Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
To (continue from yesterday’s post) and reinforce the shift back to being the source of appreciation, understanding and help applying the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, a definition:
The Wakefield Doctrine is an alternate perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. It is predicated on the character of the relationship between us and the world. There are three characteristic relationships. That of:
- the Outsider (clarks) in which the world is everything outside the boundaries of our thinking minds. Those born into this personal reality begin with curiosity and develop their social strategies motivated by a single fear, that of scrutiny. clarks know they are different but do not know why. They are governed by the suspicion that it is, somehow, their fault. Avoidance becomes the better part of valor;
- the Predator (scotts) to whom the world is… the world. Survival is simple, kill or be killed. And, as a metaphor, the manifestation of this imperative is just as immediate a concern the Outsider maintains towards discovery. scotts know the world is, at heart, as simple as they experience. Hesitancy is sleep and inaction is death. The joy and the fear that cling to both prey and (other) predators is the A1 sauce of the gods. Confirmation that they need only act. Life is to be lived in furious enthusiasm, asking no quarter and expecting none from the world. Valor is the better part of valor.
- the Herd Member (rogers) find themselves in a world that is nearly perfect. Recognizing the familiar, they extend their attention and regard to those around them. Commonality is grace and the only sin is to be a nuisance and a burden on others. rogers know the world around them is quantifiable, they begin to organize, take inventory and embrace all they know and, with the care of a bee keeper or snake charmer, keep track of those they do not. The glaze of the flambé are those apart, the different.
We, all of us, develop in personal realities reflecting these three worldviews. In a sense, we all have, in principal, perfect personality types. For the reality we experience as ‘the world’. The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that for every individual, there is only one predominant worldview, however, we all retain the residual potential of ‘the other two’. The application of the Doctrine is as simple as asking oneself:
How is this person relating themselfs to the world around them?
With this question answered, we are in a position to realize two benefits: a) we know more about them than they know about themselfs and 2) we are, if we’re so inclined, in a position to appreciate how the other person is experiencing the moment we share.
Pointers for the (most fun and efficacious) use of our little personality theory:
- the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them
- once you have the three relationships down, you can’t get it wrong
- (there are tons of examples of the typical and characteristic behaviors of each of the three personality types in this blog)
- you are experiencing the world as one (and only one) of the three
- translation is the Seal of Solomon for students of this here Doctrine here
- there is something called ‘the Everything Rule’ it will prevent needless complications. learn it.
- it’s fun and useful (as one more perspective on the world around us)
ok
no RePrint today.
Don’t forget the bloghops of the week. It’s how we develop and practice our communication skills. Tomorrow and Thursday it’s the Six Sentence Story and on Friday, the Unicorn Challenge. Go there. Read. Participate. Tell ’em the Doctrine sent ya.
Would you agree that what a person does not say, tells more about his/her relationship with the world than what is said?
A qualified ‘Yes’*
* the qualification: the nature of the background (that) would infer the absence.
The Doctrine is simple, and simpl(istic) but useful as an illustration of my answer.
If you know you’re speaking to a roger then the absence of certain value assessments, lines of interrogatory and conclusion of (the) nature likely future(s) would show up** against the shadow wall of the ‘the other two’ predominant worldviews.
And herein lies the risk of such assumptions: what is the agency that determines absence or insufficiency? We all live in a world of our own authorship or, (being in a Monday mood) possibly co-authorship. Unless we account for this basic bias, what we come to believe the other person is (or is not) saying is suspect. Kinda the ultimate confirmation bias.
Hence, the Doctrine’s position on the inestimable value of multiple perspective, aka personal reality.
** if of sufficient competency in our little personality, they would appear as whirling, neon strobe LED lettres lol
Hey, fun discussion… helps relieve the inevitable build-up of pressure to figure out the secret of the universe… which certainly is a fun pasttime, but not exactly small talk lol