themselves to the world around them. Here:

  1. a clark is said to ‘eat their futures’, this is meant to imply that anticipation is so very highly accentuated, that when the (future) realty finally occurs, a clark feels like they’ve been cheated or deprived of something that we’ve worked for and, even earned!
  2. a scott on the other hand, does not spend all that much time in the future anticipation phase of our illustration here. They, by and large,  will ‘roll with the punches’…”hey! lets have fun with this anyway!! Hey!” ( Try this: she drags the antelope that she brought down, across the savannah about 4 miles in the noonday sun, back to her pride.  No sooner does she throw it down in front of the hungry pack, that the possum playing gazelle jumps up and bounds away. The lion(ess) doesn’t sit and bemoan the unfairness of it all. hell no! she looks around, (if anyone is even beginning to smirk, there is a paw-across-the-muzzle in their immediate future) otherwise, it’s ‘oh well back to the hunt’.
  3. a roger…well, one word: ‘Miss Haversham’

That’s it for today.


Ten Things of Thankful


 Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group


]]> 28
Friday the 19th!! the Wakefield Doctrine ( “yeah, I’ll fall on my knees, raise up my right hand…” B.B. King) Fri, 19 Sep 2014 12:18:38 +0000

Related Posts:

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


We get a little technical and theoristic in today’s video Post, so, while you’re still reading this Post (like your grandfathers would have read to your grandmothers, “...Abigail, I have long meant to express my feelings.“)

Lets get all Socratic and FAQ-y on this here personality theory here.

Q: Are you serious with this whole ‘personal reality’ thing?
A: As serious as a clark before a First Date.

Q: Your personality theory has only three different personality types to account for the billions of people on Earth, isn’t that rather simplistic?
A: No. No it is not. And besides, we don’t say that there are only three personality types.

Q: You don’t?
A: No, we don’t.

Q: I’m sorry, but I’m fairly certain that I’ve read, on countless occasions, the statement: “…of the three personality types, the three personality types.” Are you sure you did not make that statement?
A: I did not make that statement. You weren’t listening. We talk about three worldviews...

Q: …oh, yeah,  your realities that everyone has a different one of
A: I think we can stop with the attempt at clever FAQs now.

Q: Wait!  Wait!…. one more, I’ll be serious I promise!
A: …..

Q: What is the point of this all?
A: …all?  What all?  the blog, this 30 Day Challenge, the Wakefield Doctrine….. ?

Q: yeah, all of that.
A: what makes you think there needs to be a reason or a point or anything….

Q: wait a minute! you almost had me going with that last…. wheres clark?!  what did you do with the clark behind all this!?!
A:  ….precisely

…that’s it for today. Hey!  New Readers?  the following is a video post, which if this was a cooler, more rogerian blog, I would be presenting it as a podcast. (which designates a video as more than ‘driving-my-car-why-not-get-a-Doctrine-Post-done?’) In any event, this might not be the best place to start.

Click here to view the embedded video.


]]> 6
Post# 18 (“…ah to be 19 again!”) the Wakefield Doctrine (rogers invent time machines but try to get a scott to go, clarks want to go but are just the lab assistant) Thu, 18 Sep 2014 10:58:21 +0000

Related Posts:

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


I was going to write about how much the Wakefield Doctrine has changed me and altered the path of my life, for today’s Post.  However, seeing how I’m actually writing this yesterday, ( ‘right now’ in the parlance of Time), it’s only natural that we should discuss ‘Time Travel and the Wakefield Doctrine’.

(Before we get any further into today’s Post, (be sure to Comment and tell your friends to read this here Post here), allow me to review two concepts that are part of the underlying principles necessary to a full enjoyment of our favorite personality theory. They are:

