Month: June 2014 | the Wakefield Doctrine

(interim) (…part 2) the Wakefield Doctrine

June 18, 2014 By clarkscottroger

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

Damn! Wednesday already. Two things: continuation of the very excellent discussion that zoe triggered yesterday in response to the day’s Post and a quick look at the week ahead.

(thing A):

Tomorrow is expected to be Thursday, pretty much all day long, that means there will be a Guest Post writer, guest posting here for Guest Post Thursday Guest Post! It’s the completion of the second full cycle (of worldviews), so it will be a clark! Don’t miss it!

(B thing):

so, at the end of yesterday’s Post, I mentioned the rogerian worldview artifact that Kristi gave us in the course of her Post (last Thursday). The funny thing: I could not find the actual quote until this morning. You can imagine how relieved I was to see that this thought expressed by Kristi, that I was assigning great and significant value to, and …and one that stimulated a very enjoyable, productive and insightful discussion, actually existed!

…anyway. I did find, in her guest Post, the quote:

“According to the Wakefield Doctrine, it is because I am a roger, a person who makes sense of the world through rules and order. Without the structure of expectations, I am a bit lost. I think my secondary, yet significant, clark-like tendencies also play a role; I’m unsure if I am welcome in a place where rogers actually seem to be in the minority. “

((New Readers? three worldviews, ok? one is the personality type that reflects growing up ‘the Outsider’ (clarks), the other is the person who lives in the world of ‘the Predator’ (scotts) and the third, the life of ‘the Herd Member’ (rogers), ok? one thinks, the next acts, and the last feels ok? Of course, in the world of a clark, reality is constantly subject to change. Black can become white, pink is mistaken as subtle, a whisper is a shout and what we know about ourselves changes as we relate it to another. if you’re good with that, welcome to the clarklike worldview!)

so lets get to the Comment discussion thread:

(zoe): “Security in an expectation? Explain please? “
(me): “what??! explain??! why are you always picking on me like this!!!” (not real Reply) however, to quote a long gone and beloved friend, “I did not make that statement!” …and then, Progenitor roger stepped out of the shadows (like a sous chef hiding in the walk-in cooler)… I was surprised but very glad to see… a roger providing (a) view from the Herd…
(roger): “Security in an expectation makes perfect sense to me. Stands as a good definition of trust.
Of course that doesn’t mean you’re always warm and fuzzy about it. You can reasonably expect 2+2=4, but you can also reasonably expect a terrorist to try to kill you.”
(Denise): “…rogers find security in expectations which I can see would relate directly to a roger’s need to always be prepared. Per the highest authority, rogers do not like (to put it mildly) to be unprepared!”
(back to the trouble maker): “…so if a Roger does not perceive the herd as their group…then where does the expectation come from? If there’s always a need to be prepared , & a need to be part of the larger herd, then doesn’t that infer an expectation from an outside source? (you know kind of like the pressure the clark is percieving.) and again its just totally possible I’ve been overthinking everything today…..” (which raises, of course, a core issue with the challenge of knowing the reality of the three worldviews… while the thorniest of questions, it is the most productive, provided the language is developed)
(me): pretty much what I just said… “as to the ongoing process of the insights made available by using the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool, we must remain alert to artifacts that may be provided, consciously or not, by any of the three personality types… (an example: the concept of ‘referential authority’ is a major artifact of the rogerian worldview, it is a symbol that resonates with all three personality types, but most importantly, it it ‘true’ in the reality of rogers
(Kristi): “Structure of expectations”–I had to go back to the post, because I didn’t remember writing “security of expectations”. I thought, is he talking about me Kristi, or the other Kristi? Not that “security” changes the meaning much. The phrase was in reference to me trying to figure out exactly what was expected in way of the guest post. If I know the rules, I know what to do.”

nice eh?

(to be cont’d)

lol… fun song:

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, relationships, the Wakefield Doctrine

(interim Post) the Wakefield Doctrine

June 17, 2014 By clarkscottroger

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

(I was thinking about ways to over-come my current…whatever with Post-writing and, for no apparent reason, I flashbacked to a time years ago when I used to play Tennis and Tennis-related. What came back to me were the times we used to try and psyche each other out while in the middle of a close game. The strategy I most enjoyed (and I actually laughed to myself when I remembered it) was to get the other person to focus on ‘how they played’. The ‘how’, in this instance, was not ‘how well are you playing’, but rather, ‘how is it you get the racket to be in a position to intersect with the (projected) path of the ball?’ I’ll confess that, much like the MAD Strategy of the Cold War or the revenge sex in our early 20’s, backlash from the attempt to employ this gambit was pretty much assured.)

