Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Quick post this morning.
RePrint plus ReMinder:
- the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, culture and age neutral
- the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up
- the personality types of the Doctrine are optimal personality type for the personal reality the individual grows up experiencing
- clarks (Outsider), scotts (Predator) and rogers (Herd Member)
- no better than/worse than, simply the character of reality the infant encounters
- with an understanding of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine you will be in a position to know more about the other person than they know about themselves.
clarks -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…and the world out there.”
December 9, 2014Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
you know the weirdest thing about clarks? It’s not the funny little half-smile you see on their faces when they’re in the group you’re addressing, (and you know, for certain, that you have not said anything funny), it’s not the odd way that the female contingency (mostly the women, but not exclusively), choose to dress… like a Fire Engine, bristling with emergency rescue equipment….painted a soft blue, it’s not even the way that clarks will be so quiet, even…no! especially when things all around are getting crazy…crazier …craziest, they seem to be apart, almost as if the (current) desperate situation that has the rogers fretting and the scotts shouting, causes them to grow… more, more of whatever it is they are…
…no, the weirdest thing about clarks is their morning time. (This is not necessarily literal. It is, necessarily, the time between demands and performance. The offstage moment, as the house lights go down). That is the strangest part of ‘the experience of the world from the personal-reality-perspective of clarks (the Outsiders).
It (seems) to be a time of choice, it is (often) a time of desperate hope, it is (always) a time of incredible … distance.
This distance is not as common and simple as physical distance (although, have you ever been in a crowd of people, say an elevator, where your attention is dominated by, say the floor you are intending to travel to, and then you notice that there is a person standing very-next-to-you? you wonder briefly how you could have not noticed them), and (this distance) is not an emotional gulf between people (although, there are times when you are prepared to accept that the person you care so much about just is not invested in the relationship, and then you see an act of selflessness that takes your breath away), no, the distance is none of these.the distance (for a clark) is the amazing and awful, frustrating and inspiring distance between the clark and themselves. They think (and think about thinking), they act (and appreciate/regret it as it occurs), they feel and wonder if it’s real.




To understand a living being is not necessarily to be able to predict it.
And the inability to predict a being does not diminish the value of understanding that being.
I knew you’d say that.
barump bump
;p
Thinking about “they feel and wonder if it’s real” made me think you would have to be a roger to know if a feeling were real or not.
I was going to Reply:They think… they act… they feel and wonder if it’s real. In doing so bring home the fact that, even a clark is heir to all three characteristic personal realities despite being of only one world (as if seeing the others through a lens, clarkly*)
But on the surface, your Comment is certainly a helpful reminder of how, despite the fun metaphor and fantasy of this perspective, the essence of the concept of predominant worldviews (‘personality types’) is rather abstract. wait! lets continue this tomorrow…after all it’ll be Tuesday and Tuesdays are the mildest of day!
thanks for the topic prompt
*For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. ( 1 Corinthians 13:12 )