  1. everyone does everything at one time or another‘  often I will hear people say, ‘oh man! that’s something only a scott would do’ or,  ’my cousin is a firefighter, isn’t that a rogerian job, he doesn’t strike me as being a roger!’  The ‘everything Rule’ is there to remind us that, though the Doctrine tells us that there are three distinct personal realities (aka worldviews), we are all still living in a common world. In this world,  there are Firefighters and Fisherman, Surgeons and Gardeners, Prostitutes and Politicians, Teachers and Children…. clarks and scotts and rogers are all of these things and everything else. The (observed) effect of having a particular worldview  is not simply that a scott will approach a job or a hobby or a romantic date differently than would a clark or a roger,  but the thing that she experiences, the dang an sich, is manifested in accordance to her worldview. It is this ‘manifesting’ that is what allows for the different worldviews to interact with the common worldview and still permit the individual differences to be expressed. Not only can we know how a certain thing might manifest for a person, given their worldview, but we can also predict how the person will experience and you know that means!
  2. ‘manifesting’ is what accounts for how we will experience (any part of life) and therefore, to an extent, the range of choices available to us…. ( you want an example in real life? well, do you?…then go to our friend Christine’s blog and read this Post  and keep in mind (like we need to tell you…lol) she is a scottian woman. And just in case you are tempted to think,  ’but that’s obvious! she’s a scott! Go and see how a certain situation manifests to a roger. Kristi has a Post that could have been titled, ‘A Brief Insight into the Thoughts and Feelings of a Well-Balanced roger on a Typical Day’  here…. read this Post.
    ( I would cite a Post written by a clark but…. talk about your ‘coals to Newcastle‘ !  lol…. check these out: Lizzi (pick a post…any post) or zoe, (interesting for reasons beyond the scope of this Post) or…Denise or Cyndi.  G’wan with ye now.

As today’s Post’s subtitle implies, the adventure of traveling in time, where it possible, would be a different experience for each of the three worldviews. rogers, being the technically gifted (they are the reason that we have computers and reliable airliners (yeah, so I’m like 87 years old with that expression) and the natural engineers. Their time machine would look something like:  time-machines-through-er-time-20100325065957774

a clark, well while clarks know an awful lot of things and, are the genuinely creative (of the three personality types), will attempt to forestall criticism (and laughter) by fashioning a machine that will simply look cool and thereby obviate the probing questions, such as: ‘how does it actually work?’ and, ‘does it actually work?’. Their time machine would tend to look something like: article-0-15B29EB6000005DC-602_634x430

While scott (though not inclined to take the time to build an actual time machine), would simply find one and hot-wired it to take his/her friends on a joyride in: 1000_Time-Machine

That being said,  this Post is about the Wakefield Doctrine, not time machines.  Then again, if the Wakefield Doctrine is all that it’s cracked up to be, surely it could predict how a concept (and common) day dream such as ‘If I could travel back in time and retain my experience and knowledge, yet inhabit my younger body, with no one around me being any the wiser, I would…..

…out of time. So, tell us how you would use Time Travel. (You don’t even have to tell us your predominant worldview… your Comment will tell us that, thank you.  lol)


]]> 10
#17 the Wakefield Doctrine (“…17!??! you sure that’s not 27? jeez… what? no! hell! I can keep this up forever”) Wed, 17 Sep 2014 12:29:41 +0000

Related Posts:

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


the Wakefield Doctrine is a way to look at the behavior of the people in our lives and appreciate the world as they are experiencing it.

(nope! while this opening sentence may sound like we’re still in serious discussion mode, we are not.)

Since I’m stumbling around (rhetorically, of course)  this morning for today’s ‘hook’  lets get out everyone’s favorite, the  dileto of the wannabe-good-writer, the blog Post’s best friend… bullet points (bulletpoint motto: ‘hey! you have incomplete thoughts that seem like, in skilled hands might be intriguing to the Reader? bring ‘em on!’):

  • clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel
  • the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them
  • the Wakefield Doctrine will allow you to infer how the other person is ‘relating themselves to the world around them’.
  • the Wakefield Doctrine will put you in a position to know more about the other person than they know about themselves ( variation 1.3: ‘with the Wakefield Doctrine you will know more about the other person than you have any right to know’.)
  • clarks are the people that you know you really like, but sometimes get busy with and forget
  • scotts are the friend that you know will do something to embarrass you, but you also are really fond of them, so you pre-excuse them before each new social gathering
  • rogers make up the majority of any group of people you might encounter, their solidarity is such (and secret) that there is no concern with having too many of them… the herd is horizontal (not vertical as with a pack of scotts) and clarks?… hell! you could have one (maybe two, never more than three) working alongside you the whole day today and not notice them, unless one of two things happen: a) the clark gets upset (no, it will not be with you! if they were upset with you, you would not only not know, you would not notice them…at all) or 2) need something that the others of your kind simply are not capable of providing (i.e. acceptance without reciprocity)
  •  scotts will make you laugh, rogers will encourage you to laugh, clarks will let you laugh
  • when you were growing up and in elementary school…  in trouble a lot? a scott  …one of two sent to the Principles’ Office? a clark  …afraid to get in trouble with the Teacher yet still have it happen …scott (female)
  • oh yeah… haven’t mentioned this in a while,  the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral and culture neutral
  • we have all three types in potential, however we live in one personal reality, i.e. our predominant worldview
  • last item…. and this is a hint as to why yesterday’s discussion was so intriguing and difficult…. ready?  these personal realities?  they are real.  We talk about how clarks are the ‘Outsider’ personality type, right?  and we can recognize a clark (or a scott or a roger) because of characteristic ways of behaving (of course, what we really mean by this is ‘relating themselves to the world around them’)…but the basic fact is that for me (for example), I am (an) Outsider.  and scotts?  the world they live in is the reality of the Predator and Prey, they are not choosing to act as they do, they are acting the way that they do simply because, given the nature of the world, ‘as they experience it’,  it is the only way to act and live and thrive successfully.  rogers? same thing  the world (when a roger wakes up this morning), is, in fact, a quantifiable place…2 + 2 not only equals 4 it cannot equal anything else….ever. and the relationship rogers have with the traditions they experience and discover and learn about?…all real and all very full of value ….to them.  not a choice, a fact. reality.    we’re all used to/been brought up knowing that the world is the world as it appears to us… ‘you can’t fight city hall’, ‘measure twice cut once’, ‘haste makes waste’, ‘to the victor goes the spoils’,  ’waste not want not’…. all those things are of the world we all live in,  but we all live in our own personal reality and that’s the gift of and fun of the Wakefield Doctrine
  • ya know?



]]> 11
Sweet 16 the Wakefield Doctrine ‘lets talk to the rogers out there… my credentials? one word: ‘Ken Burns’!’ now may I pass? Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:26:33 +0000

Related Posts:

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


…I know that zoe is looking forward to the crazy(er) Posts that are inevitable when one embarks on a everyday-a-new-Post Challenge, however, the blog gods have smiled and yesterday’s Post saw  a couple of Comments that caused me to say, ” Readers who are expressing a slight (though endearing) confusion on the matter of figuring their worldview, how cool is that?”
(visual: zoe’s frown of disappoint begins to waver and soften, eyebrows reversing their downward aspect, “hey skip! come here! Clark’s going to try to charm rogers!”)

from Sandy Ramsey:  ”You know, I don’t know why I have to keep coming back to decide where I fall. Can I be a clark with a side of roger? That seems to be where I find myself every time I look. 

from Pattie: “I am still very confused about scotts, rogers, and clarks. Does it help that I know that I am an ENFJ?”

from Lisa: “Somehow managed to read through post and comments and not be totally confused…that’s a step!”

To paraphrase Gordon Gecko, ‘…confusion is good’. Why do I make such a bold (and annoying) statement? Because the one thing we have found to be necessary, on the part of new Readers of the Wakefield Doctrine is what we used to refer to as mental flexibility, i.e. the enjoyment of preposterous notions, intriguing puzzles and plain old ‘hey! imagine this!’.  I take heart from the Comments of Readers who say, “I understand this thing but it doesn’t seem to want to work for me” or “…I know what the three worldviews are but I am equally all three” or “what do you mean I’m just a member of the Herd!” and “…did you just call me a &*#&(^ Predator?!?!”

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that, at a very early age, we all find ourselves in one of the three worldviews, (that of the Outsider-clarks, the Predator-scotts or the Herd Member-rogers) and that it is the coping strategies and skills we develop dealing with this personal reality that makes us clarks, scotts or rogers. Another way to put this: how do we (or the person we are trying to understand) ‘relate ourselves to the world around us’?  We would ask ourselves the question: ‘Am I/are they relating to the world as would:

