Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Found in translation’

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

20170619_084630

Just happened past this field of cows and such this morning. No! Seriously I had no idea that I’d be writing this post as I took the photo.

As we all know, ‘clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’.

We (also) all know that…with the perspective afforded by an appreciation of the three predominant worldviews that comprise the personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, we can know the people in our lives better than they know themselves. Even better, will can know what they will (decide to) do before they themselves do’.

So, you’re thinking, all this is well and good, so how come I still have trouble communicating with my clark/scott/roger?

There is the topic of today’s post. Communicating between personal realities, worldviews.

First: accept that your reality is manifested in a manner fundamentally different from that of the clark or scott or roger with whom you are exchanging ideas, interviewing for a job, asking for a date, coaxing into doing chores, making a pass at and offering your condolences. If you are a clark these things/ideas/thoughts are in the form of knowledge/information; if you are a roger then they are (to you) emotions/feelings/consensus and if you are a scott they are the things you do/your acts/your appetites.

Second: accept that, since you’re the one with the Doctrine and, apparently, the ambition, to get across an idea to a person, despite their different experience, it is up to you to translate what you think, (or feel or do), into something more compatible with that person’s reality.

So, how is that translation done? Well, for the moment, we’ve discovered one of the three (necessary) transformations: from a clark to a roger. For a clark to communicate an idea that they have to a roger, they, (the clark), should take the thought/idea and transform it into an effective metaphor. It is not overly helpful to say to a roger, “Here’s what I think”, or “The best thing you can do about your problem is realize that,” or even, “Have you ever stopped to think that…”

Much better to say, “Hey! that girl you want to ask out, thats a lot like,”  or “Your boss is giving you a hard time, that’s similar to”

(Astute Doctrine followers are thinking, ‘I get it! rogers deal in emotion, so I need to give them a situation that they can identify with on an emotional level.’  Exactly!)

 

Share

-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘the coolest thing about the Wakefield Doctrine?’

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

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- Saturday

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

20170520_140303

Una stands guard. The bottom third of the photo shows 3/4s of the letter ‘a’, the dirt making up the left and top curves of the letter have been dug out. To the bottom right is a rusted-red wheel barrow, the handles pointing back towards the camera, there are black grips on the ends of the handles. There is dirt in the wheelbarrow, it is brown and has lighter brown clumps for stuck-together soil. Leaning against the front left edge of the wheel barrow is a shovel. The working end of the shovel is in the trench that forms the letter, it is leaning at an angle like if you raised your left arm from against your side out, maybe eighteen inches. The shaft of the shovel is red and the end has a black rubber grip. The middle and top of the photo are of the letter ‘n’ and ‘U’ (we’re at the bottom of the word looking up). There is a certain black dog sitting guard. Una is facing away from the camera and sitting upright on her hind quarters at the inside top of the letter ‘n’. Her coat is lighter black on her back, shiny and her tail shows out behind her.

You know, I’m coming to appreciate how much reality is a process, as opposed to a product. (The latter supposition underlies the remarkable perseverance and the near-tragic inability to capitalize on the passing good fortune that most clarks encounter with a frequency that would make a pessimist doubtful and optimist suddenly agnostic).

In any event, this is the Wakefield Doctrine’s TToT post. Hosted by Josie every weekend, we’re all invited to contribute and/or share examples of the people, places and things that have caused us to feel the emotion of gratitude. It, (this bloghop), is fun and interesting. Many correspondents are remarkably skilled in (the) concise, orderly and direct presentation of their experiences. These writers have that gift of conveying, in simple terms, complex emotional experiences. Fortunately there is also room for those of us for whom the challenge of conveying emotion is all too daunting; by predisposition, mood or predominant worldview, we find the emotional side of the world something of a cypher. Relating an experience of gratitude can often be difficult, as we are usually not always paying attention to that side of the psyche.

Enough of the introspection. You want Ten Things that make me say, ‘hey! that was interesting.*’ Here:

1)  So, you’re thinking, ‘Sure you’re saying you’re a clark. Last week’s instance of the story of digging a lot of dirt out of the ground and moving it from place to place was fun, and certainly suggestive of one born to the reality of the Outsider, but we want more proof.”  Well, here is the wheelbarrow I’ve been using for the Una garden project. (It was a gift from Phyllis’s father when we bought the house in 1990. It, the wheelbarrow, was getting a bit old then.)

