Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of simple math and the Outsider.” | the Wakefield Doctrine Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of simple math and the Outsider.” | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of simple math and the Outsider.”

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

“At least no one will see how badly I did.”

While, at first blush, this statement might be attributed to a clark, it is, in fact a rogerian sentiment.

Before we do that, let us review the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine:

  1. the Outsider (clarks) like a singularity (in astronomy) it is tempting to describe this predominant worldview as what it is, rather than the more efficacious approach of sharing what it is not; (the first hint as to the conundrum that started us this morning);
  2. the Predator (scotts) a classic blue herring. Even the first, cursory examination with the distinguishing characteristics of our speedy friend hints not only at not being the solution to our puzzel but, in fact, hints at a far greater (and way more subtle) concept
  3. the Herd Member (rogers) ha! you have been, by your first thought (all while believing you are safe from the relentless understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine), bathing in the false security of being on the far side of this display); the subtle subtitle of today’s post is both noose and garrot.

ok,

this is why we normally post the RePrint first, instead of second.

But you knew that, didn’t you?

Quick, down-and-dirty lesson:

  • clarks are Outsiders. they live in a bubble that does not actually exist. so they cannot be our elocutor, as the (beginning this day) leaves no possibility that there cannot be a response from others
  • scotts are Predators. they are busy living life, not in a ‘Clearly, de Kooning intends the viewer to…’ sense of life, more, the Wiley Coyote/Road Runner duprass*
  • rogers are Herd Members. why on earth would you have eliminated them in your deliberations? they (the rogers who are, of the three1, are truest to this statement). this would lead us to believe that one’s conscious belief provides immunity to a relationship is a folly on the scale of the one that clarks maintain.

End of discussion.

If you are reading this: Congratulations! You are eligible to enjoy the benefits of our little personality theory. The fun and useful alike!

 

*search ‘Cat’s Cradle’ K. Vonnegut

  1. remember, for our follow-up discussion, one certain unifying Princple called ‘the Everything Rule’

 

*

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. This post. First coffee. First snow…

    I look forward to discussion of this: “rogers are Herd Members. why on earth would you have eliminated them in your deliberations? they (the rogers who are, of the three1, are truest to this statement). this would lead us to believe that one’s conscious belief provides immunity to a relationship is a folly on the scale of the one that clarks maintain.”

    OK, fine! I’ll pour the second and re-read…

  2. messymimi says:

    But is anything ever really simple?