The first Post second, the Wakefield Doctrine Wednesday (or so it would seem)

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

insightful_quotes_from_jean_claude_van_damme_640_20

The Wakefield Doctrine provides those with the aptitude for and the interest in understanding the behavior of the people in their lives, a perspective that is unique, very useful and quite often amusing. Part inspired observation, part creative inference, this view of human personality, while not rigidly empirical (more flexibly anecdotal), can afford the dedicated people watcher, an insight that will be both refreshing and amusing. There is a catch.

We have found, in the course of writing some 783 Posts over the last 4 years, that even allowing for a certain element of rhetorical density in our efforts to explain the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, not everyone who reads this blog gets it. I know, how the hell can that be? Actually that was predicted by the Doctrine itself, that in order to clear the hurdles of the somewhat prosaic-ositousness of some Posts1 the Readers would have to be clarks or (being scotts or rogers), have a strong secondary clarklike aspect.

But here you are, shaking your head as you read this, thinking ‘do I really have this much free time?!’

 

1)  like this one from December 2009:

‘…sun don’t shine, the gods look down in anger’

YouTube Preview Image

(Well, oh kay… interesting note to start a Post on… but stranger things have happened in and about the Wakefield Doctrine)

(…”this just in”…’clark…the seventies…were…thirty…plus…years ago’…stop…’please, stop’…)

Hey Reader! Yeah you!
Do you believe that your (personal) history defines and (pre)determines your future or what? Is there such a thing as the momentum of habit. (The ‘momentum of habit’  is the notion that what we are is simply a more elaborate form of what we have always been.) (Cheery thought, no?)

Well? Do you think it does?
Do me a favor, given that you know something about us here at the Doctrine

Look back on your life. Try and recollect the things you have done, the places you have lived, the people you have known, since as far back as you can recall…
Now, erase the names of the people, delete the addresses of the locations and take off the labels of the things you have done (job title, education, religious designations). You can still remember your life, can’t you?
Even with names and labels removed/deleted/eliminated, you know that you have been alive, with a life that is yours and yours alone. You know, even without the names, you lived in one place (or many different places), you knew some people (or a lot of people) and you spent your waking time doing this (or doing that).
Your ‘life story’ runs from the first (and often sketchy) times you remember as a child through and right up to now.

Pretty goddamn ‘straight’ line isn’t it?
(Come on roger, stop protesting. You know what I mean. You are capable of this.)
Look at your life in terms of how many different interests and activities and ways of investing your time is evidenced. How different was your life when you were 7 years old compared to when you were 17 years old (…or 27 or 77…)?
(Yeah, yeah scott, I get the ‘I gots the girlfriends/boyfriends thing’ Does not matter. Lose the names, and they (still) are people you shared yourself and your time with, no different than a best friend in second grade or a spouse in middle age or the person in the bed next to yours in the nursing home.)
What I am trying to get across here is that the important thing  is not the names of the people, places and activities that comprise(s) your life.
Rather, I am asking you to consider the question, what did they (seem) to add to your life, why did you give them (these people and places and activities) your time!?

I want the Reader to consider their lives without the qualification/rationalization/justification that we all impose when we reflect on our lives.

… ‘he was a great friend, even though he was an asshole’… ‘I really liked spending time with her, but I had to because she was family’ … “of course we are happy together! We have beautiful children and a nice home’… ‘I know this is a boring job, but I will stick with it, because otherwise, what will I do?…’maybe I can still pray and maybe its not too late for me…”who will take care of me if I get sick?’…

(These little quotes barely  hint at the myriad of ways that we employ to make the fact that what constitutes ‘our lives’, the essential nature and character, if you will,  is the same today as it was on your very first day at school.)

So?
So what, what is wrong with that, at least I have a life that I can look at and say, ‘hey I’m not doing so bad’!

You are correct, scott.  roger?  you can come back in the room, we have stopped talking about life as if it were totally unpredictable and un-certain. We won’t talk about interchangeability any more.

Well, that was fun, wasn’t it?  (Yes, I am seriously getting ready to close out this Post for today.) (No, I actually don’t have a more satisfying denouement for todays Post)

(writer leaves, house lights stay off…)

Alright, alright. Seeing that we have some new visitors (from Italy and Sweden and Ghana to name a few) and, of course, Sloveniaaa  is in da house!! I will try to impart or at least ’duct tape’ some kind of coherent point to this Post.

If pressed, I would have to say that the point of this (Post)  is that our essential natures (clarksscotts and rogers) will determine how our lives are experienced.
Having said that, I will remind everyone that the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the idea that we all have the full range of potential, we are all (potentially) clarks and scotts and rogers.
And despite how this Post reads, we always have the potential to feel, act, or think in the manner of the other two personality types.
In fact, that really is the purpose of the WakefieldDoctrine (the theory of clarksscotts and rogers), to offer a tool for self-improving ourselves by seeing the world from a different perspective.

