Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
cont’d from last week…
Hey! Picture the senior lion, missing a tooth or two, ok, maybe a claw more suited to massage than tear, nobody needs to act surprised. But is it still a lion? Yessir. More to the point (and the essence of the Wakefield Doctrine) is he/she still maintain the relationship of the Predator to the world around them? damn straight.
The interesting part of this aging process is when we consider an individual’s secondary and tertiary aspects.
We good?
So we assume you’ve done your reading on secondary (and tertiary) aspects of the Doctrine. Influences, potential, behavioral sports… not dual predominant worldviews. One per customer, please,
So we, some of us, have secondary aspects that are…noticeable. By noticeable we mean, for the skilled observer (aka studious student of a certain personality theory), and even then most often a secondary aspects shows in situations of duress and/or heighten energy (we would have used the word ‘arousal’ but, you know…. scotts*
Although we all retain the potential to experience the world as do ‘the other two’ (as distinguished from our predominant worldview), it’s useful to look.
Funny thing about secondaries, it’s become axiomatic ’round here to say that the only people who come back to this blog more than twice are clarks or scotts/rogers who have a significant secondary clarklike aspect.
It’s true! (lol)
ok, this being a Tuesday, we’re out of time. But as a teaser for anyone finding the topic of secondary aspects interesting, consider this: If you’re not in a hurry to learn a person’s secondary, wait ’til they get old.
(‘Old’ means:
- for a scott… a missing tooth, a worn-down claw, a tendency to pause before leaping at prey,
- for a roger… newspapers and National Geographic ‘collections’, an affinity for wondering what total strangers are thinking,
- for a clark… what old?! we were born old… we’re the original merlin in that regards, ‘cepting the cool portrayal in myth and legend leaves out things like the ‘terrible twos’ (and fives and sixes and such). But hey, we think we’re in a better position to interact effectively with the world around us, what with having already seen the movie.
Questions?
*
* as in, it doesn’t take much to get them scamps all rambunctious… lol
About clarkscottroger
No questions at this time!
Secondary manifesting while under duress? Without question.
tru dat
You have to admit it was fun, though… and a prime example of how commercial “ethics” ( oxymoron) have shifted.
ikr?
so god’s punishment wasn’t expulsion from the Garden, it was than Man be be possessed of a relatively long life-span. (“The better to see how transient your precious standards and values are, my little pretties!”)
ayiii fricken yeee
My leaping days are behind me. I’m sort of like that lion who’s still a lion except that I’m stuffed.
now, we might be tempted to ask your secondary aspect, but given how faithful a Reader you have been, we will, (to use a rogerian* expression) surpass on that
now those! rogerian expressions, totally fun aspect of the personal reality of the Herd Members
at the bottom of the page on rogers
Rogerian _egenskaber_ – Newspapers are put into the recycle bin before the scent of ink fills my sinuses too deeply. Same goes with magazines, although my husband keeps his auto magazines for years; drives my around-the-bend.
“un-abashed edition” … a good laugh but “baby-coated” was funnier.
I do however study user manuals front to back, and occasionally in different languages (just to see if anything important was omitted) before I touch any button on the item, and certainly before plugging it into a power source.
I find the prospects of a Scott-Roger combination a little unsettling. Like guppies who don’t think twice before eating their young.
I have an old friend (in tenure as in age) who is a scott with a secondary rogerian aspect. His interest in genealogy, saving money and displaying corporate logos (on clothing) has been increasing in the last 10 years.
that said, it is an article of faith here (and written down through the posts) that those how discover something enjoyable here are either (predominant worldview) clarks or they are scotts or rogers possessed of a significant secondary clarklike aspect. (For a variety of reasons, the innate confidence in one’s intellect, a curiosity at times warranting the occasional adjective ‘rabid’. lol at one time in these pages, we spoke of clarks having flexible intelligence. still like that description.
but more to the point, my friend (above) has no interest in the Wakefield Doctrine or this blog… so, weak tertiary clarklike aspect
like Joe E Brown once said, ‘Nobody’s perfect’.*
I hope that you didn’t take my quip as an insult toward Rogers – apologies, if so.
no.
the Wakefield Doctrine is grounded in humor… jokes, (like, arguably all human interaction) is a transaction that requires offer and acceptance. without the latter, the former is but opinion
Good.