20170520_143923

old metal wheelbarrow. it’s body torn from metal fatigue, the single wheel at an angle out of true.

 

2, 3 and 4): (i.e. My work / coastal community / me to drive around.

5)Home and Heart (a Sister Margaret Ryan novel)’. Chapter 9 will be out tomorrow morning, at the latest. (Teaser: Sister Margret is encouraged to return to her childhood home on Tulip St, in the Fishtown section of Philadelphia. Since it is Sister Bernadine who did the encouraging, her trip is a surprise to no one. What she finds as she walks through the door is something else entirely.)

6) The soil reclamation phase of the Una garden project is complete. Totally grateful to be done with that part, sorta. it has been good exercise.

7) Phyllis and Una

8) something tomorrow? maybe…

9) the Wakefield Doctrine  because with a proper of understanding of this perspective on people and such, one would have been able to correctly identify the gardener in our tale of dirt and plants-to-be as a person who grew up and developed the social strategies and coping mechanisms that would them a  fighting chance of thriving, while living life  as an Outsider. ya know?

10) SR 1.3

 

18403208_10209099434658644_1119489351777234718_n

Share

Six Hundred Character Word Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-…

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

20170503_163759

the scene from my office window: 4 lane highway running right to left in the foreground, framed by my window. across the road a triangular building and to the right of that, a strip mall. top half is blue sky with grey and white clouds

This is Wednesday and that, up there, the title? Totally a Wednesday title. The thing is, I like to get started on writing my Six Sentence Story on Wednesday, even knowing that, the chances are, whatever I write here will not end up be my official entry. It’s just helpful (to me) to have words on the page before the deadline. Like walking through the door to a party or meeting that’s mostly strangers. You see someone you know, and, even if you can’t stand ’em, you’re like, ‘thank god, someone who I can pretend I’m talking to.’

(“Yes, you, down in front. You have a question?  Why don’t I just start on the Six Sentence Story and finish it before Thursday morning? Good question. Sometimes I do. But not that often, as my writing time seems to be the morning, as opposed to the afternoon or evening.”)

I have the word. The prompt word. It’s the kernel, it’s the essence of inspiration, the nascent glimmer of a beautiful scene, up ahead in the near, far distance. Our host zoe, trusting her sense of the sublime, scouring the dictionaries from seven continents to find the perfect word to start us on an incredible writing adventure. And the word? Well, the…

“The word is….. chicken.”

“Am not!”

“I think ya are.”

“Well, you just wait.”

“I am waiting.”

“Hold on, gimme a minute…ok watch this.”

(“Please stay on the line, what is the nature of your emergency.”)

 

Share

Toosday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of new chapters and old reprints.’

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

DSC00428

a gazebo at the end of a wood-plank walkway, chainlink fences on either side. two outdoor benches are on the left and one on the right, about halfway to the end. the bushes along the walk and the sky suggest a seaside location. (that would be a correct suggestion)

Chapter 6 and Chapter 7 of ‘Home and Heart‘ (a Sister Margaret Ryan novel) is out, available and can be read at jukepop. com

Thought I’d do a reprint post.

Hey, do you know that despite the fact that the Wakefield Doctrine does not base its inferences and predictions on the results of a ‘What’s your favorite color’, ‘If you could be any microorganism which would you be’ or even, “Someone has you cornered in a dark alley and, on the top of the garbage can next to you are three items: a hand mixer, a bent-corner copy of ‘Candide’ and…. what would you need to combine with the other two so that you could leave the alley as unscathed as you might desire?’

You know, those kinds of personality quizzes. The type of questionnaire that once was found in the back of magazines that never had an offer of subscription, lately is found on whatever secret pages in ‘the Facebook’ that give rise to postings that include the statements, “And then what happened will leave you shocked…” “And their comeback left them in…. (try shock)” or “I got (fill in the blank), that nearly always prompts one person to say to another, “Come here! You have to take this test, they so have your number!”  (At the Doctrine we call these personality assessments, ‘club-shaped mirrors’.

(July 18, 2013)

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

anjana-the-chimpanzee-and-two-tigers-3

I was ‘talking’1 to Considerer last night.

me:  “Considerings (the blog) has been real busy…you’re getting good reviews”

Lizzie: “It has been indeed!  At some point I’m hoping to reach a tipping point and snag a few more members/followers/groupies…  I have been pleasantly surprised, because I am trying to take your advice and learn rogerian (see my new tab when you get a chance)”

me:  “damn, I hate to see you spending all your time re-inventing the axle! You have the Doctrine down to the point that you should be out there pushing the boundaries of (our) understanding.”

