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

During this early phase we are grateful for Comments from the likes of Mimi and Cynthia,  Denise and Nick. Most recently:

‘…I think I’d have to leave the Scott and Roger behind and turn down an alley.’ 😂

(a fragment of Cynthia’s Comment comprising significant insight into the three personality types, especially the scott and the clark)

Wanna hear a very practical insight into the Wakefield Doctrine, (in terms of how useful and fun this personality theory can be)? Well, do you?

Ask the following question:

‘How much is two plus two?’

If you have the luck of asking this of people who happen to be individually representative of the three predominant worldviews you will hear one form or another of these responses:

• {laughter}, “Thats one of the things I like about you!”
• “Four”
• “In what context?”

Well this been fun.

oh yeah, New Readers? We haven’t forgotten you. About Cynthia’s Comment (Hey! First Homework Assignment!! Follow the link back to the post it appeared in and read it in it’s entirety. Jot down any Questions for her or the Doctrine).

two things first (Like a Primer or CliffNotes): one is about her and the other is about the Doctrine

1. 1. Discussion of a person’s predominant worldview often constitutes the most enjoyable ways of learning our little personality theory. The why of it (another’s personality type) is the shortest path to fluency. New Readers? No one can tell you what your predominant worldview is, at least with an expectation that you accept it. This thing is all about being able to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. The term ‘fluency’ is often heard in discussion among followers of the Wakefield Doctrine. C’s comment is a good example of this. She describes the situation, provides her impressions of the emotional, mental and actional* states of the people she encounters. Funny thing, being fluent, as Cynthia is, she is not giving us a list of behaviors by which we might try to decode the behavior (therefor the worldview) of the players in her story(ette). Instead, she picks the correct words that not only apply as accurate descriptions but have ‘the flavor of the thing’ as often witnessed when listening to a person translate something from a foreign language. The word ‘idiom’ comes to mind. We’ve all had the experience of hearing poor translation. Usually characterized by the use of  overly-literal terms and phrases.
   2. the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.  The practical goal of this here Doctrine here is that we become better able to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. And, in doing so, way cut down on the stress of mal-communciation between two (or more) people.

ya know?

* look it up**

** burn! got ya1 not a ‘real’ word