Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
We’re gonna start the week’s Doctrine post series with some AP Wakefield Doctrine insights, courtesy of our diligent correspondent, Misky. In a comment at last Tuesday’s post, she say,
…which leads me to a person that explains a problem to the electrician in 200 words when 12 would do the same.
New Readers! the question our friend raises goes to the heart of the Wakefield Doctrine. It’s primary conceit, (in the good sense of the word), is to afford all those with the intellect, curiosity and desire to add to their respective realities an additional insight into the acts and behavior of the people around us (and the world that makes them up*). The Wakefield Doctrine offers and insight into three distinct ways to experience reality, as a:
- clark (the Outsider)
- scott (the Predator)
- roger (the Herd Member)
Through the pages of this blog are a buncha descriptions of the characteristics of the above three predominant worldviews (aka personality types). Spend the time learning. Today’s post is designated as AP level as we are considering the Everything Rule.
ok! back to Misky’s Conjecture as to how verbosity relates to personal reality. Our invocation of the Everything Rule brings into play a key concept: manifestation. Specifically, how does giving instruction (to a trade or other non-related individual.**), manifest in the personal realities of clarks, scotts and rogers? As with the standard process of determining predominant worldviews, Misky has, in effect, thrown out one, (of the three), leaving us with a comparison to two seemingly identical actors.
btw: a scott tends to be less …loquacious than ‘the other two’ if for no other reason than in the world of the Predator, ya don’t need too much filigree on: Run! Run Away! Eat! Reproduce! Sleeeep! lol
As to verbosity in clarks and rogers:
- the Outsider (clarks) are eternally curious. their lives being a search for the information that might enable them to become ‘a part of’. As such, all information has value. Combine this view with their tendency to want to share with others (yeah, half-thought-through protective coloration lol) and so will in our scenario provide more (information) rather than less. just ’cause
- the Herd Member (rogers) are concerned, first and foremost, with the Herd. Everything in their world is connected (to the people and elements of this) and so, in the process of giving direction to an electrician, see no reason to leave out: the electricians that they have known, the people who have had bad experiences with the work under consideration and the fact, that as a person, all of this puts them in a position of being… well, a peer, to the expert they are now directing.
ain’t this Doctrine fun?
*lol a little reversal of our standard, ‘…the world around us and the people who make it up.’
** yeah, if related? way different conversation lol
About clarkscottroger
I do like to run my mouth. That rules out scott as my character type.
ok
so how do you feel about the abundance of information you might provide? a) they can’t do as good a job is I don’t provide it or 2) hope they don’t take offense of think that I’m trying to appear like an expert but fun facts about electrical work are..well fun. like electricians need to pass a test for color blindness…
The kind of information I’d give an electrician is usually useless, but I would give it nonetheless. Perhaps to be friendly? That might put me in the roger category.
(huge grin) Wow is that ever interesting. Not the bit about Scotts, but rather the rogerian presence in the room. The electrician even knows that my husband’s father was a bricklayer and built most of the post-1980s houses in Fåborg, and that has nothing to do with electricity.