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

As promised:

…the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral because the Doctrine is a perspective on the character of the personal reality of the individual. As in, the human being.

Any questions?

Fine, then we can proceed to the other (slightly related) topic: the reality of personal realities.

Seeing as how the Wakefield Doctrine is first and foremost an additional perspective on the world and the people who make it up, lets look at the notion of personal reality. We have, of recent, cited our favorite scene for illustrating personal reality, three friends standing across the street from a restaurant. At the height of the lunch hour. All three are hungry. And all three observe the line out the door of the eatery*. The calculations underlying their individual decision regrading their lunchtime destination varies. This variation is the manifestation of (the individual’s) personal reality.

But, for the purposes of applying the principles of our little personality theory, their (personal)reality is as real as an anvil in a bassinet. For the person. And, we do know that you know we are limiting the scope of the personal reality to the realm of the consciousness of the person experiencing it. For the most part.**

The thing of it is, for reasons not understood, the style of social interactions, (with their supporting and attendant likes, dislikes, pet peeves, secret talents and shameful memories), when listed for each of the three personality types show an inexplicable consistency. rogers like order, the pegboard in their workshops have the outline of the tools, for ease of returning to the correct spot; they enjoy bicycling with other rogers competing only for the maximum density of corporate logos, labels, hydrating bottles and, for the true aficionado one of those little mirrors on their heads, in the workplace in charge of HR and/or corporate culture, when introducing a new employee will always do two things, say “Watch out for that one…” (to either the scott or, if they have one, a favored clark) and, without fail, will refer to whatever employment guidelines, orientation or SOP may be on hand, as the Bible, as in, “We call this the Bible”***

*what an excellent word, no? how did something that cool-sounding make its way into this post, not to say the lexicon of the 21st century? came into use in 1901 and is in the top 6% of queries on its etymology.

** of course, there are examples of a personal reality extending beyond the individual’s consciousness… the three people in the example above? their decision may pivot on something as ephemeral as a memory, stripped of it’s objective details, leaving only a non-rational sense of the value (for the good or the bad) of the choice of ….eateries (still a cool word)

*** of course, no one there calls it ‘the Bible’, not even the person referring to it as such, except, of course, for that one new employee orientation.