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

Friend of the Doctrine, Mimi, wrote a Comment to yesterday’s post that constitutes a springboard into a standalone (or at very least, continuation) post,

As usual, much food for thought. My reaction would probably be to quickly get the application done and then start clearing tables, but that’s because i have trained my prefers-to-sit-quietly self to get up and hop to it if i want to earn an honest coin.

Congratulations! You’re not a roger!

lol

We kid the rogers. There is nothing wrong with being a roger or, for that matter, any of the three predominant worldviews. The basis of the Wakefield Doctrine is the idea that we are, all of us, born with the potential to experience the world as any of the three. At an early age we find ourselves in one of three personal realities and develop our personality (types) in response to the conditions that obtain in whichever of the three we find our-very-young-selves. So it is valid to say, on the most fundamental level, we all have the personality best suited to contend with the world as we’re experiencing it. If we grow up:

1. in the reality of the Outsider, we learn two things immediately: 1) it’s best to keep a low-profile seeing how we seem to be the only one among our immediate circle, (at the beginning, this is surely the atomic family), who can’t seem to put our hands on the invitation to join them, 2) everyone around us seem to belong or, at very least, have a trial membership to whatever group they’re in and c) we are quite intelligent, (everyone keeps telling us that, at any rate), so it must be we missed the class on being ‘a part of’…. our life-long search for the missing knowledge begins; a clark is born
2. the life of the Predator: don’t just sit there, something is surely hunting for you and, besides, you’ve got this totally irresistible impulse to chase something, the world is alive, in motion and exciting! There clearly are dangers, hazards and others who find you chase-worthy…. add that to the column ‘Reasons Not to Worry About stuff in ya Head’ Physically, and emotionally, it’s all about trying to keep the dial on ’11’ Introspection, doubt? What are you nuts!?!? Why not cut off a limb while you’re at it? scotts don’t stop moving until the end.
3. the world of the Herd Member: Fine. Everything, with proper understanding and appreciation, is fine. How could it be otherwise? The world makes sense and where it doesn’t, well that’s just a matter of better understanding, practice or not looking. Life is meant to be lived properly and given you’ve an innate appreciation of how that must go, the second highest good is to help others understand the Right Way. It ain’t easy being a roger.

ok… back to Mimi’s comment.

Not being aware of our little personality theory blog, back in 2012 when the Post I was referring to yesterday was written, I’ll provide the Cliff Notes:

the ‘I-gots-to-learn-to-write-good-fever’ was beginning and so I looked for excuse to write more. I was also on a kick to come up with answers to questions that could only have come from a clark and a scott and roger. I was in my multiple choice personality test phase. (The product of this effort is still available in the landing page here… ‘In a hurry?’ the block directly under ‘What is the Wakefield Doctrine’. Let us know if you decided to take the test, haven’t been back there in a while. The reason? Welll the Doctrine is only useful if you want it to be and then, if that’s the case, the process of learning the three worldviews leads inevitably to the correct answer to the question: ‘Which of the three are you?’ But thats a whole ‘nother post.)

The point of yesterday’s reprint was that the reaction of the rogers to the ‘Answer: …and help clear tables‘ was so vehement in emotion and consistent in who objected, one could not help but think, ‘Whoa ho! What’s going on here?’

The answer? We’d detected an artifact in the personal reality of the Herd Member that was normally out of reach, even with the enhanced insights afforded by the Doctrine. At least from our perspective as one of ‘the other two’.

Of course, we went all Indiana Jones and came running out of the field* with ‘referential authority’ in our hands. (We don’t have to tell you the predominant worldview of the character Indiana Jones, do we?**)

The end.

* Herd? you know in the field of rogers?

** Hint: he wasn’t a clark. For all the exploring the unknown and such, the guy wore a fedora everywhere! And, since none of what he was so chasing after was, exactly, running away, that eliminates the temptation to consider a scottian worldview…