It occurs to me that I am, of late, doing just that when I sit down to write the day’s Wakefield Doctrine post. I’ll start with the ambition to write a really good Post, explaining the Wakefield Doctrine in terms that everyone can appreciate and understand and, pretty much right as soon as I get past, ‘the Wakefield Doctrine is…’, I ‘look’. psych!

(I used to describe my approach to writing Posts as, ‘I’ll seize on an idea, establish some kind of attitude or premise or position and then spend the rest of the time trying to write my way out of it’.) (lol)

So, be prepared for some fairly…. odd Posts in the coming days.

(I do have some kind of internal Puritan who really expects every one of these things to offer something of value (to you, the Reader), so I’ll do an easy one.)

Kristi’s Post contained what I refer to as ‘an artifact of her worldview’ when she made the seemingly innocuous statement that included the phrase, ‘the security of expectations’. Am I being needlessly modest if I say, I stared at that sentence for about 5 minutes before it hit me, this thought was from a reality that I have never experienced.

I think I’ll return to this topic tomorrow. Let me leave you with a thought, ‘expectations are a noun in the worldview of rogers and a verb in the worldview of clarks‘… clarks labor under/dodge and hide from (unless we are trying to undercut) expectations… rogers find security in them. can I get a ‘damn!’

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: predicting human behavior, the Wakefield Doctrine

the Wakefield Doctrine lets start at the start

June 16, 2014 By clarkscottroger

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

the Wakefield Doctrine is a way of understanding the behavior of the people in our lives, it is a perspective that we can employ that will show the world in a (slightly) different light. (like the cool photo above same galaxy different wave lengths).

Stop!

Please pardon the above, lame, clarklike effort at explaining the Wakefield Doctrine. In my defense, I will say, in the past week, I haven’t felt the drive to write Posts that has been behind nearly every other post you will find on these pages. Maybe it’s my recent foray into exercising, maybe it’s my insistence* that I have to write a book about the Wakefield Doctrine, maybe a lot of things. But there is one thing that has been with me since I became amazed at the way the Wakefield Doctrine blog drove me to write it… and that is the clarklike fear of the future. (which is pretty odd, you know, as clarks spend our lives in the future, hiding from the past). Specifically this fear is that if I don’t write frequently enough, I’ll forget how to do it. This statement is a lie, however. The real fear, not necessarily not the real reason, but the real fear is that if I don’t keep it going, I won’t feel the urge and the drive to write. But the next worst thing to not writing a Post, in my secret estimation, is to write a ‘true confessions’ Post. The, ‘oh dear what a trial it is to be me here… does the world out there care? Please re-assure me that I am doing well, and in gratitude for your gesture (one that you would make regardless of my plea), I will feel bad about it.

(lol) yeah, seriously, in the emotional economy (of the subjective world of clarks**), to feel bad is to pay tribute. it is to pay for… the good things in our lives.

(It is 7:08 am… I promised myself that I would leave the house at 7:00 am so I will Post this and return by 11:00 am to be cont’d)

(well, not quite 11:00 but never the less)… the one thing I will say, without reservation about the Wakefield Doctrine is this: if you learn it enough to be able to use it, which is to say, be able to correctly infer the worldview of the other person, you cannot not benefit. I always learn, gain insight, perceive with a slightly different inference things about myself every single time I have ‘used’ the Wakefield Doctrine. The saying we have? ‘the Doctrine is for you, not them’ is so very true. I look to understand the people in my life, through the perspective afforded by the Wakefield Doctrine and, in the process of understanding them, I see myself affected. So, my ‘knowledge/understanding/appreciation may be of the other person, but in a weird Heisenbergian way, I am tied into the process. The observer becomes one with the observed. Very fun. Very aggravating. Totally frustrating. Wouldn’t have it any other way.)

…back to work. thanks to Lizzi and Kristi’s well-intended thoughts

* one that I a feel strongly enough to continue (to feel) but not strongly enough (to do what needs to be done)

** as if there were any other quality

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, psychology of personality, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine

1/2 of 10 things plus a video and… the Wakefield Doctrine ( it’s the weekend…it’s the TToT!)

