The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that behavior is a response to perception. Within individuals, these behaviors tend to repeat themselves over time, and (with repetition) become a defining and characteristic type of behavior, in other words, personality.

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes to describe personality on the basis of perception rather than the behavior that results (from perception).

The three characteristic ways to perceive the world are identified as: clarks, scotts and rogers. It is a given that we all start our lives with the potential to perceive the world as any of the three. However at some point in our early, early childhood  we become predominantly a clark, a scott or a roger. Our ‘preferred bias’ in how we perceive the world at large becomes established.

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

…clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel…

rogers(adv rogerian; pronunciation: ‘roe -jeer -riann’)

The ‘premise of identity’ for a roger is that of group member, similar to those in his group(herd), definately different from nearly all other not members of the herd she might see, in the world at large. There is a (self-awareness) of being emotionally capable, perhaps even superior.

The ‘perceptual bias’ exhibited is that the world is an ordered place, filled with similar people all who appear to enjoy the company of others like themselves. To a roger the world is,  basically good  provided the rules and guides and laws are expressed and conformed to all, except the  rogers themselves. This drive to impose order, through rules and laws is particularly noticeable when the roger is in the company of others/outsiders who by definition are considered to be (potentially) hostile. From the perspective of a roger, especially when in the context of the herd, the roger is never, ever the outsider.

Of the three, rogers are the emotional ones, this emotion forms the ‘currency’ of their interactions with others, both inside and outside of the herd. 

While clarks ‘gather by themselves’ and and scotts organise as packs, the characteristic grouping of rogers is the herd.

Since the (final format) has not put in an appearance yet, lets get all Readers Digest on this thing.

• rogers are the friendly ones
• rogers are the glue to whatever social fabric you might care to consider, civic, religious, scientific
• rogers require rules and traditions, they are in fact the only ‘reason’ that history of human civilization has any continuity whatsoever
• rogers are behind the creation or and perpetuation of virtually all human institutions, religious, civic, political whatever
• rogers do not create, they maintain, they assemble, they are the machine operators
• rogers are the engineers, accountants and physicians
• rogers are the judges, the firefighters and high school teachers (except for gym teachers)
• rogersbelieve in a quantifiable universe to such a depth that it is not seperable
• when you are new to a neighborhood, rogers are the ones who come over to introduce themselves, and they will appear in a group ( herd), the scotts are the neighbors who always offer to help you with projects, scotts will feel comfortable asking to borrow and offering to lend things, but they will show up (at your house) alone.

(As we did with scotts) let us consider the nature/the purpose of herds and see what it tells us about rogers.

Herds symbolise the point of view that places the value of the group over the value of the individual. Herds do not have an internal hierarchy and do not evidence a purpose (to benefit individual members), other than survival. Herds do not organise to attack an enemy or to catch/kill/trap food.

If anything, a herd’s only characteristic as a grouping, is that it can be controlled from without. The members of the herd are happy simply being in a herd.

Rogers live to be with who they perceive to be, and that is one of others like themselves. They accept the existence of others(non-herd members) but only in the most transitory sense. Individual herd members will be picked off (by scotts) but so long as the herd survives (and they are not the ones being picked off), the roger is content.

This is not to say that rogers are not highly intelligent.

To the contrary, much will follow in these pages that show that without rogers there would be no civilization. In all civilizations there must be organisers the person who keeps track of the details.

(Accountants and bankers, engineers and carpenters, doctors and cooks, computers programmers and musicians, followers and priests, lawyers and journalist.)

They are all rogers.

A totally rogerian characteristic, ‘you know you have a roger’ when you hear a rogerian expression

A rogerian expression is a characteristic statement made by a roger  that is incorrect but nonetheless powerful. Not just a wrong use of words, rather it is a deliberate use of the wrong words but with an eq to it that forces the listener to accept it. You know them when you hear them. There is a moment of disbelief, then you laugh and shake your head in admiration for the sentence that was made.

