Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
“…you know that I enjoy my work, don’t you?”
In a word, no.
The Title of today’s Post is a bit mis-leading. Weekend days are different from week days even if, as in my case, you work on Saturday and/or Sunday. So, at this moment, in the context of the 7 days that virtually all of us who are reading this are required to divide the time of our lifes, there is a feeling, a sense of, ‘ok time to focus on serious things‘. And, as most of us know, the word ‘serious’ in this instance is not meant to imply ‘more important’ or ‘more valuable’. It is does not even rise to the level of significance as to cause a reasonable person to think, ‘I must change what I’m doing with my life’.
There is, with the onset of the workweek, however, a shifting of responsibility. And not in a good way, like, ‘hey! the responsible thing is for me to go to work, or school or focus on my duties as homemaker‘… there is something about this more fundamental going on, and I’ll continue using the word responsible, because it seems to convey the sense, “ok enough about you. now it’s time to get serious and respond to something that is: not you“. It must be a good thing, but the essential goodness lies in your subsuming your personal interests to something else, a something that is larger, less direct, mostly benign …but not always.
But, I’m being way too…. clarklike for a Monday morning. Time to set aside the toys and games, devices and distractions and get back to being a responsible life form.
(Hey! the Wakefield Doctrine does maintain that we all grow up and develop our personalities in one of three characteristic worldviews, right? and it is/are the worldview that we live in that not only gives us our ‘personality type’ but also allows us to know more about the people in our lives than we have any business knowing, right? Well, here’s the thing, sometimes it’s fun to share your insight with the people closest to you, like “hey darling I love the way your fashion sense tells the world that while you love being a woman, you want to make it absolutely clear to everyone that it is your choice how much of this quality you will share with the world around you and they better not mistake this qualification as being some kind of weird girl thing. (or) when you’re hanging with friends and you think to say, ‘yeah, you have such an ability to concentrate, it’s really impressive how personally you take the slightest most innocent criticism as a personal attack’ and sometimes it might be better to hold back on the sharing (of how much you know about the way that they relate to the world around them).
The Wakefield Doctrine offers insight, but not license. It’s been a while, but it bears repeating, “the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them”
Off to the workweek with ya now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ap-zYIOjUEQ
About clarkscottroger
Leaving a comment before I read this so I win
totally First Comment!
congrats and such…
My aunt was on MTV once with the Foo Fighters, discussing “Prom Etiquette”. All the Foo Fighters were dress in prom dresses. Did this bother my aunt? Nope. :)
xox jmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnny
I mean dressed, sorry
actually this cut I heard on a newly discovered local (=low watts range of 6 miles) radio station (which totally helps as the college radio that I listen when I don’t want to hear songs that I know every word to… god bless playlist radio
in any event, I heard this version and looked it up on ‘the youtube’ and laughed when the person who posted it said, ‘here, for as long as it stays up’ (or words to that effect, Prince being so against version of his music on youtube)
hey! there’s a good example of the three worldviews Prince. (most new Doctrine Reads would say, “hey! he’s a scott I saw him in a video and man! totally outrageous”) whats interesting is that he is a clark! (the key to this determination is to find and watch interviews with him talking to someone while not on stage… then you would be totally “wholly shit! he is such a clark!”
Hmm…It’s Monday!? BUT IT’S A SCHOOL SNOW DAY! YIPPEEE! I’m working on all-things tutoring and Spanish. :D
I might create a “blog post” for my Spanish website. Hmm…What to do…what to do…wanna see it?
http://ccspanishasheville.wix.com/spanishtutor
hell yeah!
(oh shit! school kids reading?!?)
Why certainly Miss Cyndi, that would be delightful!
Cool new site Cyndi! Like it.
I hope you don’t regret asking what is confusing about this here Doctrine here…”it is/are the worldview that we live in that not only gives us our ‘personality type’ but also allows us to know more about the people in our lives than we have any business knowing,” If the previous statement is true, (and being you said it I suppose you would contend that it is) then it stands to reason that the balance of ones primary, secondary and tertiary personality types will shift dependent upon environment and possibly time spent or the intensity of those environs, yes? So is the Doctrine predicated on all nurture and no nature?