  1. an Outsider  who lacks the assumption of belonging, finding solace in the intellect as the path to what they believe they lack, while enjoying a freedom of options and the truly genuine creativity that can only come from being outside of the normal expectations and requirements of the common-sense world
  2. a Predator  who lives to thrive and thrives on life, moving through a world/day alert to certain danger and focused on providing the basics and subsistence for the pack, taking what is found for what it must be (as opposed to: what it might be/what it may hope to be) decisive in action, limited in reflection always passionate
  3. a Herd Member who knows that they belong, the underlying relationship to everything is so fundamental as to be nearly imperceivable the relationship of this person (to the world around them) is one of certainty and the relationship of this person with the others in world around them is knowable, that this knowing is simple and direct (a) ‘Right Way’ and…other ways. Tradition is a value, in and of itself, and to demonstrate evidence of tradition is the greatest good

ya know what I mean? so try out the rogerian worldview, why doncha?

the really cool thing about this here Wakefield Doctrine here is that you …can’t….get…it…wrong.  You have a predominate worldview. One. Not all three. Not none of the those three. One of the three.

the real challenge for those-who-might-be-rogers is not what you’d think!  (I know… you clarks and (some) scotts are thinking, “…hey rogers live in a world of certainty, exactness….like engineers they have a problem when there is not a 100% clearly perfect match!!! that’s why rogers have a tough time finding their predominate worldview…they’re looking for exactihood!”)
While that is very close and nearly the answer I was going for, what I was thinking was that rogers, upon seeing something where people seem to be sharing a common idea,  expect to immediately identify with the thing that those people are sharing. …. but upon closer examining, there are lumps and inconsistency and outrageous statements. Something must be wrong.

Thanks to Kristi for her comment regarding the use of the designation ‘Herd Member’   it is kind of   ….inciteful?  lol  but then, a few years ago we heard from a few scotts about the use of the term Predator  …’hey! what the hell! that’s kinda  mean and suggestive of one of the Great Cats or wolves what with the attack first, rip apart the foes and seduce…. oh yeah,  never mind.’

Two things about the inciteful and provocative language: a) it actually, when you get down to what we originally referred to as ‘Original Behavioral Metaphor’  all three of these are kind of accurate and 2) this Doctrine is not a stolid, op.cit., academic-worthy personality theory… it’s fun  it’s exciting and, even without the inspired insights into human nature…. it’s meant to make you yell, and laugh and cry. So…lighten up and enjoy whichever parts of this thing that you want.

Click here to view the embedded video.



]]> 20
the 15th Post of the ‘More is More’ Post Writing Challenge! the Wakefield Doctrine lets talk to the clarks out there Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:12:41 +0000

Related Posts:

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


Anticipation is a curious affair for clarks. I would dare to say that most clarks might be identified, at a fairly early age, by their attempts to ‘make sense of the world’, in how they perceive and relate to the experience of disappointment. A show of hands now, please! If you are a clark (or have a significant secondary clarklike aspect), I’m willing to bet that you came up with a ‘Rule’ or ‘Law’ that applied, not only to managing anticipation, but also formed a rudimentary scheme for self-improvement.  My own effort (in early adolescence) to deal with anticipation and disappointment was referred to, as ‘the Law of Reverse Expectation’. I say ‘referred to’, because it, (the Law), was not something that stayed in my head, no! it was an observation and it was, (I felt at the time), an insight into the nature of the world and I was willing to share it with my best friend. I really thought that I was on to something, and spent an inordinate amount of time thinking about how I might use this insight to increase my enjoyment of life and decrease my disappointment (with life).

[New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine is all about understanding how a person 'relates themselves to the world around them'1 There are three characteristic ways to do this:

  1. as  predator (scott) where the world is about immediacy (immediacy in action, in thought, in feeling), the world, for a scott, consists of prey and pack, dominance and submission, thrive-to-survive
  2. as a member of the Herd (rogers) the world to a person relating themselves to the day is one of a quantifiable and knowable place, where there is a right way to do things and the highest calling is to share with others that which one has discovered (to be a Right way), for rogers 2 + 2 = 4  ….always
  3. as Outsiders  clarks relate (themselves) to a world that is 'out there'…apart from. A clark lives in a world where knowledge and reason should be enough… and since they are aware of being  different, they spend their lives trying to discover and understand what it is that everyone else clearly knows and understands.

we have a saying, well, yeah we have a lot of sayings, but the one that goes here best is:  'clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel.'  Anything confusing about this or other aspects of this here Doctrine here…just ask.]