 

 

Share

Thurston Thursday (the Third) the Wakefield Doctrine “…yes, it *is* a video Post!”

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

YouTube Preview Image

 

Hey, you got questions? We will totally answer them, you know.

clarks: the Outsiders, for them the world is ‘out there’

scotts: the Predators, live to act/act to live

rogers: the Herd Members, they know that the universe is quantifiable and there are Rules (‘referential authority’)

 

 

Hey! I got a Comment!  from Noah Conti @ yahoo.com, and he says,

This post presents clear idea designed for the new visitors of blogging, that really how to do blogging.”

I suspect someone’s soon-to-be-world-famous-personality-types-blog is on someone’s spam list!  lol

 

Share

‘…of Hendrix, good questions and intriguing dreams’ the Wakefield Doctrine

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

wonderful-life-color

Question from Considerer question:

“Yeah I’d like to know my secondary aspect, after all, knowledge is power…”

When you first practice inferring another person’s predominant worldview, you watch a person and look through the ‘lens’ of the three worldviews. (Often, it is helpful to pick which of the three is pretty damned unlikely and then focus and then begin to compare the remaining two)…watching for the sense of consistency between the observed behavior and what you know about the characteristic behavior of the worldview being held up for comparison. Keep doing this until you feel comfortable with your choice. Want to hear 2 encouraging facts? a) you can’t get it wrong1 and 2) you can’t break it2.

From Denise is this Questionment:

“It’s been said around the Doctrine that it’s like learning a second language. The goal being to eventually think in “Doctrine” … woke up today remembering a snippet of dream.”

Good! The goal is to have the perspective of the Doctrine practiced so that it is not work to apply in the course of your day. A note here to Readers who may be expecting more from this personality theory than we intend. Of late, I have been in conversation with Friend of the Doctrine, Molly, on this very question, i.e. does the Doctrine require total commitment in order to have any value to the individual? ( I may not totally appreciate Molly’s position on this topic, but that in and of itself is the reason for allowing that more is better than less, when it comes to the ways that we view the world around us5).  I do say that, as a tool for self-development and self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine will prove to be without peer. However, it is still simply a perspective. A way to view the world and the people in it.
Just as becoming fluent in a second (or third or fourth) language, should not interfere with your native language, acquiring an understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine need not cause any conflict with whatever belief system you may choose to employ in your day-to-day, ‘my god! I really thought I knew them better than that! How could they say a thing like that?’…activities. (lol)

So, as with so much in life, the greater the range of your experience in day-to-day living, the better are the chances at getting this thing right!6

 

Readers familiar with the Doctrine, seeing two partially italicized block-quotes, have stopped reading and gotten up to get a re-fill on their coffee, tea or whatever tasty beverage they may be sipping. The common reaction, among Readers familiar with these pages is, ‘oh goody/hot shit! one of those Posts!
If you are a new Reader, let me simply say… the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective, a tool, a personality theory that,  if you are willing to allow yourself to see the world as being comprised of people who are living in one of three characteristic worldviews, will give you an insight into the behavior of the people in your life. With the Wakefield Doctrine you can know more about the other person than they know about themselves… while they may know the ‘what’ of their behavior, you will know the ‘why’. Warning to new Readers, if you are successful in learning the simple suppositions, then you will begin to see the clarks that are in your life (there is a passing good chance that you yourself are one) and the scotts (we know they are there...) and the rogers (if they’re not on bicycles or in their workshops, they can often be difficult to distinguish from scotts). And….and! if you succeed in being able to see them, there is a really good chance that you will not be able to stop seeing them. Hey, what can I say?

Today’s Post is, in fact, one of those Posts.

To answer the question7 asked by Considerer:  well, the best approach is to establish the person’s predominant worldview and then look for anomalies.  Cyndi is a clark (like you didn’t know that in the first encounter…) but there she is, not only doing video Posts (a totally not clarklike activity), she is doing them effectively, more to the point she is enjoying doing them…thriving in that context. So, which of the 3 personality types are the natural performer, the front man?  …exactly!
Today’s 2 videos are from Jimi Hendrix. Now, he might be confusing because his secondary aspect is so very strong. Man! he’s got to be a scott!!  right?  well, most of us would go with that pick… (see footnote 2) until you see an interview of him. Then you totally know that he was a clark. So, the rogerian Reader is quick to ask, “how do you know he’s not a scott with a secondary clarklike aspect, huh? how do you know that?” Great question.  The answer to this is the same as the basic description of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘how does the person appear to relate themselves to the world around them?’

 

 

YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image

 

1) if you guess wrong and continue to try and understand a person using the Doctrine, you will see the inconsistencies, example: you think you have a scott but occasionally you see him acting like a girl3, then you make a note to yourself, ‘hey! wait a minute  this might just be a roger!

