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

(If we might continue?)

iii) The three predominant worldviews, aka personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine are:

1. 1. clarks (Outsider)
   2. scotts (Predator)
   3. rogers (Herd Member)

So there you go.

What? Define each. Give list of characteristics?

What do you think this is, the Oscar/Meyer ABC schedule?

Here is all you need to complete the picture: ‘The Three Personality Types of the Wakefield Doctrine’: it comes down to relationships, as in, ‘How do I relate myself to the world around me and the people who make it up’. (Hint: We said ‘relate ourselves to’ not ‘relate to’.) Critical point. Like we said, the Doctrine is about (a) relationship.

Second necessary part (for your successful assembly of our little personality types.) Wait. It’s already been provided above. ‘Outsider’? ‘Predator’? ‘Herd Member’?

(ed. Don’t feel bad. A lot of clarks do that. You know, be so excited and in such a hurry we neglect to read every single line of instruction, rather than only the ones that give the impression of ‘getting closer to the Answer’.)

Hate to get rogerian sounding on y’all,  but. “The Wakefield Doctrine is not an/the Answer. It is only a Suggestion”.

Suggestion massaged into a Proposition: Suppose everyone lives in a reality that is personal. Nothing weird or gigantic. No flying without planes or total self-acceptance in the here and now. Just personal, in a zone outwards from the mind, the body, the heart. In this zone, things are as the individual’s nature would have them be: a world where thought and reason combined to create belonging; action becomes love and acceptance conveys peace.

like that, ya know?

Fortunately for any New Readers two things happened once this blog saw the fluorescent/LED(ish) light of reality: a) the characteristics of the three personality types became self-perpetuating, to the extent that followers found ‘new’ examples of characteristics consistent with the Doctrine and 2) people found this thing useful, valuable and fun.

what more can we ask for?