Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
wikipedia: William Blake, The Temptation and Fall of Eve, 1808 (illustration of Milton’s Paradise Lost) one word: ‘holy shit!’
*************
Man’s Fall from Grace is an excellent metaphor for the goal of those studying the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘to see the world as the other person is experiencing it‘, is the goal (and) benefit of the application of the perspective inherent in the Wakefield Doctrine. When able to acquire this understanding, we then are in a position to know more about another person than they know about themselves. While the emphasis would appear to be on acquiring knowledge, it is incumbent upon us to remember the Story of Adam and Eve. While Eve may have been a well-meaning clark and Adam a favored-son roger, they were tempted by a scott, as a result, there appears an un-resolvable conflict in the rational, the emotional and the impulsive, in competition. That we all have within, the potential of all three worldviews, forces the student of the Wakefield Doctrine to strive to develop these three, very different worldviews into a relationship of harmony, drawing the strength of each of these three ways that one can, ‘relate oneself to the world around them’. As with the biblical story of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden, failure to reconcile these three exacts a very heavy price.
About clarkscottroger
HA HAHAHAHAHA! NO WAY! WAY! Most excellent post! Had I not discovered the Doctrine would I have known I didnt reconcile the three? Or would it have become apparent in some way and I would have had that feeling of ” Somethin’s just not right….” Oh so lucky to have met! You have saved me paying the price… well, I dont know if Ive reconciled… but you’ve gotten me closer anyway! oh and frist.
Frist!
…hey! glad we could help! lol (that painting? two words: ayiee!!*)
*not being major art guy, I’ve never seen that painting yow!
I knew it… from Paradise Lost? I didnt know that… actually it was pretty famous in religion books in catholic hs. it is pretty icky now that I look at it more closely!
lol yeah, huh!
I think this might be my favorite post here ever. Like Ivy said, most excellent. And of course Eve’s a clark, right?
…because, even though she was not thinking of herself and only wanted what (She thought) was best for Adam…she went for the deal ..from a fricken snake!
I will never think of Adam, Eve, and the serpent in the same way again. HAHAH. I always sided with Eve…HAHA.
we (clarks) always have, before, even, the Doctrine to give us the ‘perspective on the perspective’ !
I’m still not sure I want to recognise my roger ;)
(among the three) there is one (of the three) that it is not hard to imagine ‘becoming’ and there is one (of the three) that would be most difficult
scotts find it hardest to imagine living in our world, rogers find it most difficult to imagine being a scott and for us, it’s the rogerian worldview and, the funny thing, it’s not emotional/drama queen thing (about rogers) that we have a hard time imagining being… it’s the ‘projectile self-certainty will being happy in a world so limited as to be quantifiable’…. that and the inability to act the way they sometimes do, without having an excuse! lol
ohhh it sounds awful when you say it like that…
expressing our rogerian aspect or being a roger? lol
Yes to both ;)
not the easiest thing in the world, but then again, what part of self-developing ourselves appears to be easy. (I suspect special efforts should be take appreciate the benefits that accrue as we, those of us so inclined, work to raise and develop our potentials and strengthen our weaknesses… I know for sure the practitioner is the last to see the changes).I take solace in my belief that my current understanding of what it would mean to fully express my rogerian potential is not necessarily the only understanding… that, in fact, like the act of identifying with another person, the intent to do so produces much benefit, even if not readily perceivable in terms of actual change.
No, often the “advances” made are not always readily perceivable. Often we are the last to notice. Having said that, there comes a point at which the “practice” stops being practice and becomes a fledgling aspect (of our selves).
In my case, as in yours Lizzi and Clark, the rogerian. It has taken what? almost 4 years of trying to develop my rogerian aspect to where I am way more comfortable relating myself to rogers (and the world in which they live). The funny thing about that? just this moment I realized that it is my scottian secondary that has assisted me in my self challenge to advance my rogerian aspect.
Huh….
I fully expected Eve to be wearing the Wakefield Doctrine hat (Right of Hat in the Garden of Eden)????
lol… with a feather boa, 3 scarves, a fig leaf, a couple of palm fronds and….
Are all the great femme fatales clarks?
…noe* of the great femme fatales are clarks, they’re scotts!
I misspelled this deliberately! no! really I was thinking noetics and my mind wandered