Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3 Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 29, 2022 By

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

We did mention that the Wakefield Doctrine is a tool for self-improving oneself, did we not?

Sure we did.

At the risk of leaving ourselfs open to the totally wonderful, (wish we’d thought of it), observation, “If the only tool you have is a hammer, it is tempting to treat everything as if it were a nail.” (Maslow sorta) we will remind New Readers: the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up.

Enough with the ‘…for now, refer to the syllabus you were given at the start of the class’.

The word ‘perspective’ is also a clue to the (intended) use of the principles of the Doctrine for change and development. The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the notion that …

oh dip!* I’ve missed the early morning train to Insightsville! damn**

Be sure to check back tomorrow, we promise to offer useful information and practical applications of this most wonderful of personality ‘theories’.

Note: New Readers? If your first thought is:

“What the hell! I paid tuition. Well, I paid with my time, clicking here… ya know?!!? Though I gotta say the preliminaries are, no offense, pretty obvious. In fact, based on the most fundamental descriptions of the three personality types and the role of how a person relates themselves to the world around them (yeah, pretty clever, inserting that ‘themselves’ in to the more common, ‘how we relate to the world’ adds an entirely personal dimension to the equation) and a couple of other things like ‘personal reality’ and that initially way-weird ‘Everything Rule’ (in the last installment we actually heard Cameron (a total clark) on the wonderful internet video series BlackTail Studio state the Everything Rule, nearly word-for-word). I’ll just go ahead and do some self-study.”

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine. You got this.

 

the Wakefield Doctrine: ‘you’re already practicing the core Principles, you might as well get something for all your efforts’ (…yeah, even some fun!)

March 25, 2013

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

The reason we say,  you’re already practicing the Principles is that, as a personality theory, the Wakefield Doctrine does not start with a person answering questions, filling out a survey or questionnaire, reporting likes and dislikes, lying about weaknesses and strengths, exaggerating the things others like and hate about us. No. In a funny, you-guys-really-are-weird kind of way the Wakefield Doctrine doesn’t really care what the individual thinks their personality (type) should or could or might be. Nope. This here personality theory here does not need to know that.
…as a matter of fact! You don’t even need to involve the person that you are about to know (better, in a way) than they know themselves. You see, the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not for them.

But I’m getting ahead of us. We’ll come back to this ‘you mean I can know my boyfriend’s, my Teacher’s, my wife’s, my boss’s, my kid’s personality types and I don’t need to ask them to help?’ in just about a paragraph. First, the Principles that the Title of today’s Post says you are already practicing.

The Wakefield Doctrine is all about how a person relates themselves to the world around them. Notice the odd wording, I did not say, ‘how a person relates to the world‘. Because that’s only one dimension, in a sense a description of  what happens as the person goes about their life. We say, ‘how the person relates themselves to the world around them’ because it is not simply a choice (about how to act, what to do, how to feel about it), it is reality. What we refer to as a worldview.
In the context of the Wakefield Doctrine, we all live in a personal reality, aka our worldview. This means that my reality is different from yours. No, nothing weird… no screaming vegetables, nothing shooting across the sky, no flying without the help of technology, but different nonetheless. And it is the way our worldviews differ that we find the value and utility in our personality theory.

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we are all born with the potential to experience the world from one of three ‘perspectives’, living in one of three worldviews, if you will. And what most people call ‘personality types’, we know as the appropriate behavior, given the world that a person finds themselves experiencing. (Remember!  personal reality as in ‘real’ and ‘reality’  not  “just ’cause you felt like it, or I think I will choose to act like this, she deserves it….”) The three characteristic worldviews are:

