Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
So, Phyllis and I were discussing life, the world, and the people who make it up yesterday morning. Naturally, the Wakefield Doctrine formed my platform for this discussion. Which, not surprisingly, suggests I pose one of the most basic of questions, relating to said Doctrine.
What is the point, purpose, rationale and/reason for learning the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine?
Good question.*
The Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective on life, reality, the world around us and the people who make it up.** As a perspective, the Wakefield Doctrine affords us additional insights and thereby allowing us to know more about the other person. And, along with faith and love, surely there can be no diminution of the value for having more than one (or two or…).
It has been said, ‘The Wakefield Doctrine is not an answer, it’s a set of Cliff Notes.’1 Knowing the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and applying them to our interactions with the world each day affords us an insight otherwise not available.
The principles of the Wakefield Doctrine?
We are, all of us, born with the potential to experience the world in three distinctly characteristic ways, as the:
- Outsider(clarks) one who lives on the fringe, not entirely by choice; that said, finding themselves there, strive to be involved in life without being the subject of un-invited scrutiny
- Predator(scotts) those who live in a world of surprise threats and constant pleasure, they live for the moment and, because moments are passing, do not spend much time with introspection, (or his hot, but slutty cousin, self-doubt), preferring to savor each interaction, for better or for worse but not forever
- Herd Member(roger) comprising the largest group of the three, this is a world of quantifiable limits, knowable potential and a definable future. The primary ambition of those who inhabit the world as a roger is to find the Right Way and make certain as many others are aware of it as possible.
Once we reach a certain, early and young age, (which are, as we know, qualities not necessarily coincident nor mutually-exclusive), we settle into one and only one of the three ‘worldviews’. Being young and at the stage of life during which we learn to deal with others and the world, the ‘personality types’ we develop are in response to the world as we are experiencing it.
Big difference here between the Doctrine most other personality systems. Their focus tends to be on listing likes and dislikes, tendencies and tropisms; from the Doctrine’s point of view, my style of interacting with the world is a reflection of the reality I developed it in.
Example: I am not a person who has a genetic disposition to slouch and an inherent tendency to mutter, nor am I an introvert, encased in a fear of other people, and I am especially not a person who can’t make up his mind about what to believe. I am a clark. An Outsider. The world I experienced as a young child was that of the Outsider. This is neither a judgment on myself or my upbringing. It was that, of the three worldviews, I grew up in the one in which I am apart from. The world around me holds the secret and it is always a priority that I look in all the corners, read the flyers stuck under my windshield wipers and listen to the ravings of anyone who might be raving. This because they might hold a clue to will help in my search.
Hey! Running long… gotta make sure I include: you know how we all grow up and develop in one personal reality aka predominant worldview (of a clark or a scott or a roger)? Well, we never lose the capacity to experience the world as do ‘the other two’. This is critical to what makes the Doctrine a killer app for self-developing oneself.
…to be continued.
* and it is a question usually posed by a roger, answered, without necessarily being aware of the correctness of the answer, by a clark and a source of lasting amusement to a scott.
** one of the more enduring bon mots appearing in these pages over the years, more properly stated: ‘…the world and the people who make it up.’ (The joke is in the verb.)
1) ok… we will probably mention the personal nature of reality, which, by implication, makes it somewhat variable, person-to-person, time-to-time and like duct tape, inappropriately-yet-effective. It is CliffsNotes… not! as I now believe, here in the 21st century, not. Cliff Notes. lol damn!
(of the following vid, ‘...definitely a clark, even with his eyes pointed in your direction, he’s not looking at you.’)
About clarkscottroger
A very good post today! The Doctrine explained clearly, with a pleasant sense of humor in dare I say, “rogerian armchair easy” :)
It has always been said the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine are simple, yet not necessarily easy. The descriptions of the 3 worldviews today varied ever so slightly allowing, imo, the reader an insight into the reality of clarks, scotts and rogers from a slightly different angle. (I know you know what I mean)
My reaction to music vid – f’n clarks! :D
Thank you, still in search of ‘the Perfect Doctrine post’.
Leaving me to wonder (of course!) whether, because we can still choose to experience the world as “the other two” do, would the perfect personality blend be someone who chooses to use each 1/3 of the time? Of course not, but i think too much, naturally.
Once again! You and your (constructively) provocative Doctrine questions.
as to your last sentence, ‘Well, duh!’ lol
The highest and best use of the Wakefield Doctrine, imo, is to self-develop oneself to the point of having all three worldviews in a state of dynamic integration.
ps bunching of posts and hours on conversations on just this topic, usually focused on how to ‘activate’ the ‘other two’ and what is the nature of the three worldviews…. hey, if you ever find yourself with free time on a Saturday night, call in around 8pm (info on the homepage).