Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-‘the Everything Rule’

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

The ‘Everything Rule’ states that, ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’.

While it might be tempting to think, “oh ho! Your rule there allows for exceptions to your three personality types schema. And, unless the Herd disagrees, your Rule supports my contention that I am not a clark or a scott or a roger, I am something that is all three. So much for your ‘live in one characteristic reality’.”

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that despite living in only one of the three worldviews, we retain the potential of all three personality types. The value in the Doctrine in the arena of self-improvement rests quite solidly on this premise. The reason being, a lifetime of practice notwithstanding, we all have the necessary ‘range of response’ (to the world and the people around us) that is at the foundation of the three personality types.

The thing is, when we talk about personality types here, what we really are referring to is our (individual) efforts to develop strategies and skills to successfully navigate the world (physical and social) we find ourselves waking up to every morning.

Damn! too many words. Too roundabout and vague. Better access my scottian aspect.

We all need to interact with the world and the people around us. At a very early age we discover (and develop) ways of behaving that secure us what we desire and learn (and refine) strategies that help us avoid what we do not. As we mature, our world expands, our knowledge and abilities grow and our behavior and interpersonal strategies become more sophisticated. Up to a point. Most of the time.

Bottom line is that for the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘personality type’ is not a list or schedule of traits, impulses, desires and guesses on a long survey with multiple choice answers. It is the style of interaction what works for us in the world, as we experience it. The nature and character of the personal reality in which we grow and mature, drives the development and our ‘personality types’ are merely mirrors of the conditions of that reality.

If we grow up in the personal reality of the Predator, then we damn well better be quick to respond and slow to reflect. If we find ourselves in the world of the Outsider then we surely will learn to keep a low profile and learn as much as possible as fast as possible, the better to understand how to act like the real people that surround us.

Pretty simply, isn’t it?

So, back to the ‘Everything Rule’. It’s not that there are scottian jobs or rogerian interests or movies that only a clark would watch. Actually there are…all three. But although some (of ‘the Everything’) is more in sync, harmony, complimentary (and complementary) to individuals of each of the three types, the fact is, everyone does everything. The very useful and productive use of the ‘Everything Rule’ is as a reminder to take advantage of the perspective that the Doctrine makes available.

We use the term ‘manifest’, i.e. how does that job manifest to that person. This is nothing less than trying to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. Huge ambition. Incredible rewards.

It’s not, ‘seeing through the eyes of another‘, that’s too prone to seeing what we’re experiencing. What this exercise entails is to imagine what being a…. cook in a restaurant is in the world of the Herd Member, or working as a physician when you’re a Predator or being on stage in front of the entire school when you grew up an Outsider. Put yourself in their world and you will have a sense of how things manifest for that person.

Sure, most cops are scotts. Well, duh, the job description: put shiny metal objects on your body, have the right to drive as fast as possible while making a lot of noise, chase people with impunity and when you catch them put them in restraints…oh yeah, shoot off a gun …whenever.

Sound like any personality type you know? However, there are rogers and clarks who end up in uniform, one of the boys (or girls) in blue. Of course, their worlds, their personal realities cast the fun parts of the job in entirely different light. As a result, the rogerian police officer ends up being an administrator and Chief or Sergeant and the clark tries for Detective and ends up teaching Law Enforcement in the local Community College.

You get the idea.

If you have any questions about the ‘Everything Rule’ be sure to write a Comment.


Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘..of occupations, avocations and worldviews’

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

(Refresher: the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we, all of us, are born with the potential to experience reality, (and the world). in one of three characteristic manners: as does (an) Outsider (clarks) or a Predator (scotts) or the Herd Member (rogers). At a certain early age, (the Doctrine tells us), we settle into one of these three ‘worldviews’; we become clarks or scotts or rogers. We do not lose the potential to relate to the world as do ‘the other two’, they are available if we but find ways to access them.

The Wakefield Doctrine wears the label of ‘personality theory’, but it really isn’t. What it really is, is a perspective on the world, the people in our lives and our ownselfs. The Doctrine is a tool for adding to, enhancing our understanding (of the world and the people and ourselves), but has little interest in any whys or wherefores. The goal is to add to our understanding and appreciation of ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us‘. (Not, ‘how we relate to the world around us’, rather ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. Big difference.)

And so, since it, (the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is nothing more than an additional perspective, what good is it?*

The cool thing about self-improvement and the Wakefield Doctrine is that we don’t have to acquire anything that we don’t already possess. Thinking that you need to learn to be more demonstrative, more accessible on an emotional level? No problem, your rogerian aspect will totally help. Need to temper your temper, pre-empt your impulsiveness? You have a clarklike aspect. Feel like you want to task risks, leave behind the caution and conservativeness? Just check in with your scottian aspect.

