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

Once again we have Friend of the Doctrine, Mimi, to thank for a comment-topic:

Our little Annie is not yet one, and is up in your face, letting you know exactly what she wants, much more so than any of my children ever did. Early signs of an “I’m taking over the room” scott, or an “I know how the world should be run, my way” roger? I guess time will tell.

This is, of course, a continuation of a discussion from last week.

We up to speed?

Good.

Lets get a bit exotoric! (lol yes, whoever laughed with us on that word, you’re on your way to an ‘A’)

We all know that the Wakefield Doctrine personality types are based on the (characteristic) relationship we maintain with the world around us, life and those people who make it up.

To step a little further into the pool, (you know, after stepping off the last of the slightly rough-textured concrete crescent steps and letting go of the matte chrome handrail), we all (should) know that what we refer to as a predominant worldview, (that others might call a personality type), is merely a label for the style of negotiating, interacting and otherwise getting along with the world we adapt as children with the world ‘as we are experiencing it‘.

(Fun Doctrine Provocative Statement: We all develop a perfect personalty.)

We’re getting towards the end of the pool where the diving board offers the only proper access…

(Last Minute Flotation Device for the rogers and some of the scotts: the Wakefield Doctrine has, from the beginning, insisted that as lettres de sauf-conduit to this pseudo-psychologic funhouse of a personality system, one needs to accept that reality itself is personal. To a certain, non-global sense of the concept, i.e. a radius around us extending outside the zone of the purely subjective but inside of the ‘hey, we’re best friends but sometimes I think I might be going crazy but…’. aka nothing weird, no magical powers or ways to make the world conform to our wishes (well…. put an asterix on that last lol). Anyway, not a radical notion that to a certain extent reality is personal.

we good?

Suppose we suggest that the world in which a ….lets stick with what the AP students ’round here will like; imagine that we come into the world and grow and mature in is of the same characteristic(s) that we ascribe to our three personality types?

You remember!

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

You signed up to learn the language of the Wakefield Doctrine, are we in agreement?

cool

To develop to the level of fluency, it helps to be comfortable imagining, (in the sense of additional perspectives on the world), that it’s not the child who, deciding to relate to the world around them a certain way, acts like an Outsider (or a Predator or a Herd Member). But the world itself that presents a certain character…

If you’re a clark, you know that you did nothing, (that you’re aware of), to have everyone around you (we’re talking about the beginning when we are infants) look at you as if you were… other than. baby scotts experience a world full of danger and excitement it’s right there in front of them… rogers are welcomed, their membership is confirmed.

,,,, there ya go.

Questions?