Month: March 2015 | the Wakefield Doctrine Month: March 2015 | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘one dress rehearsal, a day off and we be so ready for them alphabet mfers’

March 30, 2015 By

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

CSR-MIRROR-e1379767981998-1024x768

Lets see:

donate to wikipedia?  ✔
youtube updated and standing by?  ✔
online dictionary?? cheque!

comic sans font… when brow gets too high?… well, of course!  er  ✔

images from 5 years of Posts…. illustrating, emphasizing… bizarre innuendae ?? yatzee!

‘kay, looks like I’m all ready to take on those rogers of regimented rhetoric, the fabulous A-to-Zers… the Blog Hopping Challenge of all time. April 1st through the 31st … alphabet?!  we got ya alphabet right here!

(shit! the alphabet, that will be easy enough, I can always go look at Kristi or Z or Val’s Posts… now the theme itself… I better review the Doctrine,  lets see:

    • perspective on the world around us…
    • personal reality/worldviews
    • three personality types
    • clarks, scotts and rogers

(ok… 21 more to go)

  • ‘the everything Rule’…
  • three types,
  • one predominant with two as potential. secondary and tertiary aspects.
  • know the other person better than they know themselves,
  • infer how a person is ‘relating themselves to the world around them’,
  • off-color jokes (?!),    (off-color jokes?! what the hell kind of alphabet category is that?!)

simple: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is a perspective on human behavior, a way to see the actions and reactions (and interactions) of the people who make up our lives, in a way that not only provides us with insight, but is (also) quite amusing, without being mean or off-putting. As a ‘lens’, the Wakefield Doctrine provides us with a glimpse into the world of ‘the other person’. Predicated on two simple ideas: a) there are three characteristic worldviews (i.e. personal realities), and that, although we have the capacity to live in any of the three, we all settle into one, at a very early age and 2) our personality type is simply a reflection of the reality that we grew up, developed in and are currently experiencing, and 3) if we understand the nature and character of each of the three worldviews and we infer how the other person is relating themselves to the world around them, we can be in a position to see the world as they are experiencing it. This can only mean that we will come closer to understanding the other person.  In fact, with practice and determination, it is quite possible to know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

As a benefit, of the practice of, seeing the world as they are experiencing it, you need hear yourself say, “How could they go and do such a thing/say such a thing? I really thought I knew them better than that!”  A further benefit of the study and application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine is the realization that how we relate ourselves to the world around us, (as would the Outsider/clark, the Predator/scott or the Herd Member/roger) is at the heart of the give and take, the problems and conflicts, the joy and passion that manifests itself in the unfolding of our everyday life.
By knowing that my world is of a certain character I am better able to understand how I contribute, not only to actions and reactions with people throughout my day, but to the nature and quality of those actions and interactions. Rather than giving us cause to say, ‘well, it’s them! they’re the ones being unreasonable!’ we now are in a position to, (be able to), accept that how I relate myself to the world around me today plays a totally significant role in how the people around me act…and react….and annoy the hell out of me…and are so attractive…. and stubborn. Although sounding very self-centered and egotistical, there is, within the Wakefield Doctrine, an inherent responsibility to understand the other person which, in turn, conveys a freedom (from our own limitations).

…

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

TT0T -the Wakefield Doctrine- …of random thoughts and deliberate photos

March 28, 2015 By

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

20150325_112814_resized

 

1) I’m grateful to have work, actually a business, but you know what I mean, that allows me to spend time driving in my car (which is an item a bit further down on this here List here)

2) This week I was driving through  North Stonington Ct heading towards Griswold and one of my favorite houses (the creepy old house with the walkup attic, the rickety cellar stairs and the occasional feral cat waiting to surprise me) and as I approached the intersection of Rt201 and Rt165 I noticed some black and white shapes in the field to my left (1st photo). Naturally my first thought was, ‘Weekly cows!’ but as I got closer and closer, what I saw forced me to pull the car to the side of the road.

3) Happy to have a couple of cameras in the car. I used the phone, stopped and zoomed in, the result:

20150325_112820_resized

4) yeah, I know! what.the.hell  I got the pictures and continued on my way to the creepy house that I had to check up on,  (there was some repair work that was supposed to have been done).  (hey!  seeing how this is turning into Photo Phriday/Pitcha Saturday, lets see if I can find a photo of that too!)

DSCN4652

classic Old house attic, non?

in case this is not charming enough, then for reference, the house:

DSCN4631

 

5) ok  enough for the ‘work Thankfuls!’  (oh, sorry… #5: I am grateful that I have other items on my TToT list this week.)