2)  by this we mean that, lets say you decide you are a clark, but you also find yourself totally obsessed with genealogy and think ‘damn I guessed wrong, now what?  Not a problem. Calling yourself a scott if you are really a clark, does not even change a thing. At any point you can go back and hold up the lens (of the three worldviews) and see which of the three your behavior seems most in focus in…er  with… whatever. As you learn more about the characteristics and gain a deeper insight and a certain fluency, you will want to do this, just for the fun of it!

3) scotts and most clarks will get this joke, if you do not, quick write us a Comment and ask!  I can esplain everything!4

4) though it will no longer be funny… ha ha

5) probably only true for clarks… seeing how we can accept anything (as being possible)

6) promise that is the last clark-centric joke in this Post.

7) lol yeah! I know… we tend to wander a bit, hey all the better to appreciate the questions!

Share

“…of meece and men.”* the Wakefield Doctrine ‘Finish dat Sentence Friday’

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

YouTube Preview Image

(house lights down…music comes up… FTSF Productions  Produced and Directed by the ‘Bloggarini de celebrini ’  Janine (‘the Machine’) ‘Confessions of a Mommyaholic‘, Kate ( ‘no, you didn’t!..’) ‘Can I Get Another Bottle of Whine ’, Stephanie (“…you really think you’re up to this?”) ‘Mommy, for real‘ and Dawn (“…who keeps them all out of blogger jail”) ‘Dawn’s Disaster’

This Summer I plan to….  ”

(since this is the Wakefield Doctrine and we maintain that there are three characteristic worldviews (personal realities), it would only be right that we finish this sentence in three ways**)

worldview of the Outsider (aka clarks): ‘…hope’

worldview of the Predator (aka scotts): ” fuck!!!! yeah!!!!”

worldview of the Herd Member (aka rogers): (smiles)

 

 

* …cultural reference to cartoon feline, if you need to know, write a Comment

** don’t forget! you have one predominant worldview and the (possibility of) secondary and tertiary worldviews that usually result in people saying, “Hey Doctrinaires! sometimes I know I am a roger but other times I must be a scott! What gives?” What gives is that a) these worldviews are characteristical and not exact, the same in every damn tiny detail yo,  2) the secondary and tertiary aspects shade and influence the world…  why don’t ya just call us Saturday Night, we’ll explain ever thang

Share

the Wakefield Doctrine (it’s AP/AS/SH at the Doctrine… bring your yellow pads and No 2 pencils… and your questions!)

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

 

YouTube Preview Image

The Wakefield Doctrine is all about how we relate ourselves to the world around us.  The Wakefield Doctrine is built on the idea that everyone experiences reality, to a certain extent, as a personal affair and we call these affairs, worldviews. The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the notion that there are three characteristically distinct (and distinguishable) worldviews, and if you ask someone who understands the Wakefield Doctrine what these three worldviews are all about, they will tell you:  it is about being the Outsider, knowing that you can never assume to ‘be a part of’; and they will tell you that one of the three worldviews is the reality of the Predator who lives in and of action, (a person)  for whom the world is the ‘here and now’; finally she will tell you that some people grow up secure in the knowledge that the world is quantifiable, that there exists Rules and (a) Right Way of living. The Wakefield Doctrine is about seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it,  knowing and accepting that when the other person, your husband/your sister/your pupil/your customer/your date/your enemy/your Doctor/the-person-stealing-the-parking-place-you-were- trying-for-and-would-already-be-in-if-you-had-not-been-so-damned-polite/the surly kid at the hardware store/the girl at the checkout counter who smiles as you realize that she doesn’t even register your existence/the new boss, so anxious to impress his boss/the girl you were afraid to ask out but decided to try-having-a-normal-life-just-one-more-time/the parent in the hospital bed that they will never leave/the child that you take to the bus top the very first time, full of hope and fear/the husband who says that he would never do anything to hurt you but….

So, you think this Wakefield Doctrine might be useful to you? in your life? We bet it can! if… your wife seems to ignore the things that matter the most to you, if you get mad when people just fuckin stand there and talk about what they are going to do instead of just doing it, if you want to hide but are afraid of being left behind in life, if you know that there is more to the friends that you thought you had, even though they don’t seem to bother calling you anymore more, if you want to stop the bad habits, if you keep thinking that there has to be a way to figure it all out, if you are tired of seeing others lead happy normal lives and you know that they are not that different, if you think that you could use an edge, if you feel that knowing more about the people in your life would make it richer and more fulfilling, if you just want to be sure…

yeah there is something in the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine that might help.

Today at 3:30 EDT  if you call this number  218-339-0422  and do what the nice woman sez including entering this code: 512103 followed by the # sign   … you just might find some people happy to tell you what they know and are happy to hear what you know  about this understanding people stuff.

Like we say, ‘if you learn and use the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for understanding people, you need never find yourself saying, “I really thought I knew him better than that! How could they say such thing, what would make her do something so thoughtless!”

 

 

 

 

Share

© 2009-2013 Francis Clark Farley All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright