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

In terms of actual tools that offer genuine effect on one’s personal reality, it’s a given the Wakefield Doctrine appeals primarily to clarks*.

Why should that be?

Part koan/part: ‘Why did the chicken cross the road?’ This question has  been the source of that rarest of commodities, mutual identification/solidarity for the one personality type in a position to benefit from it.

This being a Doctrine post written by a clark (with a significant secondary scottian and weak tertiary rogerian aspect) and (it) being Tuesday** we will forego the projectile apologia to our scottian and rogerian brethren and brethrenia. Let’s give them the day off. To go chase shit and discover new sources of referential authority***.

Hey! That footnote reminds us to mention what is surely in the Top Ten benefits of the Wakefield Doctrine.

No…wait. This is our time.

ok… just this once! Then back to whatever self-help, automatic writing exercise this, (as with nearly all other posts), is today.

The heck with that! We all know that we’re doing is nothing more than our  habitual, curry-favor with the real people, just to be on the pre-emptively safe side.

Allow us to shift tenses, POV or whatever and say that it was when we identified a certain characteristic behavior of the the Herd Members that offered an insight that makes the life of the clark following this personality theory a whole lot better. We’re, of course, referring to ‘lashing out’. Will leave it at ‘it has nothing to do with you, it is all about them’. The rest, if you need it, (secondary clark- rogers and scotts out there) is contained somewhere in this blog.

We’re running short of time. Have a big day of ‘Fine. You have the Wakefield Doctrine. You must attend a social function full of strangers. Lets see if you can do something different.

…and, no, writing on your wrist:

• clarks (the Outsider) abhors being the center of attention but will not tolerate being ignored; are smarter than they need to be but still mistake information with identification; fear scrutiny above all while assuring they will stand out in any crowd, despite taking up a position on the fringes and in the purported shadows
• scotts (the Predator) the total life of the party, are as obvious as flashbulb in a pup tent; as with all forms of their kind, the problem with encountering scotts in public is not being noticed, but in trying to run away. the closest (in a pet lion sorta way) to being the friendly one of ‘the other two’
• rogers (the Herd Member) if quicksand were, like an element of the atmosphere, this person is attractive and usually not so beneficial, at least when there is more than one of them. (Hint: schoolyard at lunch time after they were singled-out by the teacher for not doing their homework and… you laughed when everyone else stopped. Quit school. Join the circus.)

is not really what we’ve been striving towards the past fifteen plus years. lol

We think we said yesterday something about remembering to imagine the world/immediate situation as the other person is experiencing it. Then, and only then, do you have a shot at deliberate and effective communication.

Will report back tomorrow.

* it is almost axiomatic that for anyone else, (aka ‘the other two’ predominant worldviews), to get caught up in this most excellent alternative perspective on the world around us (and the people who make it up), one must have a significant secondary clarklike aspect

** the most clark-friendly day of the workweek. by far!

*** New Readers? this is the second-most startling and serendipitous insight afforded us when applying the principles of this here Doctrine here to learn more about ‘the other two’.

*