  1. the reality of the Outsider (clarks)  not ‘because’, not ‘well, you should speak up more’, and definitely not ‘well if you didn’t act so weird, people would get to know you and  you would have an easier time in life’  this reality is simply one in which you are here and ‘the world’ is out there. (For our clarklike Readers this last statement is sufficient, the rogers and the scotts might nod and look understanding, but will never get it)
  2. the world of the Predator (scotts) of the three personality types, scotts can be the easiet to deal with- they are energetic and active, enthusiastic and mercurial helpful and very dangerous… the saying here is: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’.  scotts are the life of the party and the reason the police get called, scotts are your best friend until someone who they look up to shows up and then your life will be miserable , scotts are the neighbor who will lend you anything in his garage and help build your deck without asking and she is the neighbor with the well-behaved kids (at least they are when she is around, when she is not….ayiieee!), scottsare fun and tiring, loyal and seductive  you have at least one scottian friend
  3. the world as seen by a member of the Herd (rogers) are the reason we have civilization and they are the reason we have repressive societies. they are the personality type that lives in a world of emotion… not just moods and feelings, but where clarks think things and scotts act out, rogers manipulate emotion, in themselves and in the people around them. Ever encounter someone who makes you feel comfortable talking?  ...roger  know anyone at work who is always in the center of things and knows all about everyone?… roger ever find your husband/wife…boyfriend/girlfriend  acting like they had no idea that you had a life outside the relationship?  lol roger  there is a saying around here: without rogers humanity would still be out on the savannah with the scotts roaming in packs, feeding on the giant herds of rogers while the clarks dart among the low underbrush in a desperate attempt to stay alive long enough to invent opposable thumbs

These three worldviews are the ‘core principles’ of the Doctrine that you are already practicing.

Back to the Practical Value….and how you don’t need to involve the ‘other person’ and how this Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not for them.

Today. Observe the people in your life. Infer which of the three worldviews they appear to be acting from, test this against the descriptions of each of the three personality types that you will find throughout this blog. Once you know which the other person is, you will know why they are doing the things that they are and because you know this, you will have the choice of how you would respond, how you feel about what they do, how to shape the message if you need to get them to do what you want. In other words, you will have more freedom of choice than they do.

 

* one of the best ‘tv shows’ available on the internets, ‘Good Place’ we totally recommend it.

** yeah, here… all too often

#wakefielddoctrine, #theoryofclarks,scotts,and,rogers

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 8, 2022 By

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

This is the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) Silver Anniversary post! Fifty years of observing and noting the steady progression of animals, weather events, barbecues, hilarious second-date mishaps, all written in as wide a variety of styles as there are participants. (Full Disclosure: practicing the fascinating literary device of ‘the unreliable Narrator. We didn’t actually have a second-date mishap).

For this week, the Wakefield Doctrine cites:

1)  Una

2)  Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine sine qua, y’all, sine qua non

4) serial stories: the Whitechapel Interlude, the Case of the Missing Fig Leaf and the Six Sentence Café & Bistro

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

6) It, (this morning’s coyote), (what? oh, yeah, this is a hypograt reference from Item 9 below. If you want things to pretend to have a certain logical progression, you’d best jump down there… unless, of course, you’re a regular Reader), was like a fox, except more in a hurry, with a lot less looking around for something cute to kill and take home to the kits. This coyote simply trotted along the path on the far-side of the fence, (photo at top), and we only had time to think, ‘Damn, if we were a Millennial we’d have that thing filmed, edited and trolling for views on Instagram by now.” But we’re not. But we do enjoy this digital refrigerator door (‘Hey, Mom! I drawed a coyotee and a huminbird… put it up on the ‘frigerator’!)

7) Yard-work: good exercise and, being ‘large scale’,  the reward is a satisfaction derived from altering the general environment.  ‘Hey that whole section of the woods looks different!” Unfortunately, I don’t have the frame of mind that produces those excellent ‘Before and ‘After’ photos. (Hint: that would be rogerian). Thing about clarks, we simply know that there is a ‘here’ and a ‘there’, a ‘now’ and a ‘then’; not unlikely to forget one and doomed to endure the other. … lol

8) something, something

9) Wildlife: in the 69 minutes I’ve spent here, this morning, in front of my electrical computer, I’ve observed: three loudly-red birds that looked like they’d just flown through Ketchup Falls (on the mighty Finger Paint River), a Hummingbird that paused in front of the window (top of this post) like a special effects animal for an Uncle Remus video, assorted rabbits and squirrels, (the Doctrine is everywhere: there are grey squirrels and there are red squirrels; the latter are half the size of the former, and will, if competing for access to buried food, fight-to-the-death anything short of a 150cc Toro, double-blade ‘Lawn Ranger’ and, finally, a coyote. (See Grat 6 for accompanying Hypo Grat)

