Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
…I’m back. (no, not ‘back from writer’s block’ back… back from wandering around the internet in search of a hook for today’s Post). I will admit that it’s still there, the lurking fear of having nothing to say on behalf of our little personality theory here. The cure for that, is to remember that the definition of the Wakefield Doctrine is
a unique, useful and fun way to view the behavior of the people in our lives. With the Wakefield Doctrine, as (an additional) perspective on life, you need never again find yourself saying, ‘how could they say something like that? I really thought I knew them better than that!’
fun: a long list of etymological root sources, none of which I thought were all that funny, except maybe for ‘virgin’ and ‘cheat’ (now that I see that in print, maybe we’re on to something!)
first un-planned end of a relationship:
- clarks (it is) at the hands of a scott
- scotts (totally caught off guard, which is so not like scotts) at the hands of a roger
- rogers (in a tiny, not-nearly-enough-to-make-up-for-a-lot-of-the-other-stuff) at the hands of a roger
(lol… now that’s more like it! Hey, Jin-nay called in this Saturday on the Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive Call-in! And one of the things we were talking about was the fun of the early days of the blog… a lot of the ‘language’ and expressions of the principles of the Doctrine were way more provocative and outrageous and…well, and fun! It’s just that some concepts are easier to convey this sense of ‘hey!! listen to this!!’ in the spoken form than in the written form. Un-avoidable, I suppose… but still, it was fun to talk in realtime with Jean. Funny how distinctive scotts (and rogers and even clarks) are even in a voice-only format. Fun
the other thing to come out of this weekend was a re-appreciation of ‘the everything Rule’. This is, of course, the Rule that states: ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’.
(here is a temporarily useful approach to the Monday morning Post writing: I will not try to write a complete Post. I will write what I (am) enjoying, but when the temptation to ‘make a point’ arises and I find myself bogging down, I’ll just say: ‘to be cont’d’)
(Free Wakefield Doctrine docTee to the Reader who correctly identifies which of the three worldviews is most sympathetic to this approach to problem-solving)*
(for any of the Readers who, through no fault of their own, were born long enough ago to have watched this show (and enjoyed it different ways, appropriate to the different ages they watched)
*some restrictions may apply, Contestants must look within and determine if they really, truly deserve the award and measure, by their own worldviews standards, the cost to themselves and the others (participating in this contest) of insisting on getting the shirt, even when they already have one, what the hell does one think they are proving, I mean you can only wear one docTee at a time, ok, if you’re a clarklike female you could manage to wear more than one and, sure just because you’re a scottian woman and thought it would look better tying a knot on one side, and tearing a shoulder off does not automatically qualify you for an extra shirt and the rogers do have to have one shirt to wear while the other is at the dry cleaners (despite the insistence of the tag that says, ‘wash any damn way you choose, it’s a frickin undershirt!’)
About clarkscottroger
I like your Monday morning approach! I should try it some time! LOL
sarah
as the above comment implies… there were certain ‘children’s shows’ (and I suspect this is true for all generations) that held a mutable appeal for it’s fan base
Mr Green Jeans…Mr. Moose…. and ping pong balls! Loved that show….oh..oh..and Tom Terrific with the funnell on his head.
zoe
lol
exactly and….and!!! that scottian Bunny Rabbit
(good example of a multi-generational* appeal! …as a kid and then in college (which might be a little redundant…lol)
*within the life of the same person
Kinda funny a mute scott…of course he still said so much.
Did you get Hap Richards as a kid??? Gawd…hated him!
no
locally we had ‘Salty Brine’s Shack’ a local roger who played cartoons… we were also exposed to Bozo the Clown (not to be confused with the FireSign Theatre album of almost the same name, ‘I think we’re all bozos on this bus’)
Hap was a raging roger!!! Bozo with that hair! Can see how people fear clowns…
Frist! :) jeh
Scott!
Hurray for the Captain!