6) the pre- ‘We-are-Free’ April Blog Challenge  lead up work. I’m thankful for Z and Kristi, Val and (even) Dyanne who are all planing on doing the 30 day post-a-thon. I’m trying to get in the spirit of the thing, but I have a rather weak tertiary rogerian aspect, so I have yet to do a number of the things that the more experienced bloggers are doing, i.e. Theme reveals… changing their blog theme to match the theme of their planned posts, having plastic surgery in order to look like a famous historical blogger!*

7) Lizzi and Denise and the others for their Post-Topics disguised as simple Comments!  Thanks guys, will totally be getting back to the question of ‘clarks and the world’, and ‘the diminution of the rogerian expression at the onset of advancing age’.

8) SVG (that new one… still don’t have her name, but the whole 7 Guard Virgins are stepping lively since she arrived on the scene!)  I want to give a shout-out to our Friendita Cynderita, as she was the prescient life form who first mentioned these …. people.

9) For you newer Participants… there is a book (check with Z/I and L,  each have 1 of the 4 remaining copies of) the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules), which is one of the the things about this here bloghop that sets us totally apart from the rest of the ‘sphere (well, that and the…. uniquely talented co-hostinae…. they are the ones that you should go to first, when the authorities come around and demand an explanation!)

10) 1.3

 

Ten Things of Thankful

 

 Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group



* well, yes, I did make that part up… I doubt any of the rogers at ‘Avarice and Zenaphobia’ Monthly Challenge are having any significant plastic surgery performed, unless it would really make them the envy of the other bloggers.

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Thursday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…lastly through a hog’s head of real fire’

March 26, 2015 By

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

Yang_cheng_fu_single_whip_application_2_75

Well! there’s a week, (or so), remaining before the beginning of the ‘Hay ‘n Seed April Blog Challenge’…and I’m all, getting into character and such. No! don’t laugh! Just because I’m a clark, doesn’t mean that I can’t capture the spirit of a really fun month of blogation! As we say in this here Doctrine here, if you use the Wakefield Doctrine to better understand the people in your life, you can’t avoid learning something about your self.  So, the rogers… the people over at the ‘Challenge’, they’ve been doing this for a fair long time and there is much that they suggest in the way of promoting my participation here at the Doctrine. Admittedly, I’ve missed a lot of what is recommended to make this a successful participation, but I did get out and introduced myself to my list-neighbors*  (See, Dyanne? clarks are capable of being…er outgoing  and all!)  In any event, yesterday morning, I went around my List number (yeah, the whole college dorm-suite metaphor)….and introduced myself to my fellow A-toZenans. Met a rather nice person, a certain, zannierose, who has a blog called ‘the Artist’s Way‘  like right ‘next door’… #1233

I should be promoting this thing more, as I get closer to the Start Date of April 1st. That way everyone in the ‘sphere will be talking about the whole thing and I’ll be accepted into the bosom (woo hoo!!) of the online writing fraternity …. sorority!  no, huh?  lol…. I can hear Z now…spitting out her coffee in an excellent Danny Thomas take, all over her computer screen.  Well, I’m still going to do this thing, one way or another.  I have letters that have not yet, (been) assigned, words!  Anyone wishing to participate, well damn! come on down! you can sponsor a letter or, if you want, you can write a guest Post! (some restrictions may apply**)

Ok… best stop here. I’m not a young writer anymore, (actually, I was never a ‘young’ writer…. I started when I was old.  yeah, clarks do have a bit of the Merlin thing going on), best I conserve my words for the big fight!

 

* the list of participants?!? it’s frickin up to 1300 plus!!  hey!! 1200 block!! yo!!  (we’re at 1232 on the list  1232-on-the-April-blog-challenge-list motto: ‘oh, I’m sure those blogs in that part of the list mean well, and a lot of them are here on special scholarship…no, lets not linger!!…. I have an invitation to the ‘1-115 list blogs kickoff party’!!’)

** restrictions that apply: the word chosen (on a given day)  must be defined, used, presented, whatever, in the context of the Wakefield Doctrine, or, at very least, be one of the main themes of your (guest) post. Now, this being the Wakefield Doctrine, we will say, do not let your ‘not knowing the Doctrine well enough’ get in the way of volunteering! If you read today’s Post, you will remember that: ‘if you use the Wakefield Doctrine to better understand the people in your life, you will not be able to avoid learning something about your-own-damn-self “*** so if you enjoy our little personality theory and you are of good intent, we’ll certainly look over your application to write a guest Post!1

*** man! quoting myself from within the very same Post…. I got this Berries-and-Cream Challenge nailed!

1)  ….ewww  (sorry, trying to get my roger on)

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Tue Comments -the Wakefield Doctrine- …and Tue answers (plus…)

March 24, 2015 By

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

colorcomicpopartwomancomicspainting-ea1686b001a4f03ad275d59b1e003ffc_h

(from this weekend’s ‘hop… a comment from Lizzi regarding a statement that was made about (a) clarks capability to engage in social interaction. the block quotes being the thread)

Lizzi:

“…the thing we don’t have, is that natural inclination to participate in the commerce of social interaction ” ORLY? (L.)