So I told our newest DownSpring, write me a question (about the Wakefield Doctrine) and I might use it as a launching point in an effort to present where the hot topics and current challenges are in our efforts to learn, use and have fun with the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers.

(here’s Lizzie’s Question):

How you came up with such a thorough Doctrine. And whether or not all the Doctrine views are ‘but only through the eyes of a clark‘, in which case,what might the other views think (or would they?)”

My Answer: ‘No’

The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the idea of personal reality. Simply put, the totality of your experience of the world around you is more than the aggravation2 of objective facts, (who, what, where, why and when). Reality involves interpretation of the external ‘objective’ world. Nothing earth-shaking there. The Doctrine is concerned with, ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. No one should have a problem with that as a starting point. The Wakefield Doctrine holds that there are three characteristic worldviews (those personal realities we spoke of just now). Since the Wakefield Doctrine purports to be a personality theory, we have three personality types. The difference between us and the mainstream personality systems that immediately appears, is that the Wakefield Doctrine is not particularly concerned with the individual (as a source of information to determine personality types) per se. Rather, the primary goal of a person employing our Doctrine is to infer which of the three worldviews are being experienced. If we correctly infer that a person is living in, (and has grown up and developed in), the personal reality that we call, ‘that of the Outsider’ then we have what we call a clark. (and so with the respective worldviews of the Predator and the Herd).

Where the work of the Wakefield Doctrine currently lies, is in our efforts to develop a language that can be understood by an individual (from) the perspective of any of the three worldviews.4
The three worldviews are different. They are different in terms of how they require a successful ‘inhabitant’ to relate to them. This is a qualitatively, fundamentally, scrumptiously different difference (between the three worldviews). Lets go with the bullet points:

  • clarks live in a worldview (in which) the individual is an Outsider. if you are an Outsider, what is the first thing that occurs to you to do?  what quality/capability/capacity found in (a) human being is best suited to this task? And while you are engaged in this effort what would you fear and what would you hope for
  • scotts live in a worldview (in which) the individual is a Predator.  what is the first thing that occurs to you to do? (now to expand on the line of reasoning we followed with clarks), how you describe the world to another person is a function of how you relate yourself to the world (that) you find yourself in, (we call this ‘how the worldview manifests’), from the perspective of having the world of the Predator to relate yourself to and, given the range of human expression available how would you be inclined to express yourself to those around you?
  • rogers live in the world of the Herd, the nature of the world for the person who lives in this worldview is relatedness  what would it be like, to look around at the people and the places and the things and the activities and the past and the future in a context in which everything (and everyone) is connected in some way?

The challenge of creating a ‘common language’ lies in the fact that in languages there are sounds and there are concepts that are exclusively the domain of one’s context, environment …world and is not necessarily even possible in the other two worldviews. And it is surely these ‘exclusive/characteristic/native’ concepts, that are critical to understanding/acting in/feeling the true nature of the three personal realities. For better or worse, the Doctrine maintains that we are all heir to the three ways to experience the world, so our job is to learn, understand, identify with, feel and do something with each of these distinct, though somewhat in common worlds.

We talk about our initial efforts to understand/act/feel the three worldviews as acquiring fluency. Only reasonable, no? You have three cultures that have only the biology of their inhabitants in common and you want to create a language that allows productive interaction between the three…first thing you better do is become fluent in each native language. Then find common ground. Then…then! try and convince those stubborn bastards that not only is this a good idea, but they will be better off once they learn to save the lava-walking and the witch-burning for their once-a-year culture celebrations and stand acting like the evolved people that we want to hang out with (and we promise to stop mumbling and hoping to be forgiven).

Any questions? Outrageous acts? Overwhelming Feelings?

(oh yeah!! new Readers?  clarks thinkscotts act and rogers feel.  If you have the kind of mind that enjoys playing with ideas and you have the sharpness of intellect that you will see when you look at Cyndi (the brilliant young clarklike female currently known as Cynthia) and Considerer and the others  you might just get something out of this!)

1) actually I was typing…not one of the more effective ways for me to communicate

2) a rogerian expression3

Share

© 2009-2017 Francis Clark Farley All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright