2ooze’dae -the Wakefield Doctrine- | the Wakefield Doctrine 2ooze’dae -the Wakefield Doctrine- | the Wakefield Doctrine

2ooze’dae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

(tonight we walk among the Herd…shhh)

The ‘Everything Rule’ notwithstanding, we can make the following observations:

clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel

when manifesting creativity, clarks are the only one to bring into being something that was/is/otherwise would not be; the creativity of a scott is to allow the other person to imagine they might have had a hand in bringing to the world something wonderful, and rogers, they are the Fabergé manipulators of the world in common (which explains why rogers in whatever art they may engage are the more successful. if popular success was the only measure.)

the Wakefield Doctrine offers a perspective that you would have/probably already noted (if you’re a clark), watched and enjoyed others become entertained by (a scott lives to live, not consume or otherwise deplete), rejected before fully-appreciating, (those rogers with insufficient secondary clarklike aspects)

more often than not, ‘its them, not you’

that said, the ‘them’ (in this contrived provocative statement) is also you (or rather, the ‘them’ in your life are almost (almost) entirely a function of the manner in which you relate yourself to the world around you and the people who make it up.

the Wakefield Doctrine is the simplest of toys/tools. you can’t break it. you can’t even ‘get it wrong’.

If you’re still reading, congratulations! You have a significant secondary clarklike aspect. enjoy! (the clarks knew that already)

Don’t worry about ‘getting’ the Wakefield Doctrine. It’s not a get. It’s more a ‘oh yeah, I see what you’re doing here. you won’t tell them, right?’

Absolutely.

mums the word

trick your friends into coming by and checking this thing out. natural selection at work. (the way young clarks, with the best of intentions, deluded themselves into thinking the world could be, and continued trying to maintain it. yet, you’re here.)

cool

Share

clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one

Comments

  1. Misky says:

    May I leave for my profiler, please — a Scott finishes what they start.

    • Misky says:

      That is, of course, in reference to: If you’re still reading, congratulations! You have a significant secondary clarklike aspect. enjoy!

      • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

        you laugh but (lol) I have friends who are cursed with having negligible secondary aspects (of clark, scott and roger… the individual effects and distinctions are more post-level discourse… so thanks! for the theme suggestion) In fact will paste that bad boy into tomorrows draft post right this minute!

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      they do…unless something shiny bounces into view lol

  2. Fun and enlightening!

Leave a Reply