“But…I LOVE making connections and talking to people. Perhaps I’m more scottian than I think.” (L.)

I did not say ‘make connections’ I used the words: ‘…participate in the commerce of social interaction’ (c)

we clarks loves to make connections… we are better at it, (making, discovering, illustrating and generally, pointing out to anyone near, the connections that exist between all things), than scotts and rogers are, if for no other reason than the fact that we are on the outside looking in/over/at the world. Who better to see connections, than the Outsider? (And, yes, I do note that you used the word ‘make’  we’ll come back to that.)
‘commerce‘ in the above statement is meant to imply an exchange that occurs between people when interacting within a social context.  It’s said that, ‘clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel’ and, from this, we can view this (social) exchange as a bartering among people. a scott will (offer) to do things: play games, yell at people, chase down those who would flee, make people do things… a roger is aware of the things that people feel attachment to, fear the effects of, or covet a place that another may occupy… and a clark, well, a clark knows stuff, creates (that which did not previously exist) and, above all, clarks see the inter-relatedness (the connections) among the parts and things and people of the world (all three worlds, if we’re to be accurate).

Trouble is…. clarks give their thing of value away for free. a clark is said to be the most generous and (willing to) share of the three personality types, ( “...hey did you know? …hey, I learned the coolest thing the other day, …by the way, you want to hear something really neat?“) which one might conclude is a good thing. Unfortunately, not counting gift-giving, most people do not place a large value on things that are offered without a price.  In this ‘commerce’ of social interaction there is (a) bartering going on and clarks suffer from 2 very significant weaknesses:

  1. we learn and know and discover things, (mostly the connections among things), and recognize the limitlessness of this ‘commodity’ and are not concerned with getting an equal value in exchange (because we can always find more)
  2. we do not (normally) demand the highest price in exchange of what we offer (in this commerce), because the one thing a clark fears the most, avoids at all costs is ‘scrutiny’  (and, yes, I will stop at this point and let the questions create themselves)

…so, that is a little additional Reply to our friend Lizzi’s Comment

******************************************

Denise:

“this morning my question concerns rogers…..what happens when a roger loses his/her “rogerian expression” (not through choice)?” (D.)

good question! in part because (the) ‘answer’ is an illustration of how the Wakefield Doctrine offers multiple uses, (i.e. fun and insight), for all of us. It, (the Wakefield Doctrine), is a metaphor and it’s an analog that allows us to see the world from another perspective. And, because we have these additional perspectives, we can frame our understanding different ways (fun)… ‘she is such a scott! you could see her nose twitching as soon as she stepped into the meeting hall full of engineers!‘… ‘I saw two clarks engaged in a conversation the other night… I’m pretty sure I did, but, of course nothing, including the logic of their exchange, can escape the gravitational pull of the black hole of two clarks in conversation‘  you know, like that!

so Denise’s question can be interpreted as: can a person lose the realness of their personal reality?  This can also be framed as: does the set of strategies and coping mechanisms that are the product of our growing up and developing in one of the three worldviews (that of the Outsider/clark, the world of the Predator/scott or the reality of the Herd Member/roger) eventually wear thin, become less and less the personal expression of how a person relates themselves to the world around them… can age (or circumstances) diminish the clarity of expression of (a) person’s personality type?

the best answer must start with a question: what is the ‘rogerian expression’?  (The short, but nevertheless useful answer is: ‘the rogerian expression is that which makes a roger feel as an individual while remaining a part of the Herd (which, by definition, does not recognize individual individuality…. ‘) lol   yes, more to follow.

****************************************

from the blogger formerly known as zoe (tbfkaz):

When I started reading Denise’s question and your answer I thought you were gonna answer the question ive been asking since I met you! Did you answer it? I think you may have avoided it and reworked the question! E for evolution. …can life circumstances cause a personal evolution into another predominant personality type? Not just we all do stuff sometimes. ..???????? Whaddya think? 

No, no I did not. Where I am heading, (with Denise’s question), is a consideration of what ‘the rogerian expression’* is and what happens when it diminishes (as has been observed in aging rogers), all in the service of a better understanding of a) the nature of the three worldviews and, 2) by inference, what is the potential value to self-improving ourselves?  are we to gain by better understanding of (the) characteristic of (one of) the three worldviews .