So it’s all there, provided you can let it out. And that will be the topic of our next post.



*  The extent to which a new idea is accepted and embraced by others is very much influenced by the claims made by the originator (of such ideas). It is not about providing the answer to the ‘what’, as it is about making the answer to the challenging question of ‘what’s in it for me?’ immediately clear. Even more so, it depends upon providing this information cloaked in the appearance of being widely accepted and incontrovertibly true and certain. (Which, for one of the three worldviews, is a totally redundant description).  If this is a valid observation1, my own predominant worldview is very much a factor. Not in a good way. Let me explain2.

It will help to consider this: there are three jobs/occupations/avocations/hobbies/styles-of-effort-to-influence-those-around-us. (Yes, just three).

The three jobs are: scientist, salesman and machine operator.

The scientist is concerned with a world of ideas, reveling in explanations and laboring to refine proofs of principles that underlie the workings of the world and (especially) the people in it. The salesman lives for the people they encounter each day, it is not simply about getting them to buy his/her product (or service or convictions or willingly-submit-to-whatever-it-is-the-salesman-wants…at that particular moment), it is about the interaction/negotiation/the ‘Close’. The machine operator lives for the precise execution of rules and laws, relationships and ideals, they find joy (and frustration) in learning the correct way to do job/cook a meal/build a society/live life.

As you’ve probably guessed, each of our three ‘personality types’ is more appropriate to one of these jobs than the others3.

  1. clarks (Outsiders): scientists. if you think hard and observe the world around you, the rules that people follow to feel a part of the group will become knowable. (Career recommendations: school teacher (elementary or college), nurse (pediatric or geriatric) sheepherder, librarian, counselor (effective but not successful), one-term politician)
  2. scotts (Predators): salesmen… I don’t really need to give examples here, do I? The guy on TV, the politician, the early developer in school doesn’t care if you buy or not (well, sorta) that they get to try to get you to (buy what they have/believe what they want you to/do what they feel like doing is what life is all about. (Career suggestions and ideas: cop (or robber), surgeon (but not physician and totally not an oncologist), nurse (charge nurse) teacher (High School industrial Arts, Gym or French…)
  3. rogers (Members of the Herd): machine operator.. precision is the result of following the rules and precise application of the rules is how you get to that point, there is a right way to do everything (add and subtract/machine aircraft parts/play in a symphony/treat cancer/live life… being the best among many is its own reward. (Careers: Accountant, attorney (prosecuting) physician (oncologist), chemist, scientist, philatelist, chef (but not cook), firefighter politician (successful, multi-term)

That’s about all we have time for today. Thanks for coming by.

….the point? My misgivings about how I present the Wakefield Doctrine? Wellll I guess to learn the answer, you’ll just have to keep reading the posts.

1)  see!?!?! damn!

2) enough with the explanation!! tell ’em what it’ll do for them!

3) the Wakefield Doctrine has something called ‘the Everything Rule’. It states, somewhat obviously, that ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’. What that means is even though the most effective police (in the present culture) are scotts, that does not mean that there are no clarklike or rogerian police men and women. And, chemists are more likely to be rogers, yet you can find scotts and clarks in that profession. (look for the exploding laboratories). The point is, how well one does in a profession or job is very much related to how (that) job or profession manifests to them. One of the reasons that rogers make excellent accountants is that, for them, the world is quantifiable and knowable. So working with numbers is a joy, in and of itself.



Finish the Sentence Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Sometime in February/March of 2013, I worked up the nerve to participate in my first bloghop, Finish the Sentence Friday. Hosted at that time by Janine, Kate, Stephanie and Dawn, joining in marked a transition in my online life. Up until then, starting June 9th 2009, (come on, everyone remembers their first blog post…right?), I devoted my time in the ‘sphere to writing posts about the Wakefield Doctrine. For whatever reason, I worked up the nerve to go over to their blog (yeah, the high school metaphor’s been with me from, like, the minute I turned the computer back on.*) and I wrote my first Finish the Sentence Friday post.

Since that time, I’ve met some very remarkable people and have become friends with many of them. And that’s where the temptation to indulge in metaphor begins. Meeting new and interesting people, not something I’m naturally inclined to do.

“But it wasn’t a dream — it was a place.

