Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
We had such a good time reviewing the basics of everyone’s favorite personality theory with Frank in yesterday’s post, we couldn’t help but think, “Lets continue on this theme! Who knows what we’ll learn next?!”
Mr. Frank, as they say in Proverbs 18:15, you’ve done well JV, time to move up to Varsity. What’cha got for us?
That does sound like scotts: “they will totally employ the diminutive form of a person’s name” Rogers wouldn’t see the point in using the diminutive form of the name. Clarks could see the point, but realize there are more clever ways to make the point.
ok. ready for this? the diminutive name thing for scotts? A manifestation of dominance drive/need to establish ranking in the personal reality of Predators.
We agree with our friend that rogers don’t see a point, (in the use of diminutives), as their predominant worldview, that of the Herd Member, is not so linear.
That said, speaking of idiosyncratic approach to names… rogers, of the three personality types, are the ones most likely to give inanimate objects names/nicknames… ‘specially cars.
It’s true!
The reason? Expansion/expression of the Herd.
Quick Review: rogers live in the personal reality of the Herd Member. The binding force in their world is ‘association’, which provides confirmation, validation and explanation. Existing, as they do, in a world that is quantifiable (and therefore finite) every roger has a ‘sense of the world’. It is, collectively, everything he/she knows of themselves and, by extension, all things that reflect his/her sense of self.
While our scottian friends might say, “I scream, therefore I am”
Our rogerian companions say, “More is more.”
Hey! Come on! What manifests the quantifiable nature of reality more effectively than… quantity.
ProTip: in the personal reality of a roger, the Herd exists because she/he feels it. ‘We’re not alone’ isn’t a suspicion, it’s an article of faith (about the nature of reality). The Herd includes people. places, things. It is the ultimate nickname. As a scott needs to establish a ranking, a roger always celebrates association. They are the Bacon in the Six Degrees of Separation principle.
Reminder: the Doctrine is all about how we relate ourselves to the world around us and the people who make it up. This relationship is established at the earliest of ages and therefore becomes the reality that we develop our personality to cope with/ survive in/negotiate/and live our lives. One per lifeform, yo. One.



Good point about rogers. They are “most likely to give inanimate objects names/nicknames”.
I currently think of rogers as spectators of football games. The scotts would be (the best) players of those games (or perhaps the ones who trigger the most fouls). The clarks have better things to do. I know little about football which makes me think I’m a clark.
the most fun? Quarter Back: scott, Receivers: rogers and Center: clark
I name my cars because it’s too funny not to.
I did with one car… my first car