But, addressing what I hear is your question…. can we move, evolve or otherwise go from worldview-to-worldview, personality type-to-personality type?  the current answer is, ‘no’  the current answer will have to wait for later in the day, as it is quite involved (i.e. I don’t have the rhetorical skills to concisely express the idea that these worldviews are real, the world is as described, it is not my ‘choice’ to act as would an Outsider…. my acts (as an Outsider) are appropriate to the world, the reality that I am experiencing today, (in fact, the reality I was faced with as a small, young life form)…. having said that, there is an argument to be made for ‘catastrophic’ changes in one’s life and, therefore, (possibly), a change in the character of a person’s predominant worldview. You might be thinking, “yeah, sure,  but what about your much-vaunted secondary aspects, what about those? huh? well… answer me, dammit!!!” (lol)  the key element to our ‘behavior’,  is the energy that is involved…. (no, the following probably will not make any, ‘standalone’, sense….), if our behavior is not related to the world around us in a way that produces/conducts/returns energy, then it is a fad, an affectation and has nothing to do with a worldview…. (more to follow)

you know, I was just re-reading this Post and next month’s ‘Apples-to-Zuchinni Blog Challenge’, will be very productive provided the right words are found. Clearly there exists a need for a comprehensive yet simple outline of our little personality theory, especially now with newer Readers such as Val and Lisa and them joining us in our pursuit of better understanding the world around us. ya know?

* not to be confused with ‘a rogerian expression’!

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

as ‘something’ is to ‘something(else)’ -the Wakefield Doctrine- the run-up to the ‘Hay to Me Blog Challenge’

March 23, 2015 By

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

Alphabet_board

Have pretty much decided to do that ’12 to 4 Blog Challenge’ in the coming month of April. The theme will, of course, be the Doctrine and the unifying viewpoint is best expressed as  ‘the ABCs of the Wakefield Doctrine’. So the real work is to find the best word(s) for each letter of the alphabet. My hope is that the result will be a comprehensive explanation of the Doctrine (on April 31st, that is).

So we’ll be accepting suggestions and donations of words in this week before the start of the Challenge. (I don’t believe that there’s anything in the Rules prohibiting  prep work on the Posts, in my case, finding the right words for each letter.  Naturally I’ll  wait until the morning of each day to actually write the Post. I’d love to have the writing skills to be able to pre-write and hone and polish each post, well in advance, but if I did, I be a roger and this would not be the Wakefield Doctrine). If any of you Readers have any favorite letters or better yet! a  lingering question about the Doctrine that starts with a….wait, they all start with a letter! Never mind. Here’s what I have so far:

A is for Apple  (yeah, I know…gotta go with the classics to start. figure to talk about the theory of Adam and Eve and the fruit of Knowledge.. (Spoiler Alert!!!!  Eve was so a clark))

H is for… Hostinae  (?!?!   …that apparently is all I have at this point  not worried…. I know words!! I know a bunch a words, not.worried )

so other than C and S and R   and W

C is for clark

S is for scott

R is for roger

W is for Wakefield Doctrine

E is for (the) everything Rule….  ok, I think I can believe I’ll have the words I need

I is for Identification…

so,  18 or 19 more words and I’ll be all set!

The above is an example of a clarklike approach to problem solving. Now, if anyone out there is thinking, “Excuse me, but if you’re going to say that a clark will approach a problem by breaking it down into component parts to be dealt with individually, I hate to disappoint you, but that is clearly the rogerian approach to problem solving.”
Allow me to retort,  “yes, you are right” (rogers tend to always be right…repetitiously, meticulously and aggravatingly always right with the answers to questions….as they define the question.) However, this is an interesting example of the surface similarities of the three worldviews, more precisely, it’s an example of how, as we go through our day, we interpret the actions and behavior of the people around us, in terms of our own worldview. This is entirely natural, of course, but we can do so much more with the Wakefield Doctrine as an (additional) perspective on the world. What we try to do is imagine how the interaction is being experienced in the worldview/personal reality of the other person.

a roger would, in fact, break a problem into it’s component parts.

a clark would attempt to understand the question.

a roger seeks the definition of the problem, knowing (in their personal reality) that all is definable and quantifiable, everything is knowable, if not necessarily immediately identifiable. This is why you will see an inordinate number of rogers in the field of engineering and the other hard sciences.

the drive for a clark to understand the question is twofold and, at its heart the same thing: fear  fear of being exposed (by poor, or insufficient performance) as the Outsider. and so, when we do things like the ’30 Day Me and Thee Blog Challenge’ the first thing we try to do is defuse the open-ended parts of the activity, understand it enough to believe that we can perform just like everyone else… only then do we believe that we can enjoy ourselves. (here’s a fun contradiction seen in clarks:  we anticipate  …we try to imagine what a future activity will be, so intensely… imagining every possible variation… ‘if I do this, then she might say that..’ on and on…. so much so that, when we get to the actual, real event,  we appear detached and un-interested.  lol  not the case! it’s just that we’ve lived through the experience so many fricken times in our heads (all in the name of eliminating fear and risk) that we’re just going through the motions…. phoning it in, as they say.

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts