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

Hey! Remind us Friday that we have a ‘Grat’* manifesting in the form of two astute Readers. (yeah, we never tire of the high school metaphor**) but, even in an AP Level Doctrine post, they stand out. In this case, following yesterday’s post.

Frank:

It sounds like clarks, scotts and rogers are three different ways to be awful.

Mimi:

Yes, heartless is a good way to put it, which is why you have to put the brakes on it early and look for the better way to respond.

Our Reply(s), unsurprisingly, were couched in terms of the Everything Rule, to wit: while the state, (of mind/emotion/being), used as a ‘standard’ the variance in the adjectives is a fricken text book illustration of 1) the difference in the three realities (well, duh) and b) to provide a context for one of the key concepts in this here personality theory here.

manifest v. to make real, to give form to something incorporeal, a subjective (thought) made objective (concrete)

you get it, right?

We all live in a common reality. How we perceive (and subsequently respond) is, for the Doctrine, one of three ways:

1. as a clark (Outsider) when the topic is anger, what they say (about clarks) ‘It’s when they get very quiet that you need to be worried.’
2. a scott (Predator) is easy, like, there it is! damn they upset… whoeee! The thing about scotts is/are for all of the pyrotechnics, it’s usually a squall not a climate change… scotts get mad kinda quickly but it passes and there is not a lot of carry over
3. rogers (the Herd Member) they get angry and it’s always personal. (the anger, not necessarily the trigger for this reaction)

there ya go

ask us anything

Don’t forget tomorrow is Six Sentence Story day. (if ya got something written, Denise opens the stage door at 6 pm tonight)

damn! the lyrics of this… not too much a writing clinic, right? show don’t tell