…so, back to the topic of clarks. The Wakefield Doctrine is beginning to demonstrate a practical value. Of course, the Doctrine has always been intended as a tool to understand ourselves better. However, the use of the word, ‘better’ is not intended in anyway to imply superiority to other perspectives, rather, we mean,  ’in addition to how you view the world, try  looking  at yourself (and others) from this perspective’. The Wakefield Doctrine does not offer Answers or  ’the Truth’.  All we say is, “hey Reader! if you imagine that those scotts are, like predators in the wild and rogers are the stable, moving reliably Herd and, over there, that rustling of the underbrush? …clarks! If you look at people and the way they behave, from this perspective, you will:  a) get a little more insight into their lives and 2) have fun and laugh (on occasion) and ruefully smile (on other occasions)”.  But I started this Post talking about how we are, of late,  seeing a very definite use and value from the Doctrine.  What? you mean I did not say that?…well, I was thinking it!  lol  Given that I’m on a Post-a-Day schedule, it might be best to save some for tomorrow.



1) the wording here is important, we say ‘how they relate themselves to the world around them’ not ‘how they relate to the world around them’  big difference, ya know?


]]> 15
Sunday TToT-ette the Wakefield Doctrine lets look at pitchas! Sun, 14 Sep 2014 13:03:02 +0000

Related Posts:

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


(the Wakefield Doctrine is at the near-mid-point of ‘the Great 30 Day ‘so-you-think-you’re-out-of-things-to-write-about-for-this-blog-so-why-not-write-a-Post-a-Day-?’ Challenge!’ if you laugh, yet nevertheless think that this is a reasonable response to a common problem for blog writers, you might want to head over to the Page on clarks (upper right in on the Landing Page). no, wait!  just consider the following:  often upon waking to a new day, I will stop and think, “I can do this! I have what it takes to deal with that world out there”. If you think there is nothing odd about that viewpoint1, then you might want to join the clarks over at the clarks Page. no, don’t worry, no one will bother you or quiz you about what you’re doing or ask you questions about yourself… just browse through the stuff you find there and get back to us…whenever.)


1) Glad to see the noticeable increase in the canine contingency, at least in terms of their being included in photos in a lot of TToT Posts this weekend.

2) zoe is away on a trip this weekend, which is only sensible, since in this part of the country, Autumn lasts about 3.7 days and then it’s Winter-practice. (Winter-practice is when all the leaves fall on the ground and the days pretend to be comfortable in temperature until you forget your jacket and then you’re freezing until you can get home.)

3) grateful for the technology that allows this whole blog and post and instant communication thing… a fairly comment Item on this (and other) Grat Lists, but valid nonetheless.

4) I referenced photos in my subtitle, so lets look at this:



5) I am ‘re-impressed’ with the skills of those of you who use photos as an integral part of your Posts… way harder than it looks! (I’m thinking of Kristi and Susan and Jen and them)

6) I’ve gotten a lot from this weekend’s various TToT lists…for whatever reasons I’m hearing a lot of clarks describing their dealing with the pressures of maintaining the good things (that they know they have every right to have, but….lol), in their lives.

7) excellent Call-in last night!  Cyndi stole herself sometime to join us and it was great fun.  We, (Denise and Cyndi), talked about the positive benefits of interacting with other clarks. This may not seem like much, as we all are surrounded by clarks and scotts and rogers, but there is something about clarks who are aware of (being clarks) interacting with other clarks, that opens one up to benefits that are  amazing. That we, (clarks),  can identify with each other and, by doing so, give ourselves a break (from time to time). I ‘ve had this kind of conversation with Lizzi on a number of occasions, i.e. that when I see her do well or go through a bad time and still come through it all without giving up or losing everything, then I gain just a tiny bit of…not hope, not even encouragement, more… that it’s that my own ‘certainty’ becomes altered in a positive way. (yeah, if any of that makes any sense at all… follow the arrows to the clark dept.! lol)

8) Una and Phyllis for the fun of altering the home environment

9)  video (warning! I haven’t listened to it since I made it… I suspect it’ll be alright)

Click here to view the embedded video.

10)  you’d be surprised at how you can do one of these and not have a clue as to all that you said and, more importantly, how it comes across… oh well.



Ten Things of Thankful


 Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group

1) of course, the ‘other two’ may not be inclined to articulate what they feel is wrong with that statement, about ‘the world out there’, and that’s because scotts and rogers don’t view the world as being ‘out there’, as in being apart from, separate from, a different thing. they (the scotts and the rogers are in the real world and that’s pretty much that)


]]> 14