10) Secret Rule 1.3 “…heck, technically, you could fill in any of postfivial Items with the experience of making progress on the list… but, you’d better wait until Grat 10″ (BoSR/SBoR 1980-2022 ibid, op. cit. ten-four)

 

music vids

*

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

RP MDY -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 2, 2022 By

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

The Week Ahead!

Now there’s a common-enough phrase that should serve to facilitate a productive discussion of the three predominant worldviews, (aka ‘personality types’), of the Wakefield Doctrine while conincidently illustrating one of the most helpful, (and necessary), conditions to the aforementioned theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, i.e. the Everything Rule.

Hard part first.

We all exist in time. Time is often distinguished by its placement along the continuum of before, now, later. The past, present and future. Even if this were say, Tuesday morning or late on Thursday, the topic would be as unmanageable as a plastic garbage bag full of angry octopi. To simplify enough for a Monday morning, (Monday Morning motto: ‘The on-ramp to the workweek, ain’t no turning back now!‘), let’s say, the favortie tense for the three worldviews is:

  1. clarks(the Outsider): the future. Hands down is the preferred time period. Not for the seemingly obvious delay of need to act, rather for the quality (of this state of time) of being the un-scratched lottery ticket. clarks don’t fear work, they don’t even fear failure. clarks fear the scrutiny that is all that remains when time stops.
  2. scotts(the Predator): the present. Where else would they be? Seriously, there is no other time that guarantees they can act. (With a sufficient secondary clarklike aspect), a scott would know that memory is unreliable and the future is unpredictable, only in the here and now can a person actutally act.
  3. rogers(the Herd Member): the past. Similar but different from a scott, the roger knows that the past is the pen and ink of their actions to center a Herd. Living in ‘the life emotional’, investing in the future is just like buying with a credit card, the cost increases over time and, besides, they’re way too busy discovering, (and sharing with everyone/anyone), the Right Way in the here and now to do anything more than to check it off on their itinerary.

The Everything Rule: Everyone does Everything at One Time or Another. The difference between the three worldviews informs how a thing manifests. How a thing manifests is a reflection of the overall nature/character of their relationship to the world around them.

The further implications of the Everything Rule is more than we have time for today. Hopefully we’ll be able to complete it on another day.

(lol)

 

from 2017

images-2

 

The coolest (and best) thing about the Wakefield Doctrine is not that we get to make statements such as “Everyone lives in a perfect world”, and it is not the fun of asserting, “Everyone works exactly as hard at life as everyone else does.” Nope making these statements isn’t what this Post, (and its tantalizing questionistical subtitle), is proposting.

What does makes the Doctrine so cool, is that if a person is able to apply the perspectives inherent in the Doctrine to their world, these (and many other, equally outrageous declarations), become totally self-evident and, true even.

You know whats the hardest part of this ‘applying of (a) Wakefield Doctrine perspective’ process? (And it’s not confined to the Wakefield Doctrine), its that any philosophy or belief system that offers an alternative path (in life and such) always demands payment in exchange for it’s benefits. And, just to make matters worse, the price is not, strictly speaking, a ‘quid pro quo’*. What is asked for/demanded, for the privilege of enjoying the benefits of an additional perspective, is that one relinquish the bedrock-certainty of knowing the nature and character of reality. Many Readers are muttering into coffee-shadowed cups, “Hey! I’m open-minded. I know lots of people who see the world different than me, and, well, I got no problem with that!”

(…almost. this close. Unfortunately, that is not the level of acceptance of the validity and reality of another’s worldview required in order to take full advantage of a perspective(s) as contained in the Wakefield Doctrine.)

