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

“[T]he bonds of outsiderness are stronger, in a way, because they’re not predicated on hierarchy or conformity, but a state of the soul,” Lizzi

“…We need to be useful to our own selves.”  Denise

Sometimes people say, ‘Clark, your blog is topical, it’s about the Wakefield Doctrine, only the Wakefield Doctrine. You’ve been writing posts for, like, 5 years. How the hell do you do it?’ I smile and say, ‘well, the Doctrine is about life, about how we relate ourselves to the world around us, so everything is a potential topic. It’s not just things, it’s events and occurrences and situations that we, all of us, encounter everyday.‘  Of course, there are Reader Comments, now that is a source of Post topics that’s invaluable. As people who have been reading this blog know, the first half (of the time we’ve been writing this thing), was spent presenting the idea of the Doctrine, it’s principles, how to use it and like that. There came a point, a couple of years ago, when I realized that, not only did Readers understand this thing, but they understood it way better than I realized!  Sufficiently to extrapolate its principles and, through their own experience, further the understanding we have of this Wakefield Doctrine. (Kinda funny about that, I was the last to know that Readers and Friends of the Doctrine were that far along in taking the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and applying it in their own life. )

What does this have to do with today’s Post and my Three Daughters?*  Well, it’s about Readers Comments. They have become a really great source of Post topics. It’s no secret that there is much more to discover about the Wakefield Doctrine. We have the basic principles:

• we all live, to a certain extent, in a personal reality (aka worldviews)
• there are 3 characteristic worldviews that we all are heir to,  the world of the Outsider, the Predator or the Herd Member
• what others call personality types, the Doctrine maintains that everyone grows and develops ways of interacting, strategies for coping with the world that are in the context of the world that they are, as growing children, experiencing. Outsiders (clarks) learn to hide, Predators (scotts) know that ‘fight or flight’ works best and the Herd Member (rogers) accept that conforming to the collective wisdom of the group is really the only best course of action.
• while we all experience the world as one of these three worldviews, (our predominant worldview), we always have the potential of seeing the world as do ‘the other two’

…and we have the goal: to understanding how the other person is relating themselves to the world around them. Knowing this last, we are in a position to know more about the other person than they know about themselves. And…. and!  we will never have to find ourselves lamenting, “How could you do such a thing!! I really thought I knew you better than that!!”

fine.

what about the quotes?

Lizzi and Denise are referring to the most recent ‘development’ in the Wakefield Doctrine, i.e. the benefit (to clarks) of identifying with other clarks. It, (this ‘identifying with’), holds the potential to be remarkably beneficial (and) helpful thing that clarks can do to improve their very lives. Yeah, I know…. 

…sorry.  Hey, no one said this would be all seriousy and academic  and, you know rogerian…. at the risk of losing a tiny small handful of Readers (those who might have missed the statement of how the Doctrine is a fun…and useful tool to help better understand the people in our lives. oh well)

But the serious part of this topic today is that there is a thing that clarks can do with other clarks that will not only help, but will be useful to other clarks, all without invoking any requirements that might trigger the ‘run away!! they’re getting too close!! I’d love to help, but I don’t want to let you get too close (and run the risk of you learning too much) or be in your debt (and run the risk of disappointing you), reflex.
That a clark can identify with another clark is obvious. What might not be so obvious is that, by doing so, I benefit in ways that simply would not be possible with, say, a scott or a roger. And even though I benefit, I don’t have to worry about the relationship (created by this ‘identification’). I remain free to benefit or not, from seeing a person (another clark) and knowing that they experience the world as I do. I’m free to know that, if they weather a certain storm and survive, then I might.
It’s not that I need to learn shit from the other clark… hell, if learning was all it took, clarks would be….well, rogers and scotts!  lol.

No.

What happens for me is that I see, say Lizzi, survive a bad time and maybe she did a little thing differently, then I know that when those conditions apply to me, (that dark place is available to all clarks), maybe it can be different. That’s all. And if I see a clark, say Cynthia, and see that she can take the totally un-ruly ambitions and interests and enthusiasm for life and channel them in a way that keeps one strength from neutralizing the other, then it becomes a possibility for me!

(end of Part 1)

* well, because odd and (semi)random references to classical literature and stuff is fun, if for no other reason than, with surprisingly little effort, you can see the Doctrine in everything. Take the three young women in the painting above…please (bar rump bump!). Who out there is not thinking, ‘ok… I see the roger, pretty sure I got the clark…that leaves the red head as the scott.  Hurrah!’