Re the everything rule–I think Hollywood producers have explored that concept! I just saw “Divergent” on Friday, and the whole plot centers around what happens when a few individuals do not fit societal roles of being ONLY scotts, clarks, or rogers–well, they had different, and a few more terms, but same general concept. These “divergents” follow the everything rule. You might enjoy the movie; it would definitely give you fodder for the Wakefield Doctrine. (It might be out on DVD now; John and I saw it in the dollar theater.)
Had a jolly good chat about the WD and the world of science.
Clarks – get the mad new ideas and create ways around things
Rogers – ensure best lab practice and policies and measurability and reliability
Scotts – sell the ideas to others
Husby was pleased to have thunk this through
*sometimes the entering of the contest, on a 33% chance of winning something I already have is worth it just to see whether saying “Rogers!” in a warm tone, wins it.
did I win? jen
would you guys tell me please?
thanks!
I think no… this time, the overwhelming opinion is that rogers would be the ones most comfortable with the approach of using ‘to be cont’d’ as a way of dealing with having nothing to write but not wanting to write ‘The End’
scotts would simply say, ‘hey! that’s all I got today’ (and, on the chance that they used the ‘to be cont’d, they would not feel guilty as a clark would (see Reply to Lizzi’s Comment)
scotts are of the present, the future is something that they count on, but don’t worry about, so much
yes, I agree (with the not-feeling-guilty-about-‘to-be-cont’d’ solution as being rogerian)…a clark a try (this approach) but obviously feels that, not so much there is anything wrong with (this approach) but if there is, they know they will be discovered and held accountable and hence the covering of the approach with a pre-bribe… as an example of the clarklike view of this way to interact with Readers
which, hey! that totally ties into the ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’ Principle, which I believe will be the topic of tomorrow’s Post.
Give Joe our compliments! Well expressed attribution of how science manifests in the respective worldview
Madame Curie- clark (this
Isaac Newton – roger (‘how can you do this to me?! that hurt!)
Leonardo da Vinci – clark
Albert Einstein – roger
Alfred Noble – scott (hey!! come ere!! pull my finger!)
Ha! Husby’s got a Doc tee – that he proudly wore in the Outer Banks – and I’ve got my sweatshirt – that I could not wear in the Outer Banks, because, um, for the first time ever it was too hot – but ….in an ADHD related sentiment…I love Madame Curie – her story is fascinating. She was a clark but had such singular focus. If only I should be so lucky. :P
Einstein was a roger?!? How the hell, so? I always thought he was so stuck in his own head he didn’t even comb his hair.
Newton? A roger?
And Alfred Noble – of the Noble gases? A scott? Actually, periodic-table-speaking-wise, I could see it. The noble gases like Helium are perfectly in control with their electron configurations. <– I just wanted to be asinine and pretend like I know what the hell I'm talking about. ;)
Einstein was reputed to have said, ‘god doesn’t play dice with the universe’
Nobel… that was kinda for true fun of it…. (I couldn’t think of a scottian scientist so, the one who invented dynamite sounded like something that a scott would have liked to have invented, you)
Newton a roger because, for reasons I can’t explain, I had a visual ‘oh man! it hit me on the head! that’s not fair! my head hurts’
lol hey I like the electron configurations
Fun Monday morning post even if I’m reading it at 9:10 pm!
Yes! Jean was both entertaining and fun and nice to talk to in general. Glad she called in.
This everything principle (not totally, absolutely unlike the everything bagel) is not as all encompassing as one thinks. No, that’s not the word…. Not as simple? Dammit! Where[s the Capt. when you need him! (no, don’t answer that lol)
The everything principle reminds me of those beautiful,rare,not often enough experienced moments in time, when this clark is on fire. Which is to say experiencing the world of a scott! Or getting caught up in a genuine moment of pure rogerian “togetherness”. If only there was a switch to turn those moments on and off…..look forward to tomorrow’s post!!