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

While everbody can see the Wakefield Doctrine as ‘an additional perspective’* it takes a little extra reflection to appreciate it’s utility as ‘a tool’* and a whole lot of clarklike imagination to accept that it (can/might) offer a lever*** on the world. It might be more accurate to use the term, ‘personal reality’. (While more comprehensive and conducive to understanding the Doctrine, the description of three ways to relate ourselves to the world around us was, originally, “Σοβαρά, θα εμπιστευτείς ένα google translate για ένα κρίσιμο στοιχείο στο Δόγμα; (ναι, φαίνεται ωραίο όμως, σωστά)”.¹

The concept of personal reality is both simple and irrational. (so, yeah, welcome to the world of clarks). It maintains that we, all of us, experience reality to a small, but not insignificant basis, as personal . Nothing cool, (or scary), like singing toasters or having the ability to fly (though, clarks out there are all too familiar with our capacity for being invisible, deliberately and otherwise), just personal. Therein lies the key utility of our little personality theory. The Doctrine reminds us that all that meets the eye is insufficient for complete understanding while, at the same time not conveying the ability to read minds (damn! was that too much to ask of this serendipitous insight?) but providing (an) additional aid to allowing the world to be different for the other person than that which we are experiencing.

In the early days we spent a lot of time with this concept of personal reality. Mostly because we needed to communicate that our personality types are not necessarily our conscious (or even, unconscious) choice. The clarklike female does not add neon highlights to her perfectly nice-looking hair and the clarklike male does not hunch his shoulders and look at anything other than the eyes of the other person because they’re (as a scott might express: goofin’ on the interviewer)… we do it because it makes sense. To us; in the context of the reality in which we find ourselfs. And that, according to many authorities with books and colleges named after them is a definition of rational behavior.

So, in conclusion:

Εάν δεχθούμε την ευθύνη για τον χαρακτήρα του κόσμου που αντιμετωπίζουμε, τότε έχουμε πρόσβαση στη δύναμη να τον αλλάξουμε.³

Teaser: so, we’re engaging in a live action application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, going all Sy Sperling on this here tool here. Will keep you up-to-date.

(for those with longer tenure, we might reference a period of time shortly after starting this blog that we provided an example of attempting to act as a live demonstration. and, for reasons uncertain but respected we will keep it simple and say ‘This link for that reference’

* “…on the world around us and the people who make it up”

** “…for seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it”

*** “Πᾷ βῶ, καὶ χαριστίωνι τὰν γᾶν κινήσω πᾶσαν [Pā bō, kai kharistiōni tan gān kinēsō” (Archimedes) That thing about levers and moving the earth. Yeah, extra points to the Reader who cupped handed ‘roger‘

1)  we trust Nick, if he’s reading, to not so much do the translate check, as let us know if we’re saying something like, “The can of dog food forms the basis of a complete breakfast” or phrases other than what we actually wrote

2) something to the effect: ‘Seriously, you’re gonna trust a google translate for a critical element in the Doctrine? (yeah, does look cool though, right?)

3) damn! let this put to rest the persistent rumor that, at least in the public eye, clarks are totally risk-aversive (That said, everyone lets have a round of applause for Nick and his good-hearted efforts to eq this bad-boy (linguistically-speaking) into something that gets us at least a B-minus)