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

…yeah, I get it! W comes after V not U…

“…the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique, useful and fun way to better understand the behavior of the people in your life. With the Wakefield Doctrine, as an added perspective, you need never again hear yourself lament, “Why on earth would they say such a thing? I really thought I knew them better than that!” The Wakefield Doctrine is a way to know more about the other person than they know about themselves and, …and! it’s fun!”

That’s pretty much where we started… at least in then context of this, an actual blog. The theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, predates this blog by, say, 30 years, but this Post is about U, not History. (ha ha… a little ‘Anyone-else-tired-of-this-worn-ass Premise April bloghop Challenge’ humor?)

so, seeing how this is all about the letter ‘U’  W and, who among us doesn’t first think, ‘un’, it’s only appropriate that we provide you with some examples of which of the ‘un-words’ are associated with the three worldviews, aka personality types, of the Wakefield Doctrine. (yeah, but we’re obviously going to talk about the Wakefield Doctrine!!  and since when did we ever feel it to be a bad thing that we’re not on the same page with the rest of the class?!?  ….ayiee my rogerian aspect is surely exerting it’s group-based self!)

un-compromising: rogers (who’s surprised?)
un-usual: …. if I have to type this one, you really need to go and read the About page
un-relenting: gimme a ‘S’!!!!  gimme a ‘C’…. “hey! gimme back my pom-poms”
un-suspecting: clarks (yeah, I know! you’d think with all that thinking going on, they should be so easy to catch napping…)
un… hey! most of the ‘uns’ are associated with clarks!  what the hell is going on here?! Are we not imaginative and creative and kind (to a fault) and easy going (to a fault) and adaptable (to a….)  ok, ok…maybe we need to approach this from the other direction, what are clarks?  un-real* Now before anyone feels the urge to re-assure and/or state that we clarks are surely quite real, let me say, ‘not that it’s a bad thing! being ‘not a real person’. By not being real, clarks have the freedom to be anything, have anything, imagine anything…in our heads. And, when you get right down to it, is that not where we all start?  wait… lets try the reverse perspective:

• scotts live in and of the here and now (not to say that individuals can’t experience the anxiety of the future or regrets of the past, that’s what secondary aspects are for!) but, the worldview of a scott is ‘here and now’… the mother lion sitting under the acacia tree, with her cubs playing in the shade, seeing the appearance of some hyenas is not, I guarantee you, thinking, ‘well, maybe this pack is simply curious and wandering about the savannah.’ No. She is not thinking. She is not worried. She is simply …ready
• rogers live in and of the past (not that individuals can’t laugh at a surprise or be totally spontaneous, that’s what tertiary aspects are for!) but, the worldview of a roger is ‘then and forever’… the roger in the midst of his herd (and a herd need not manifest as multiple of similar people, the key concept of the Herd is ‘like qualities’), and wonders how best to act, how he can exemplify the Right Way to live, even if it is as simple a thing as crossing the street. the wildebeest in the middle of the herd does not worry about being able to swim, (as the herd is being forced to cross the river to escape the predators), he is only concerned with being s member of ‘the Herd of Swimming wildebeests’!
• clarks…. well, we kinda know about clarks… they live in the future, the ‘un-world’ if ever there was one. (which is not to say that a clark can’t be aggressive and win the girl or engaged in service and be honored as the leading member of her ward, that’s what secondary and tertiary aspects are for!) but, the worldview of a clark is that of the Outsider and there is no time more Outside than the future. In the future there is hope and possibility, in the future there is opportunity (to learn) and chances (to act)… the lemur sits in the underbrush (it might serve our metaphor better to switch to early mammalians watching dinosaurs fight it out) and watches and dreams of a time when the way is clear and obvious and fear no longer is the prerequisite condition of his/her decisions on how to live life.

…

the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that each us grew up and developed our ‘personality’ in the context of one of three worldviews (personal realities). Those of us who woke one morning, at the age of 3 or so, and experienced the world as one of predator and prey, quickly adapted and grew up as scotts; those people who knew that they were ‘a part of’ the world that they found themselves in, well before pre-school, settled in to practicing the way of the Herd Member, knowing that the world was quantifiable and knowable and (it) only asked that they made every effort to act the Right Way…they are rogers; and then there are those who woke up… maybe a little late, (for dreams can be so inviting), and could hear their family downstairs, already un-wrapping the presents and… even as the so-very-critical instant evaporated, thought of his/her family as ‘them’… started on a very long path, searching for the knowledge that erased that little, tiny distinction, the apartness. The world became forever full of interesting things and yet was missing that one fact… clarks search as Outsiders

the Wakefield Doctrine is not the answer, it’s not even a (proper) question. the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective. The Wakefield Doctrine charges us to use it to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. That we look around us and understand that, to a certain, but very real extent, reality is personal. The Wakefield Doctrine offers a tool that might allow us to understand how the people in our lives are relating themselves to the world around them. And by understanding this, better understand ourselves.

(…why, yes, you might say this has been a typical Post from the Wakefield Doctrine… but then, it’s not for everyone, is it? (thanks to all of you that do ‘get it’…. not that ‘it’s’ anything overly special, but ‘it’ does insist on a certain lively and confident imagination and a sense of fun with reality, in order to be properly used and enjoyed.)