         And you — and you — and you — and you were

         there.” (Dorothy Gale)

Kristi was gracious enough to invite me to co-host the Finish the Sentence Friday bloghop this week. In part, because I’d returned to joining in on Fridays and, one Friday, a few weeks ago, I threw out a sentence fragment in a comment and Kristi replied, ‘Hey, I like that! That might make a good sentence fragment.‘ So, here we are.

(Can’t say enough about Kristi other than, if I knew about her and wasn’t already a friend, I’d be too intimidated to introduce myself. But that’s getting ahead of the sentence fragment. Suffice it to say, Kristi Campbell is one of the most able women I know. I consider myself fortunate in being allowed to hang out here. So join Kristi and me at the best of all bloghops…. the Finish the Sentence Friday.

“A study released by the Department of HHS reports that most people consider their online relationships comparable to their social experiences in high school… this is true because….”

...For some of us, the virtual world is not simply a place drawn in phosphorescence and LEDs, binary yes(s) mating with stubborn no(s), a place of mathematical precision and statistical approximations of feelings and intuition. For some of us, its a reality of metaphor and stories. The world online is a place where the social contract has been stood on its head.

In our lives (in the real world), when we interact with others: visiting relative’s homes, running into our children’s teachers at the convenience store or meeting friends at the mall, our personal lives are subject to immediate validation. Your car sits in the parking lot, your children wear the clothes you pick out (or not,depending on age) and your life is a page in an increasingly public record.

In the virtual world, however, we are, in a very real sense, a story we tell those we meet. When we interact in the various locales such as Twitter or Facebook or on bloghops such as this one, we tell our story. The virtual world, at least the parts that I frequent, is very much a world of words and writing, stories and imagination, risk and rewards.

It’s a secret rule of life that the rate of meeting new people and making friends is inversely proportional to age. In the real world. there are only so many people who can fit into the: work places, schools, daycare, health clubs, churches, neighborhoods, supermarkets, doctor’s waiting rooms, therapists offices, barracks, bunkhouses, cells, wards and three-bedroom-colonials-on-a-quarter-acre-with-a-really-great-HOA. When limited opportunity butts heads with escalating demands on our personal time, is it any wonder that 80% of our real world friends are those we met back when we were still in school?

Then there is the virtual world. Available anywhere and anytime. And with more people (on the other side of the screen) than you could fly over in a plane on a four-hour flight.

And,(to try to establish the basis for my post….finally), just as it was in high school; when we arrive in the world-online, a social environment is waiting for us to negotiate, navigate and accommodate. There are people already here. They’ve been here long enough to establish their own little corners of the ‘sphere. Some of the people on the ‘net we meet because they on in our path. I mean, you have to get into line in order to get lunch, right? And, if you’re in line to get lunch, eventually you have to come out of the serving area and face a room (small or huge) of people eating lunch. Already seated. At their own tables. With their friends.

(lol  ok, so my own experiences with high school are not exactly 100% positive.) But I made it through those years. And now, a lifetime later, I find myself in a social environment that, with only a little imagination, looks a lot like high school. The difference is not that ‘I am older and mature and know better.’ That would be the easy and not-overly productive way out. The difference is that I choose to see the metaphor because it allows me to see myself in a slightly different perspective than might someone, (a roger, for example, who might say, ‘Dude! it’s the internet. You’re an adult. Stop with the make-believe, the trying to relive the past‘) who does not see the common points between past experiences and present reality. And the Wakefield Doctrine is about nothing, if it’s not about taking advantage of varying perspectives on the world in the service of becoming a better person.

Anyway… the value, (for me), of indulging in the conceptual metaphor of ‘the blogosphere as high school’ is that it allows me to make different choices and, by doing so, come to accept that ‘experience does not define the entire person’. My personal history, the social one inferred in this post, is not the summation of my potential. It is a description of choices I’ve made. The unfortunate thing about life is that, for some of us, when we look at the choices we’ve made (some consciously, others under duress, still others under the influence of others), we feel that they define us.

This time around, I’m finding it a little easier to be uncomfortable around others. I’m more willing to take risks, despite how foolish a part of me says I am. And, as a result, I have a bunch of friends that I might not otherwise had and, from that, I become a better person.

Thanks Kristi!


This has been a Finish the Sentence Friday bloghop post. Come on! Join in…. you’ll be glad ya did. Get on over to Finding Ninee and tell ’em the Doctrine sent ya.



* I remember writing my first post in large part because of what happened when I completed the process. So, I wrote and I edited and did all the things that we all do, Then came the moment… to hit ‘Publish’. I went through a number of clarklike changes and finally hit the button. I then reached down, turned off the computer, got up and went down to the garage, got in my car and drove away from my house.  Eventually I returned and turned on the computer and the rest has simple.

** Outsider (clarks), Predator (scotts) or Herd Member (roger)


impromptu post* -the Wakefield Doctrine- *…done without being planned, organized, or rehearsed.

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

Of course, our Dickensian subtitle begs the question, ‘can a reprint truly be un-planned or un-organised or (especially) un-rehearsed?‘ I mean, serially, is it not the essence of rehearsal to present something that, while at one point was spontaneous, by definition is a repeat? I know that the clarks (and those rogers and scotts with significant secondary clarklike aspects) are thinking, ‘isn’t the bulk of my day in fact a ‘reprint’? if I’m remembering how I usually respond to people and situations in the past and am taking that habitual path today… am I giving up my opportunity for the sake of certainty. damn! best try not to do that!’

From 2012

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

The Wakefield Doctrine is a unique insight into the behavior of the people in our lives (and outside of our lives). The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the fact that everyone lives  in what amounts to a ‘personal reality’ (aka a worldview).1 For the Reader willing to accept this premise, we offer three characteristic worldviews that account for:  you, me, the person who woke you up this morning, the Physician who will change your life in a single statement, the child you remember being on the perfect Halloween Evening, the woman who said she would love no other, the Teacher who you hated, the man who promised to return, the dreams of the future, the regrets of the past and your smile (to yourself) that you are still reading this thing.

The characteristic worldviews are (that of):

  1. the Outsider, you wake up each day knowing that the world is ‘out there’ and you are ‘here’, you are creative and funny and have an insatiable appetite to learn things, anything, for the joy of discovery and in the (secret) hope of learning the secret of how to be ‘a part of’ to not be the Outsider. This is the clark personality
  2. the Predator, you wake up each morning hungry…physically, spiritually, socially, sexually. A scott, (this is the personality type that naturally results from living in the worldview of the Predator), is always on the move, always alert, aggressive, fun to be with, mercurial, loud, un-shy and outlandish. It is said of the scottian individual, “I scream, therefore I am”
  3. the Member of the Herd, as a roger you are confident in the rightness of the world and constantly worried about sufficiently understanding the proper way to live, you are a social genius, you are a very encouraging listener and an inveterate gossip. You believe that Reality and the Universe is quantifiable and governed by Rules, your understanding of these Rules invests you with Power and Responsibility to everyone you encounter, rogers are responsible for Civilization and the Spanish Inquisition, the stability of  governance and the Salem Witch Trials

The theory (of the Wakefield Doctrine)  is that we are all born with the capability to live in one of these three worldviews and that at an early age (3-5), we all settle into what becomes our predominant worldview. Although this predominant worldview becomes our defining reality, we never lose the capacity to act as we would if we were in the ‘other two worldviews’. This is why many people, upon first trying out the Doctrine, write in and say, “Hey, I know my type, but there are times when I act like one of the other two! What the hell?” This is the example of what we call a secondary aspect, where a person ’employs’ a characteristic of the non-dominant worldviews to deal with a situation. It is usually a passing thing, nothing to be alarmed about.2
The Wakefield Doctrine is not only unique, it is easy to use! It does not ask questions, does not require the individual (you, the Reader, who else would we mean??!)  t0 complete a survey or describe their likes, dislikes and favorite colors.  There is no math to be performed, no charts or graphs (“…your personality type is somewhere on this scale that runs from 0 = Savior of Mankind to 10 = Geez, what a jerk!”)
The Wakefield Doctrine simply maintains that your personality is the natural result of your growing up, developing and living in one of the three worldviews.
The Wakefield Doctrine is not only unique and easy, it is fun! If you learn the characteristics of the three personality types, go out into your day today, you will see at least one clark and one scott (and by inference a bunch of rogers), and they will act just like we describe in these Pages. So go out, try it and come back and say “Hey Make it stop now!! Sure this is a valid insight, but my husband!!  he is such a roger! I can’t stop giggling when he tries to tell me how great a hobby that (genealogy, re-enacting, bicycling is). Make it stop!”

Thats it for today.

Thanks for behaving! We have a group of new people here today (yes, those odd locations in the feedjit, the whispering in the back of the classroom) not to worry! Most will leave as soon as the Tour bus gets here. Sure, why not? “Now,everone say hello to all them folks what came by from Bloppy Bloggers!