Oh and keeping with a Clarks nature to explain themselves ( I refer back to your comment on my post) , My weird dialogued comment was all around Sybil and forgetting to hit the button on the bottom re notify me of comments… although I probably dont have to because for some reason whenever I sign on your blog is on my screen no matter who I am signing on to…including my own blog… you got the guard virgins working for you or something?
to paraphrase Madame Blavatsky and them:
“when the Doctrine is ready, a pain-in-the-neck Questioner will appear” (lol…)
I hope I frame the intended question correctly, “…is the Doctrine predicated on all nurture and no nature?”
The answer is probably not. (This is not said in a flip or whimsical manner, although I would want to re-cast the question a little, i.e. are we born with a predisposition (of some sort) that results in our finding ourselves in one of the three worldviews (without much chance of being in the other two)?
To step back a…er step. The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that everyone, at a fairly young age finds themselves in one of the three worldviews, i.e. Outsider, Predator or Herd Member and we grow up and develop in the context and conditions of (that) worldview. Slight restatement I found myself in the personal reality in which I am an Outsider. The social skills, coping strategies core attitudes (towards the world) began to become established and, of course, continued through childhood, adolescence and (early) adulthood. The Doctrine simply says that all of these skills and attitudes are predicated on my being an Outsider.
Your question, (I hear) is was I ‘born a clark’ or did I learn to become a clark. The fast answer is ‘I acquired the behavior, coping skills, etc of what we call a clark’ I was not born a clark.
But… there is reason to believe that some people are physiologically pre-disposed to the behavior associated with the scottian worldview… high energy, low impulse control… you know, maniacs!
the part of your question that I may be mis-reading, is of definite interest, i.e. where do the secondary and tertiary aspects come from and why do some people have them and others do not!
If I may, I will return to this follow-up question, lets see if I’m framing your primary question correctly. then move on… very cool pushing of the edges of current understanding
Kind of want to ask what Zoe just did!
well! certainly (am re-reading the question… will reply (as a) Reply to zoe’s Comment.
To be honest, I actually like my job… Maybe I even love it.. It definitely helps me to maintain a routine when otherwise I tend to tun to sloth-ism.. Happy Monday everyone :-)
My head hurts.
lol
“Your question, (I hear) is was I ‘born a clark’ or did I learn to become a clark. The fast answer is ‘I acquired the behavior, coping skills, etc of what we call a clark’ I was not born a clark.” well, we may need to discuss this one but I can see how you would break down the question this way however its a bit oversimplified… I am thinking for example of say a kid born with an Asperger’s type of autism in which you will usually find said kid emeshed in specific redundant activities or being highly (very highly) attentive to detail or specific interests to the exclusion of social skill development because of an organic inability to read social reactions on other folks…He might be a very intelligent kid as well. …that kid wont be a scott any time soon…you got yerself a budding clark there. Who comes by it naturally/physiologically/organically…as well as environmentally as when he leaves his home for other social situations he is likely met with some level of alienation. So I guess that IS what you said… I just talked myself back around … Its both nature and nurture but I guess I was thinking there are equal factors that may predicate the development of one type of personality trait over another… Not such a clean delineation as “I was not born a Clark.”
And on another note… who the hell knows?
Also the second part becomes what if that kid’s situation changes organically? Does he change his primary personality type as well?
Im thinking I may have hurt myself thinking about this one… Im with Lizzi… my head hurts….
And I believe Blavatsky stated “When the Doctrine is ready… one will appear who will force you to think of every angle long before they try to skewer you during an interview on 60 minutes…”
(smiles)
thank you! (for both the hope of the situation and the aid (in) being better prepared.)
But wait! we are just getting to the (interesting) part that your line of questioning is beginning to cast light on… the matter of the secondary and tertiary aspects.
In a practical sense, the secondary aspect allows a greater differentiation among people (of) a given worldview. (I might speculate that secondary aspect is the result of the interaction (interface?) between nature and the nurture of an individual (still need to reserve the answer: are we born into a worldview or do we end up in a worldview) but, if it were true, I am getting comfortable with the idea that the the secondary aspect (represents a reconciliation between the worldview ‘as nature’ and the specific individual’s acclimatization to the worldview, as influenced by their ‘circumstance’…nurture.
To complete this triad, that leaves only the ‘third’ worldview to find some expression within the individual.
very cool thing you have jumpstarted here…
I think I’d relate to that, Clark. I’m S’porean, we’re a pretty Rogerian country that places so much emphasis on efficiency, ya da ya da…guess that kicked the Rogerian aspect in me. Having been a teacher might have played a part too.