Examples:

 (First recorded rogerian expression. When asked by Camille if he wanted more mashed potatoes, Roger replied), ‘no thanks, I think I’ll surpass on that’)

 (other examples):

( looking at his paycheck, a roger was heard to say): ‘look at how much they deducted for aggravated security’

 (about a new DVD release for a movie): ‘no, I am going to wait until they release the un-abashed edition’

 (about to talk to a client): ‘I know I have to give them the bad news with the good news, I just won’t baby-coat it’

(and the most recent recorded rogerian expression)…

(writing in a blog about how egotistical certain real estate agents tend to be a roger wrote): ‘ I have to say that as a professional class, most agents are much too self-absorbent…”

So just as you know a scott by their eyes and clarks by (their) hunched shoulders, you will know the roger for certain by these rogerian expressions

Because of this they are drawn to professions such as engineer, computer programmer, doctor, chemist, accountant. Most of the ‘engineering/hard science’ professions are the place you will find rogers.

This comprises the positive aspect of rogers, an ability to focus on details, minutiae.  Rogers are the ones that will read and follow the instructions in the box. To the letter.

When the rules are applied to people, it becomes a personal matter for rogers, they will be found as priests, ministers and bureaucrats.

Any environment in which the rules are regarded as more important than the individual, you will find rogers, i.e. the military, organized religion, all government.

The primary benefit of the herd for a  roger is to know that there are other rogers.

Following is written by the Progenitor roger:

(The Roger adds);      As a progenitor, I feel compelled to offer some clarification here. Life is hard if you’re a Roger and don’t know it. Or a Scott or Clark, for that matter.The overview and main function of this little project is to help you figure out which of these three categories fits you best, and then you can find your own way to deal with it. I’m sure that there are countless psychology/psychiatry texts and works that do the same, but aren’t nearly as much fun. So just forget all that crap, and try this on. In no time, you’ll know which box you’re in, and then you can spend countless hours shallowly labeling your friends and relatives for your own personal enjoyment. But wait- there’s more! That’s only phase one, sort of like a baby who just discovered his toes. You’ll eventually realize that everyone you ‘ve ever known, or will know can be accurately described and understood in these terms. It’s fun, it’s disturbingly easy, and actually works for as far as you want to take it. This explains everything. For example; Obama is a Roger. Wants to reconcile everything and everybody. And really believes he can do it. Believes he was born to do it. Believes he is singularly capable of it. If any or all of it fails, it’s not on him, because he was the good guy. He’d say he was responsible, but he doesn’t really believe that for a second. Massive ego there. He’s got to have lots of Clarks in the back row for advice, reference,analytical crap. And lots of Scotts to go out and tear up the bad guys. But he gets all the press and absolutely all the glory. Another example; Jesus was ( is ) a Roger. ( see above. Same basic deal. And there’s a very Rogerian trait; always take the highest road you can.) But, just for contrast, here’s another one; William Tecumseh Sherman. This guy was a screaming example of a Roger gone bad. He was in command of Union troops during the Civil War. His boys were out raping and pillaging at will, entirely beyond his control. His “Eureka” moment,( as Clark would say) consisted of putting a 180-degree spin on the whole horrific mess. He just claimed that he meant for them to do that. Very cheeky. Very Rogerian. Now, he’s held up not only as a hero, but also as the Father Of Modern Warfare. Not too shabby. Just don’t bring this up in Georgia. They are still mad. So- now  you try it. Pick anyone at all. Are they highly dramatic and emotional? Got yourself a Roger. They’ll die for the cause. Doesn’t much matter what it is. How about introverted, complex, distant? That’s a Clark. That is one big-ass can of worms. Proceed with caution. You’ll find yourself being studied like spit on a lab slide. Got an A-type on your hands? Aggressive, go-getter, bring-em-back-alive-but-fuck-that-they-got-killed-trying-to-escape kind of thing? That’s a Scott. Be really, really careful. Those teeth aren’t just shiny, they’re sharp, too. And you are just about to find that out. Because you are a food group. Hell, to a pure Scott, other Scotts are a food group. You’re all done. But at least you died knowing how things are. Too bad you didn’t figure this out sooner. Beginning to get it? And most importantly- and enlighteningly- how do you fit in? Feeling a bit annoyed with this generally Rogerian slant? Well, you might want to check the Scott or Clark files. Believe me (us), you’re in here somewhere.  Damn, everyone is in here somewhere. So come on aboard. Feel free to jump right in and mix it up. The therapist’s couch is warm and comfy, Dr. Clark has a nice clean legal pad and lots of sharpened No.2′s, Roger believes deeply in your humanity, and Scott is out hunting and hasn’t picked up your scent. Yet. Till next time- The Roger ( certainly not the first, just the first to be labeled)