Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
(no, I have no idea what this photo has to with, adds to or otherwise enhances your enjoyment of this here Post here… ask zoe, she knows of such things*) *but don’t expect an easy answer!
self-consciousness:: “…uncomfortably conscious of oneself as an object of the observation of others” (www.merriam-webster.com)
clarks worry about what other people might think (of them)
rogers are concerned with how they appear (to the people around them)
scotts only care that they are noticed (by people…good bad…. not important)
Most clarks will describe themselves as being self-consciousness. In fact, as a rule, clarks will take the more committed position of assigning the description of ‘introvert’ to themselves, and, depending on the clark, there will be no small amount of pride in their assertion. Most people think of clarks as ‘the shy ones’. If, however, we accept the further definition of ‘self-consciousness’ as “A person with a chronic tendency toward self-consciousness may be shy or introverted. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-consciousness), we are not immediately dissuaded of this proposition. However, as we all know,* a clark with a significant secondary scottian aspect will not suffer being ignored. (‘…a clark will avoid being the center of attention but will not tolerate being ignored.’)
But the lesson of today’s post is in the realm of ‘the everything Rule’ which states: any experience encountered by (any) one of the three personality types, can be experienced by ‘the other two’ and be exactly the same, …except different.
Self-consciousness is no exception. A roger is not concerned with what others think, (which implies the right to act in the manner being considered), because they are of the Herd. Any action, for a roger is, by definition, allowed. It’s all about ‘how well are they doing it, in the eyes of their peers’. That’s how self-consciousness manifests in the rogerian worldview.
scotts? nah… you all know about how they relate themselves to the world around them! (Hint: a scott alone in a room, isn’t).
Hey!! New Reader Alert and Helpful Hint:
Read about how the world looks to the three personality types. try looking around, using each…one will be ‘no way!’ discard that (worldview). Now try the other two… in different situations, one will seem to be ‘clearer’ more ‘comfortable’ that’s your predominant worldview! Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine!
…oh yeah, learning this thing? ‘you can’t get it wrong and you can’t break it!’
…ask anyone!
*provided we are doing our reading…. Dyanne? yes, there is assigned reading, as you very well know!
About clarkscottroger
You know i have never tried that last bit about looking deliberately out of the eyes of each… Im gonna do that today…. and BTW…no clue on the pic. How’s that for an easy answer … and that just complicated it! OH YE CLARK !
I’ll the first to say, it’s a tough one to do fully (that is simply the ideal-goal) but, when it comes to additional perspectives, what can it hurt?
Hey, even though you may not be into the jog/pretend run form of exercise… I’ve started a little secret blog called 2 Mile Run…. (www.2milerun.wordpress.com)… if you’re in the virtual neighborhood, there is one aspect that I would value your input, i.e. ‘thought of the day’ which is a part of the blog…. (yeah, I know! knock you over with a feather with me and the metaphysics …lol)
very cool. I thought you gave up on the running…. way to go!
“rogers are concerned with how they appear (to the people around them)”
Nice reminder on this. And one of those “Doctrine ditties” that is quite valuable. Especially, in the workplace.
Ha! This is great. I’m not “shy” per se, but given the crowd I might either come alive or become…a wallflower. Funny, I was often a wallflower at my last school, but this one, I’m in charge, yo! Haha. Since finding the Doctrine, I’ve thought that my significant scottian aspect was responsible for my lack of shyness…but some would perceive it as shyness when really, I’m “observing.” I became quite the observer in my last job…I dunno why. It just happened.
In other news, not at all related to your blog, (ha!), we are about to make an offer on a house…and our DD date for the current one is 6/5. Quickly approaching. Fingers crossed. Eeep!
totally crossed fingeration!
(good point: the secondary aspect, scottian in yours (and my) case, provides the ‘reflexes’* however it remains for you to relate yourself to the world (as you would)… an Outsider is not (necessarily) a hermit. It is the degree of adopting parts of the world that shows when clarks exert themselves before a live audience (as they used to say before the old TV sitcoms)
very cool developments, yo
* huge topic, barely scratched the surface, i.e. how does the secondary (and tertiary) aspect manifest, exert it’s influence…the whole magilla, we’re just beginning to put words on that part of the Doctrine… a huge potential
I think you addressed a herd of Clarks at one point in an earlier post. Is there such a thing? I can maybe see it, except they wouldn’t be worried about how they were perceived, per se. I picture a meeting of the self-conscious Clarks where no one says anything, or else it would be a laughing good time.
correct…again! no, a Herd of clarks is a contradiction in terms (sort of like like introspective scotts or a pack of rogers)
we are seeing, here, in the virtual world what is probably the closest thing to a gathering of clarks… (for a very good, if elusive purpose, to benefit from the phenomenon of ‘identification’)… but if you say, ‘hey! what group of clarks?!?!’ you’re correct. We’re there but as any smart Leptictidium would have told you (49 million years ago) it’s best not to stand out in the open for too long.
besides, and remember… the worldviews? aka personal realities that are key to the Doctrine, these are real realities. as an Outsider the world is a place where it is best that I stay in the background a lot… it’s only by virtue of my secondary aspect that I can do what it is I’ve been doing
ya know?
Oh and as far as the photo is concerned, I am the one sitting in the back, cowering in the corner.
the movie, that this is a scene from is ‘Kalifornia’ an excellent movie, if you don’t mind violence and such… it includes David Duchoveny (a clark) and, the person you’re identifying with, that would be Juliette Lewis, one of the more clarklike of actresses out there… very (difficult) to watch at times (as is often the case when we observe our people, the effects of the inescapable realization that we’re ‘like that’)