1)  nothing weird, really! We are not saying that reality is what you want it to be ( well, we actually do say that) and we are not proposing that the world at large is less real and concrete than your personal world,  (err..better hold that thought too) and we are so not saying that this is a personality theory that requires the user to have  a certain, special quality that combines intellectual confidence and a desire to imagine what if? (damn! 3 for 3…back up to the Post now, enough about you, this is about how the Wakefield Doctrine will make your today much more interesting).

2)  actually this business of secondary aspects holds the key to the Wakefield Doctrine being used as the best of self-improvement, self-development tools! But that’s for later, this is an introduction to the Doctrine, yo.



* here’s the vid that took me back (almost) to the reprint post above.


Re-Print Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

 Why a Re-Print post?
Are you sure you want to know?
You ever hear the expression, “As it was in the beginning so shall it be in the end.”? Fine sentiment. Impeccable provenance. A lead pipe cinch for ‘most likely to end up spelled out in colorful thread in a needlepoint’ or ‘ironically overlayed on a poster-sized photo of a mushroom cloud and/or a very cute kitten.’
The thing of it is, what does this saying imply about the time between ‘the beginning’ and ‘the end’.
Same as it ever was? (T. Heads).
The Doctrine reminds us that while it’s easy to believe that ‘nothing remains the same’, that is more intended for our surroundings than ourselves. And…and! since the key to the value of the Wakefield Doctrine lies in our coming to understand ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’, we ignore the difference (or lack thereof) in how we related ourselves to the world in the past at our extreme peril.
That being said, below is a three year old Post.

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

the part of the boat where the name 'Roann' is? that's the fo'c's'le (sleep and eat there…work everywhere else)

the part of the boat where the name ‘Roann’ is? that’s the fo’c’s’le (sleep and eat there…work everywhere else)

So here’s the thing, I need to write a Post before I get pulled into my work-world. (I’m also trying to learn to become a better writer… so let me think out loud here, ok?) You, the Reader, have a couple of Questions at this point:

  1. Why does he need to write a Post
  2. What does he mean by ‘(being)pulled into his ‘world-world’
  3. What does he mean by ‘work-world’ and
  4. I don’t think with parentheses… what they hell is going on here?

Fine. Here are the Answers:

1) I need to write a Post for two reasons: a) I’m trying to write ‘the Wakefield Doctrine book’ and, for reasons beyond the scope of this Post, I need to practice my ‘voice’ in writing (has something to do with how I’m trying to come across to the Reader of the book, more conversational than informational… interesting instead of pedantic. Not that I’m ever in danger of being pedantic. 2) I find that I only have a certain ‘amount of words’ to write in a given day and c) I’m always afraid that if I don’t write frequently enough, I’ll forget how to

2) I mean that there is a schedule to create, tasks and appointments that are part of my workday and, for me, I need to ‘get into character’, (Jules Winnfield in that wonderful movie, ‘Pulp Fiction’), in order to have any hope whatsoever of being effective today. The moment I start to plan my day, I’m halfway into that world

3) I believe I just told you.

4) So, I need to get something down ‘on paper’ in order to satisfy my need to do whatever-the-hell-it-is-that-I-think-I’m-doing-by-writing-this-blog, today. Not as cool as waking up carnal or waking up and running 5 miles or waking up and meditating on a bamboo mat or waking up in the fo’c’s’le of an old Eastern rig (you actually wake up because it become quieter…. the engines are slowed down because you’ve arrived at the spot where you will ‘set in’ , i.e.putting the net out, which involves physical work in one of the most … bracing of environments. It’s not just that you’re waking up outdoors! Hell, cowboys and campers do that! It’s not even that you’re in a hostile situation….soldiers and hookers experience that… it’s that the place you are, the ‘middle of the ocean’* is a place that you have no, natural business being. You are, through your technology, floating in an alien world, a ghost/demon in the quiet dark world of the fishes that swim below. Totally at the mercy of the elements, (wind and temperature, sky and water). Waking up and going up on deck ( the fo’c’s’le of an Eastern rig is in the bow, the foremost part of the boat and is below decks, so you need to climb a ladder to get outdoors). Working on deck means ignoring where you are and never for a moment forgetting where you are, very ….special way to wake up to a workweek.

Today’s Post title? Sometimes, all it takes is a wonderful song lyric to jumpstart a Post, ya know?


* for the most part, at least in the context of the Atlantic Ocean fisheries, you’re not really in the ‘middle of the ocean’… you’re on the left edge, the Continental shelf, to be somewhat technical…. the depth that you fish in is relatively shallow, maybe, 600 feet versus 6,000 (the shelf drops off very sharply…well, yeah just like a shelf…google it)