June 14, 2014 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Ten Things of Thankful, the creation (along with a group of co-hosts that is 9/10s lovely and talented and 1/10th me). Lizzi took a fairly straightforward, if not challenging and difficult, exercise in self-development and nurtured a community of like (and non-like) minded writers and bloggers and others who gather here each weekend and share strength and off-load stress and fear with the group. You should really try it! (However, a lot like chondroitin, the benefits are felt only after a certain amount of time and energy invested. Not that this is a requirement! Many people stop by whenever they can, intermittently and such. It’s just that for those of us who can benefit (from this exercise) and are (constitutionally) un-inclined to actually do something like write a gratitude list…. well, wait for 5-7 weeks of writing Post(s), before you decide if this is worth the effort.* On with the damn list, already!

10) the Wakefield Doctrine (see the following, preceding list)

9) Kristi (‘K2 Kristi’, not ‘Kristi Kristi’… Kristi is a roger, while Kristi is a clark) she wrote this week’s Thursday Guest Post Thursday Post and it was excellent! (one of the rather cool things about the Doctrine is that we have a principle that maintains, ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’. The meaning and application of this principle is as varied and adjustable as the definition itself. In this instance, I am referring to the fact that I learned something new about the worldview of rogers. And, seeing how this whole Doctrine effort is about appreciating and knowing more and more about all three worldviews, this is something to be grateful for….)

8) the Vidchat (in general) and last night’s Vidchat specifically ( kinda broad** a statement, I realize, but if you have not joined Lizzi and Michelle and them on a Friday-Night-at-the-Jetson’s you do not know what you are missing)

7) Christine and Dyanne joined us last night (on the Vidchat) and if there was no Wakefield Doctrine, I would have been able to create at least two thirds of it last night in the 35 minutes or so that they both joined the group…fun

6) hypo-grateful for my deficient time management… work (which I am grateful for) if demanding nearly all my awake time, leaving v little time to do the other things in my life that is part of living a normal (sort of) productive (well, lets consider all the definitions of the term) and…. er life-like!

5) the following video was done on my normal Friday evening auto-walk with Una (it should produce the remaining five items in today’s TToT!)

4) (in the video!)

3) (right above here!!)

2) (photo of a dog with a red triangle, says ‘youtube?)

1) (…the Beginning!)

*the above results are typical. your benefits may vary, things (good) and things (bad) do look larger in reflection, it is not your imagination

** ha ha

Your hosts

A Fly on our (Chicken Coop) Wall, Amycake and the Dude, Considerings, Finding Ninee, Getting Literal, I Want Backsies, Mother of Imperfection, Rewritten, Thankful Me, The Wakefield Doctrine

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group

An InLinkz Link-up

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, relationships, self-development, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

‘Guest Post Thursday’ Thursday! the Wakefield Doctrine …rogers

June 12, 2014 By clarkscottroger

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

Drexel
(who, fortunate human, Kristi, is part of pack with)

I ‘ll admit to feeling no small amount of trepidation when I first made the decision to ask people to Guest Post at Wakefield Doctrine. The aspect, (of this ambition), that gave me the greatest pause was, rogers. How was I going to keep this thing going when rogers are so under-represented in the Readership?*

It’s not that rogers don’t like the Wakefield Doctrine. (….ok, I’ll wait…. ahem! …can we proceed?), it’s just that rogers, prefer…are more comfortable with…. identify with… find common ground with…incorporate common interests and minimize contrasting differences, with groups that are clearly established. As a people, not so big on sitting at the cafeteria table with the odd kids/the troublemakers.

But, I was wrong.

(you know how I’ve been saying, ‘the people we are attracting, who are reading and understanding and getting something from this here Doctrine here, are the exceptional people in the blogosphere’? I

I was right. It’s just that I did not appreciate how this ‘exceptionalism’ might manifest itself. With clarks and scotts it’s easy to imagine the mavericks in those groups.)

rogers are different. and, in a sense, the capacity to be exceptional is that much more impressive, when expressed by a roger.

So, imagine my surprise when, while participating in Lizzi’s TToT to find the following Comment:

” Hmmm, your posts this week and last have seemed easier for me to understand, and now you are calling them rogerian. I love Thanksgiving, too. I might be one of those annoying rogers.”

damn!
it meant a lot to me (then) and I’m glad to have come to know Kristi better. A co-hostinae of the TToT, the focus on home and family and tradition comes through in her blog, ‘Thankful Me’.
Funny story: as the ‘conversation’ developed over successive weekends, (somehow) the topic of Wakefield Doctrine docTees came up and, to my self, I was all… ‘hey clark, this here is a serious person here, she’s not going to find the idea of a tee shirt with ‘Wakefield Doctrine’ printed all over it to be very amusing! However, as it’s happened since I started this blog, I found myself thinking, ‘but…but! this is the Doctrine! of course she’ll think it would be fun to have one!’

