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

As often happens, a idea/reason/demand/’hey-you-really-should-write-that-as-a-Post comes up that causes me to stop, halfway through a Reply to a Comment.

This morning is one of those Posts. Courtesy of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia I will demonstrate my own advancing maturity and, rather than hold forth at length, provide her

Comment:

I don’t think you could get any more accurate on that “clark” description. Seriously. It made me think of the retreat/training. The whole time people would say, “wow, you know so many things! You’re really brilliant.” (I’m not good at compliments, so I managed to mutter a thank you when that happened.) And then what happens? I don’t ace the final exam. Because you know, regurgitating answers is just not my thing. lol.
I *tried* to be a good student in school and often succeeded at it. But, then I’d get burnt out from the grind of it and just not turn in assignments due to lack of time, oversleeping or whatever. That happened more when I was younger. Grad school was different: I could “shine” on the papers we had to write. I actually didn’t mind those. They were stressful, but I would *much* rather write a paper than take a stupid test. Those things – I’ve often thought – really just demonstrate how well you regurgitate knowledge at that moment in time. They do not allow you to demonstrate all the other things you really studied in-depth on, or your real passion for the subject matter such that you know that your learning is not complete, even I did do well on a test.
When I missed those questions on my exam last week, at first I was about to beat myself up over it, because this training was really important to me. And then I remembered that no one cares about a test score. And that I will never stop exploring and learning this stuff and you can bet that I will learn it and assimilate and digest and live it more than most people. Why? Because clark. lol

To which I Replied:

…know what you mean*

What comes to mind is the ‘Everything Rule’.

The Everything Rule in the context of the Wakefield Doctrine states, ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’. It is intended to remind us that, although we three inhabit different realities, we all encounter the same people, places and things. The beauty part of the Doctrine is that we recognize that all, and every one of, these people, places and things manifest differently for clarks, scotts and rogers. Sometimes very differently, other times really not that differently, it is the fact of the difference that is valuable. And the character of the manifestation is a reflection of the world as the individual is experiencing it. Surely this insight is the most stupendous** of advantages afforded by our Doctrine and is probably the single (at least sufficient) reason we claim that ‘with the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine you can know more about the other person than they know about themselves.’

Take knowledge (“..please” barump bump!) knowledge is ‘a different thing’ for clarks, scotts and rogers. For scotts it’s natural and singular (and therefore) limited in value.

Hey, I totally need to write this as Post. You write the best of comments (which is a reflection of your talent as a teacher.)

Ahem…where was I?  lol

We will use knowledge (in the sense of the product of learning and, if time permits, the motivation for that same learning) to illustrate the ‘Everything Rule’

For scotts knowledge is naturally occurring and, as such, is of limited intrinsic value… scotts know what they need to know as scotts. They do not learn in order to become better scotts, they learn in order to become more effective scotts. Like body building or practicing to be a surgeon, you get better each tim you do it.

For rogers knowledge is like the air we breath. Absolutely necessary and essential and totally without specific value until some one decides to shut off the supply. They (rogers) will know then that the intrinsic value of air is in the person (or agency) that turned it off. Provided they escape, the knowledge that they have acquired is: there is a certainty in the world (air) and there is certainty among people (some one or some agency has the power to control it). When you meet a roger in a position of authority, pay attention to the words they use. They rarely imply that they are the authority. Rather it will be someone (or some agency) that has power. They just happen to speak for that person (or agency). This is referred to in the Wakefield Doctrine as ‘referential authority’. A hallmark of the rogerian personality type.

For clarks knowledge is the answer. Unfortunately for them, the question was misunderstood that day in learning to be human class. No doubt due to a scott throwing something at the blackboard or a roger threatening them into giving up their lunch money. In any event, knowledge is central in the life of a clark. It represents the (possibility) of learning what it is we clearly missed out on when growing up. It is the key and the membership in the common society that we immediately observed among the rogers and the scotts. In other words, the knowledge, the lack of which has consigned us to the fringes, the world of the Outsider.

One practical note: clarks acquire knowledge because that is what they do. clarks are free with that knowledge and are more than happy to share it with one and all. Unfortunately, rogers consider knowledge to be… well, to be a well-kept secret and scotts, hey they found it first and sure, if you want to wrestle for it, that’d be fun.

The Everything Rule reminds us to consider that the very nature/character of knowledge is different for all three personality types. Fortunately, with the Wakefield Doctrine we are in a position to understand and appreciate what it is the other person is experiencing when we share knowledge.

Thanks Cynthia!

*lol, well, duh!
** to borrow from don Juan Mateus