But enough of the coyness. Here’s a fun** experiment. I was roaming the contemplative and hallowed halls of the Facebook the other day, and a person wrote about losing friends. He concluded that the cause was related to the current politico-cultural mashup thats currently sweeping the world, (like a seaweed and ice cream sandwich wrapper cluttered wave, moon-pushed up the beach farther than any of the previous 3,897 waves). Anyway, being a thoughtful person, he wrote that maybe it was something in him, maybe his own views (on the state of ‘the world’) were at the heart of the problem of otherwise seemingly compatible people running away.

I offered the following: find a person in your life that has seemed like a normal, regular person who, if they are not currently long-standing friends, have the resume to make a successful bid for the job… except of one part. They are totally fervent believers in (fill in the blank with politics/religion/scientific opinion…whatever). You are forced to scratch your head and think (or say), “I just don’t understand how a person like Joe/Jane can believe in that!! He/She is an intelligent, educated, accomplished person, but they believe in….” Now imagine that, from their perspective (i.e. the reality that they are experiencing) there is nothing incongruous in their beliefs.

When you can be comfortable with that, you’re ready to pay the price for the power of alternate perspectives on reality.

And, the irony is that for most of us, when we confront the notion of surrendering the exclusivity of an idea or belief, premise or tenet, our initial reaction is that we are being threatened with a loss. When, in fact, when we accept that our belief or tenet or premise or perspective is not exclusive, we open ourselfs to adding to what we have, what we are.

Ya know?***

*  Latin phrase inserted to culture-up this little post, and since there isn’t an ‘Illuminated Text’ font handy, this will have to suffice to provide, you know credentials.

** no, really, it is fun

*** well, sure I can explain what I mean by the cool thing about making inflammatory and outrageous statements and claims and such… have to be the next post… be sure to bring along your scottian aspect!

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

Part Tue -the Wakefield Doctrine- “When is a reprint not a writing desk?*

March 22, 2022 By

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

* when it’s a reprint of a unfinished intro to a reprint post… (Damn! today is so the day for over-reaching… see below)

Wait, here, This Post** is the precedent, precursor to our post today.

(Full Disclosure: I did not, in fact, complete the post last Tuesday, so it’s kind of a hybrid post. A pre-re-print.)

Well that was fun.

**Monday’s ‘this is the Wakefield Doctrine’ post, that is. Short, concise and possessed of the core elements of this here personality theory here, i.e. three predominant worldviews, reality being personal and the value of having (an) additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. While it is possible for one to acquire the benefits of the Doctrine solely on the basis of a reading of yesterday’s post, the fun is in the three ‘personality types’.

(Standard Warning: once you are able to see the clarks, scotts and rogers in your life, you may find you’re no longer able to not see them.)

The three predominant worldviews are:

  • clarks (the Outsider) although never shunned, they’re always in the background, on the fringe, in the shadows. From the moment they become aware of others, the Outsider realizes the people around them have a connection they cannot feel. Knowing that it can only be information they lack, the clark assumes they missed the class on being a part of.  This assumed knowledge, this secret information, is clearly fundamental, if for no reason than the clark cannot perceive what it is that passes between and among the people in their life. This increases the perception of value, and by not being in possession of this information fear they would be ostracized. So the clark resolves to ‘fake it’. Being alone (the reality in which they are existing) the Outsider lays all their stock in using the tools at hand: rational (if not with flawed premises) thought and, being un-encumbered by the common values shared by the others, a genuine, if not ferocious, creativity. While true creativity is to bring into existence the new, novel, unique, the process is much like a forge: the flame must be maintained. The raw material for this forge is: everything, the drive to gather raw material is curiosity. While the famous adage warns us that ‘curiosity killed the cat’, an Outsider chooses to become, well, a mass murderer. All in service, in common with compulsive killers of the more pedestrian ilk, of the erroneous assumption that it is the secret to becoming a ‘real’ person. The ‘fatal’ flaw is the belief that what makes everyone around them a part of a group, belonging, is that they know something the Outsider does not. A simple mistake. A curse, if one’s mood tends towards the melodramatic. Driven by the most powerful of needs, to belong, clarks don a disguise that, ironically, becomes a disguise only to themselves, and begins a life-long search for the secret of belonging.
  • scotts (the Predator) energetic, impulsive, mercurial, loyal, impulsive… if you woke up as an infant on the wide-open savannah and a herd of wildebeesteses were charging in your direction, how much time would you spend thinking the situation through in oder to become comfortable with your understanding of the appropriate response ….wait!! get that scott back here!! lol As clarks exist in a reality that manifests as rational, considered thought, scotts dwell in a reality in which the coin of their realm is action. They are (in relation to the world around them and the people who make it up) what they do; preferably physical expression, increased volume will serve if gross motor function is restrained.
  • rogers (the Herd Member) they know the world, the universe and everything else is quantifiable. Their world is one in which reality is manifest in terms of emotion. It is their expression, their talent and their limitation. The strongest possible force, in a reality in which relatedness is the highest good, is emotion. This accounts for the ‘everyone around me knows something I don’t‘ condumdrum clarks find themselves in… to paraphrase Nietzsche1, ‘Everyone who appears comfortable in a crowd confirm the apartness of those emotionally bereft’. Or something. Too much? We really love the Nietsche quote, it actually works in both directions for clarks… we like the idea that we’re Outsiders because of a natural quality that we happen to be afflicted with and, like the deaf audience at the dance recital, if they only knew…  yeah. right.  (Note: the Doctrine is either an attempt at creating a hearing aid or, failing that, a sound system that cannot be ignored.)