…Kristi?

I’m both honored and perplexed to be guest-posting here at the Wakefield Doctrine. The invitation to write a guest post went something like this:

“if you find you might have the time (in say 3 weeks) If the feature still is around, I would love to have you do a guest Post (for Guest Post Thursday), don’t answer yet! I’ll ask again as we get closer in to roger day.”

Followed by this:

“(with the Doctrine as a tool), I am better able to understand how difficult/challenging/tempting a request for a guest post might be… at the risk of repeating myself (and still not be construed as asking a direct question*….yet, I will say that the only standard/requirement for a guest post is that the writer write what they enjoy/want to/are happy to write. I (re)state this because I found that with rogers, this ‘no requirements/standards/guidelines’ is not as welcomed as it is with clarks… but then, given what we understand about the rogerian worldview, it only makes sense, yes?”

And finally, this:

“I guess I am finding that my ‘non-directional’ is a way of saying, ‘ok it’s a guest post, topic of your choice, whatever you think would be: fun or serious, frivolous or amusing…. a lot of the things that we tend to ‘not’ write in our own blogs ’cause it’s too out of character…. something like that!”

Why have I struggled so much to write this post? According to the Wakefield Doctrine, it is because I am a roger, a person who makes sense of the world through rules and order. Without the structure of expectations, I am a bit lost. I think my secondary, yet significant, clark-like tendencies also play a role; I’m unsure if I am welcome in a place where rogers actually seem to be in the minority. (Please don’t misconstrue my meaning, it is not a judgment of the friendliness of clarks and scotts—I’ve never been ostracized by anyone here–I’m only unsure if my abilities in writing could lead to real understanding, or merely portray me as a caricature of rogers.)

So, here I sit, composing my thoughts, knowing what most influences my worldview, yet hesitating to share. I’ll have to muster up scott-like courage and just write.

I can relate to Tevye, from Fiddler on the Roof:

“Because of our traditions, we’ve kept our balance for many, many years. Here in Anatevka we have traditions for everything… how to eat, how to sleep, even, how to wear clothes. For instance, we always keep our heads covered and always wear a little prayer shawl… This shows our constant devotion to God. You may ask, how did this tradition start? I’ll tell you – I don’t know. But it’s a tradition… Because of our traditions, everyone knows who he is and what God expects him to do.”

I’m not Jewish, but my religion impacts every aspect of my life, too. Religion is, of course, not solely the venue of rogers (and it would be interesting to hear from scotts and clarks on the role of religion in their lives), but for me, it is the most significant influence on my worldview. It also defines my “herd”—probably more broadly than you might imagine.

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Mormon. I believe that we (all people, Mormon or not) are literally spirit children of our Heavenly Father, making all of us literally brothers and sisters. (Clark, scott, roger—it doesn’t matter—we are all part of the “herd.”) Each of us came to earth to gain a body and to exercise agency. Knowing that we would all fall short, Jesus Christ came to provide an atonement for us all. He made it possible for us to return again to the presence of Heavenly Father, after this life.

That is a very short summary of the Plan of Happiness. Knowing that there is a plan helps me make sense of the world. Knowing that Christ’s atonement paid not just for the sins of the world, but also provided a way to right all that is unfair, gives me hope. While I want to stand up for everything good, I also know I don’t need to despair about events in the world outside my own control. I can have faith that all will be right in the end.

I could write pages about the peace I receive from my beliefs, but as this blog is a Wakefield Doctrine blog, and not Mormon.org, I will refrain. I do believe the world is essentially good. I am not living with my head in the sand; I am aware there is evil in the world, but I also know there is much good in the world, and that good will ultimately prevail.

I recognize that not everyone shares my beliefs and worldview. As a roger, it seems that those differences should bother me. One of the Articles of Faith, though, states: “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”

Perhaps the Wakefield Doctrine has some subsection that says if there is a rule to prevent a roger from behaving in the way the roger might normally be so inclined, the rule takes precedence. However you want to interpret it, I welcome open and sincere communication, but realize the harm that comes from argumentative dialogue.

As I always end my blog posts with thanks, thanks to Clark for the opportunity to share a bit of what makes me tick. I hope I interpreted your Wakefield Doctrine correctly. (Because, of course, as a roger, I have a deep need to follow the rules!)

Kristi

* Michelle, we know, is the first of the rogers to come to the Doctrine and actually stay…helping to create among other things, the Friday Night vidchat…. we will be hearing from her in the future, of course