Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
As abundantly clear by this post’s primary image, today is Tutor Tuesday. Implicit in this somewhat aged cultural reference is an age requirement which you are encouraged to ignore. That said, for max amusement, your birthday must not only be from the 19oos, it must be the mid-1900s for you to attend.
As with most of our better Doctrine Posts* today’s is prompted by Friend of the Doctrine, Misky who responded to Monday’s Post with the Comment:
I’m not afraid of being incorrect. Wrong is a different kettle of fish. My answer; final answer is the girl is a Clark. That was the question, right? Hmmm … maybe I should re-read this. Nah.
Shall we begin?
…oh yeah, did we mention this is an Open Book, and…and I believe we also said in our Reply something about Self-Grading. oh yeah… any effort to determine a stranger’s predominant worldview is invaluable practice…
We’re totally sincere in the saying that, despite how aggravating it may have been to certain among us, back in school daze to see the Exam Notation: SHOW YOUR WORK. We totally embrace that directive. It is in hearing the ‘Why’ a person feels the subject is a clark or a scott or a roger not only enhances our understanding but it’s just pretty much the fun of this exercise.
New Reader! In case there is a roger among you who snuck into this AP class; one word: ‘No, if everyone’s opinion of the predominant worldview is equal, that does not mean that any/every Answer is possessed of equal validity.’
The cool thing about the Wakefield Doctrine and it’s use is that it is entirely self-correcting. If you ‘get it wrong’ then the benefits inherent in the application of it’s principles (not the least of which is: to know more about the other person than they know about themselves) simply are not there to enjoy. Usually such a person decides this stupid thing doesn’t work anyway and they wander off. Not a problem. For the rest of us? If we hear a scott or a roger cite evidence for the determination of a person’s predominant worldview, (in this case the photo yesterday) it is to our benefit. After all, we’re a clark and they are not. quid pro quo non serviam. I learn about their personal reality. Win Win, binyons!
Wait!! Wait!! Before we begin what we’re sure to be a spirited discussion in the Comments section we have a visitor! An alumnae, if you will from the distant Before Time. We’d be the entirely gracious and organized Narrator if we offered her background, maybe offer a link or two to posts in the Archives, but given her predominant worldview1, kinda coals to Newcastle. Jennifer? Jennifer Katherine Wilson? (the blogger formerly known as Miz AKH)
* a post written to explore, explain, extrapolate and otherwise enjoy the core principles of the Wakefield Doctrine**
** which can be succinct’d down to: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel
- ‘though we’d expect ever one here to embrace the preferred politeness of ‘One simply does not state another’s predominant worldview, at least not unless they have already self-identified or it is, otherwise, general and/or common knowledge.’
*
About clarkscottroger
For some reason, I heard a voice from my past say, “I am sometimes incorrect, but you are wrong!”
lol
(those darn voices from the past! nothing is more annoying than our desire to allow the benefit of the doubt to most ever body… ‘specially them what are of the rogerian variety)
No problem: mid-1900s; head; parapet.
Show work: No worries. “…clarks see themselves as different, separate from everyone in their lives…” the girl in the photo, whose poor little legs are stuffed into thick, itchy, white stockings, could only be more separate from the family group by using a rubber/erasure on her image.
Are there snacks?
excellent and though the resolution of the photo is insufficient to allow closer inspection the expression is telling… not, however, as horrifying as the image of ‘Pa’ (to her left in shirt and suspenders)… damn! talk about your enthusiastic devotee of the ‘Spare the Rod’ school of childrearing and spousal guidance!
eww