damn… so much for the power of starting and finishing a post in one sitting.

  1. at least most references give Fred the credit… but who knows? (What? Who said that? Matter of fact we agree, “Who ever it was, they totally were a clark.”

At least we have an obvious much vid

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 10, 2021 By

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

 

Quick, little, Doctrine post for a Wednesday morning.

We have a question from a New Reader*,

“I can see how those personality types seem to fit the people I know. I’m impressed by how, testing the type, (against a ‘real’ person), using only a few of the characteristics of, what do you call it… you know, instead of personality types…. oh yeah! predominant worldviews. How, if I take a couple of the primary indicators and apply it to someone, the rest totally fits. Pretty impressive.

That said, besides knowing that if a person I know will only ride his bicycle with a bunch of his friends and their spandex riding suits all have more corporate logos than a Nascar Chevy, he will also be into gossiping like his life depended on it, what else does this thing do?

How do you guys, (or girls, I know there are some there, even if you always use the reflexive pronouns like ‘us’ and ‘we’), use this theory. You know, for useful stuff like, self-improvement, getting a date, getting hired, having fun?“

Glad you asked, New Reader!

Since we’re almost out of time, I’ll just link this most importune and insightful question to the others who know whereof they speak, Doctrinistically-speaking.

Denise, Mimi, Cynthia, Val, Patricia, Lizzi, Dyanne, zoe? Care to enlighten our guest’s question. Or, at least, make sure they don’t wander off and pull on any cinematically-green curtains.

 

 

*a hypothetical Reader. you know, like your friend at work, who, when you told him/her about the Wakefield Doctrine, they were, all, ‘Wow! Thats really interesting. What else does it say about me?” And, of course, you promise to email/text the url and, when you run into them again, you start to say, “So, did you read…” and skidding to a halt you see that there are others in the conversation and so you end with, “..in the newspapers today.”

You want to tell yourself that you did not see a look of hunger or, more oddly, a look of disappointment in their eyes, and you suddenly have a feeling of relief, and an uninvited memory of the time in high school, when you asked one of the most popular students at your school to go to the big game and, how you ran into them, in the parking lot, and they didn’t even seem to remember that they had to cancel at the last minute because of a illness or shampoo in the family, and you, realizing you were there, managed to act like you wanted to be…. you know, like that

The important thing is that, before you ask the person, (the one at the start of this footnote-longer-than-the-body-of-the-post), if they had a chance to go to www.wakefielddoctrine.com  you remember something that you read there…

Then you smile for two reasons: a) you know it didn’t make sense when you read it the first time and 2) you now know what those people at that Doctrine place meant when they wrote, ‘The Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.”

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »