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

A Comment from, Misky the following:

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

Thanks, Misky

Funny thing about Chuck Berry, (sample below). Back when we were as young as the music was new, we took to the change in stride. But like Vinko Bogataj, we both under-and-over appreciated the new music. Over-appreciated in the sense of the technical innovation of Mr. Berry’s guitar playing and under-appreciated how fundamental to modern music it would be. (Hint: showmanship, while never absent in popular music, to the student impatient with the dull, routine of playing scales by rote, represented a license to evade the drudgery of practice.)

the Wakefield Doctrine, in this caffeine-stumble of a Post (that started with such an impeccable thesis: ‘Essay Question: Typical Response of the three predominant worldviews (clarks, scotts and rogers) to first encounter with the Wakefield Doctrine. Compare and Contrast’

clarks: damn/huh!/shit
scotts: “You fuckin’ clarks!” (infectious laughter)
rogers: “Sorry, but while this is interesting, I seem to be a fourth personality type consisting of all three equally”

So, back to the implied essay question: Why is having a significant secondary clarklike aspect necessary for scotts and rogers to best appreciate this little personality theory of ours?

The inability of clarks to believe anything.

There’s an old saying, “The greater the power of imagination, the higher the barrier to belief.”

In simple terms*: a scott or a roger without a secondary clarklike aspect is a perfectly balanced personality. They live in perfect worlds, leading perfect lives. The relationship they (each) maintain with their respective worlds accounts for everything. While individuals may appear to search for answers and strive to develop, they are all Chuck Berry. They advance their personal realities. Develop and become more sophisticated. But they are, (to themselves, in silent affirmation), good and sufficient people.

There’s another old saying, “If you need to identify the clarks in a crowd of people gathered in an auditorium, pose the question: “Who would be interested in becoming another person?”

the clark’s gift (and curse) is the prominance in their personal reality of the challenge, “Yeah, but what if?”

*(lol ok, we’re trying. having, of late, spent time with early-Doctrine posts, our efforts to duplicate the naturally provocative voice of those days… (visual: opera singer complete with tuxedo and pince-nez singing: ‘Deep down in Louisiana close to New Orleans…’)

Program Note!! Tomorrow is when Denise‘s bloghop, the ‘Six Sentence Story’ goes live. Be there or be…

*