you like potato and I like tomato | the Wakefield Doctrine you like potato and I like tomato | the Wakefield Doctrine

you like potato and I like tomato

So we were having a semi-spirited debate in the Comments section of yesterday’s Post.  There were contributions from glenn, DS#1 and (the roger).  The topic was fairly basic, what is the point of the Wakefield Doctrine, it’s raison d’etre…(and whatnot)…

The Doctrine’s position is simply that if we are born with the qualities of all three types, but for a variety of reasons become predominately one (type), the highest form of being would be to have the qualities of all three (clarks, scotts and rogers) actualized to their fullest and in dynamic balance.

As a scott, glenn took the position that he likes and enjoys his scottian self, that his clarklike and rogerian aspects were “unavoidable character quirks” (thereby accepting the basic tenet of the Doctrine, see above).  Further, glenn maintains that since he sees his scottian ‘character’ to be the best he can be, ” I am the best ME I can be when I am fully scottian”, rather than develop his clarklike and rogerian aspects, his thought is to,  “If I seek improvement, I seek it by emphasizing MORE the scottian part of me–and suppressing more the roger and clark”

The rogerian view is proffered by no less an authority than the Progenitor roger.  He be sayin this: 
“… a few months back that DS1 made the point of using the Doctrine as a personal philosophy aimed at internal balance. …that’s the only positive practical application for this. If you try to go any other way, you end up with a completely immobile, static system that will do nothing more than reinforce whatever hatreds and prejudices you already had on your plate when you came in the door. (That is very probably the only real difference in the world between good guys and bad guys, in the end. The good guys struggle with it, and the bad guys just say ’screw it’ and kill everything.)”

Finally DownSpring#1: “I would simply say that clarks do not “need” to be more, they aspire to a higher level.  Always.  Call it self-improvement, self-enlightenment.  It is about evolution…”

Damn!  Is it just me or is not the Wakefield Doctrine the most excellent of ways to understand the behavior of those around us at home, at work and at play. This Doctrine not only allows one to understand the behavior of others, it would allow one to predict the actions and reactions of these other people, yo.

It is not for me to refute any of these statements that were made…they are in fact validation of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).  And as to the question that is at the center of the discussion, i.e. “the best use of the Wakefield Doctrine“.
I would submit that each of the viewpoints assert the contrary:
glenn’s statements indicate a clarklike drive to understand combined with a rogerian relativism (as to the virtue of the other two types)
roger’s referencing DS#1’s statement is of a clarklike tone in combination with a fairly scottian directness
DownSpring#1’s statement while true is wrong…

Not bad for a theory of personality that don’t be havin no graphs and such.  Did someone say “where the hell is da music, mon?”  Yes I have a special treat for y’all.

This first I liked even as a barely heard section of music behind a commercial (I get a lot of music that way, Box of Skulls doing a Mustang commercial, Bing Crosby doing Sugar Crisp and Mike Post who wrote most excellent theme songs), anyway you will have to bear with us on the commercial for a new show, ‘Memphis’, but the band is totally worth it.

Lets give it up for Robert Randolph and the Family Band. Yeah.

See ya, scott…(Have the scotts left?  OK good, they are really trying hard to stretch, to work beyond their boundaries…give ’em credit.  Yeah, I know we all are working beyond our boundaries but consider the scottian world, black/white, good/bad, fun/not fun, predator/prey it is not that they don’t want to ponder the in-effables, it is that for the (un-enlightened) scott those things are not there.  Sort of like going up to a lion or a wolf and asking them if they have considered the implication of the airplanes flying over the savannah, so high that all you could see are the contrails…what’s the lion gonna say?

06 – Midtown at Midnight – Harlem Nocturne

(Forgive the awkwardness of the music here, have not used a mp3 format in the Doctrine to date.  Seems that it will download to your computer and play on whatever media player you have, worth the effort, though).

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. Downspring#1 says:

    And why is my statement “wrong”. Explain. For me and the readers.

    Oh, and tell us “what” is Mr. “Hill Street Blues” Post? A clark, scott or roger. (yes, of course I should know this and who says I don’t)