Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Comments:
Mimi (on Wednesday’s Post)
It all depends on the source of your hope.
Our Bible study group tonight was talking about our Scottian female member and one noted if she sits on the couch, it only seats two instead of three because she seems to take up more space, not physically but presence wise. Someone else overheard this and noted she takes up the whole room, and she really does, and we love her and wouldn’t have her any other way.
I concur. Love the sense of a person with presence. scotts do that quite naturally.
Frank (on the Second Six of the week)
Nice phrase: “time-clogged senses”
Also, nice tale of crossing the river to the other shore.
Frank, hold that thought! Actually, hold both those thoughts. (Reader: our correspondent, Frank, has a remarkable proclivity for anticipating lines of thought/story narrative/wild supposition that is rather curious. In this case, he has hit upon a new project of ours. The telltale? Citing: “time-clogged senses’. (As Vincent Vega says, ‘To be continued…’)
Finally, Misky (Warning! Warning! Craino-over-sufficiency Danger Will Robinson!) To the Second Six.
That is an amazing piece of writing. Well done.
Thank you. (One of the better rogerian expressions is also one of the oldest. meant to reference a state of not-entirely unpleasant states of self-consciousness and is quite apt to my initial reaction to her compliment: ‘My head swelled-up and my face fell.’ (ikr? ya can’t make this shit up).
oh..kay!. we’ve reached the limit of both our desire to increase the capacity to feel further development of our tertiary rogerian aspect.*
Time to get ready for the final Doctrine post of the week, the TToT.
You, (inferred Readers and slow-to-click-away wanderers), are invited to stop in this weekend. The TToT (Ten Things of Thankful) is a gratitude bloghop with a difference. It’s fun, challenging and worth your time to check out.
Hell, if you like the idea of linking your own list of ten(ish) things that’ve incited the experience of gratitude but are concerned with it being too much, the Doctrine’ll spot you two Grats… (to get ya started)…inquire within. some restrictions may apply, nothing bad.
*New (and newish) Readers: While we, all of us, develop our ‘personality type’ from coping with one of three personal realities, (the Outsider, the Predator and the Herd Member), we never completely lose the capacity to ‘see’ the world(s) of ‘the other two’. They, (the non-predominant worldviews), can have an effect/influence on our lifes. Using myself, (your Curator), as an example: I am a clark (predominant worldview of the Outsider) with a strong secondary scottian aspect and a weak tertiary rogerian aspect. As such, in certain situations, (oh, we don’t know…say writing a blog), we can be all kinds of direct and aggressive and ‘Hey! You! Read this!!’ That is the ‘benefit’ of a secondary scottian aspect. Our tertiary aspect, that of the Herd Member…more of a work in (reluctant) process. The inclusion of Misky’s compliment is totally at odds with my predominant worldview. But, hey, no pain no gain, right binyons?
*
About clarkscottroger
It sounds like we are all three of these personality types. You are a clark-scott-roger including the secondary and tertiary traits. I wonder what I am. I’ll start with clark (although I might be presumptuous), but now what?
ok err no
two and a half core concepts essential to the Wakefield Doctrine:
there are three separate ‘types/characters’ of relationship that people establish (and maintain) with the world around them these are Outsider (clarks), Predators (scotts) and Herd Members (rogers). Setting aside the mechanics of how they are ‘chosen’ we all live and grow up in the personal reality the flows from these relationships. the perfect personality type we often cite is the fun way of saying, ‘If you grew up in the personal reality of the Outsider, you would develop this social strategy and that tendency to react thus-and-so. And the reason you are not also a scott and a roger is that just as it takes a lifetime (infancy to youth to adulthood) practicing who we are, you simply can’t practice the style of the other two.
more importantly! I’m a clark. My personal reality is that of the Outsider. Any of the characteristic behavior and such of a scott (and a roger) would not be appropriate to the reality of the Outsider. (Lets say you fell in love with the idea of being a pirate. You learn to act like a pirate. Beyond the novelty (and hopefully amusing) effect… it would be inappropriate to do so.
the second core concept is that of personal reality. to a small but discernible degree, we all live in a reality that is personal to us… nothing outlandish, just that split-second of thinking/acting/feeling in response to the world that you do because…
the thing of it is, the Doctrine maintains that this personal reality is a reflection of our predominant worldview I am a clark because I have learned to survive and (hopefully) thrive in the world of the Outsider.
that I retain a potential to experience the world as ‘the other two’ no more makes me a scott or a roger than does learning the German language makes me a native… just an additional insight…
so keep at it! appreciate the commentationing (rest assured I’ll be revisiting the fundamentals of the Wakefield Doctrine in the coming weeks.) you will surely find your predominant worldview with time and effort
Quick!! What’s 2 + 2 equal??
;p
2 + 2 … hmm … quick? I’ve got a master’s degree in math. In base 3, it would be 11. In base 4, it would be 10. In base ten, it would be 4.
But good point about mixing all of them together. I’ll stick to being a clark. That gives me an outside view of the world.
that said (just to keep the New Reader scratching they heads) the ambition of some of us who study the Doctrine is to learn the ways of ‘the other two’ to as great a depth as possible, thereby being better able to (in a given situation) see the world as that other person is experiencing it…
totally deliberate italics there… this is where personal reality stops being ‘hey! you don’t understand’ and starts getting towards, ‘I imagine this situation might be different than I am seeing…’
The situation is different if you see it from every angle. Having an imagination helps, I think, you can imagine what it looks like to “the other two.”