clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine

“Tuesday Afternoon” -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…is never ending.”

June 11, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

Damn! This* is dry. Interesting. Bordering on witty, slipping into boredom.

See?!?! Right there!

ok. pencils down. No, this will not be on the text.

the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on life, the world and the people who make it up. It is both tool and map. (Not instructions or hot assistant wearing a provocative outfit/clothing). It is presented as a theory of personality though there is no particular drive to justify suppositions, validate inferences or don a cap and gown (or tweed sports coat with leather patches). The terminology is used to justifiy using the term personality types, of which there are three. clarks, scotts and rogers.

{Spoiler Alert! New Readers, if you’re hoping for a fun narrative, outlandish metaphors, out-fricken’-rageous descriptions of behavior set in a rhetorical setting like a turnip in a museum display of Fabergé Eggy-weggs this is not the post. Go back to this post… or this one. Read it. Come back and ask your questions}

The Wakefield Doctrine is but one of countless attempts to make sense of the world, the human condition and how-to-get-through-Life-relatively-un-scathed.

The Beauty-part of who the Doctrine is intended to help is that, (and thank god! for the concept of secondary and tertiary aspects), the only people still reading are those who have a certain quality: once referred to as ‘flexible intelligence’, at time derided as, ‘jeez will you ever stop dreaming and apply yourself‘ or, even, “No! There never was a place called Kansas. This is as real as it is ever going to get.’ In other words clarks (or scotts with a significant secondary clarklike aspect / roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect).

scotts and rogers have no particular need for the Wakefield Doctrine. Why? Why should they? Go find your (favorite, longest-standing) scottian friend and tell them about the Wakefield Doctrine. Go find your leading rogerian friend (the one who will spend time with you without requiring the presence of others) and explain the Wakefield Doctrine.

The result? They will laugh. (And we’re intending to characterize this reaction as laughing / laughing.)

The reason? As scotts and rogers with the minimum level of clarklike secondary aspect they enjoy what you seem to get out of the Doctrine. But, on the most fundamental level, they’re fish puzzled by your fixation on this ‘water’ thing (or quality or secret insight), if only you’d keep a consistent description, but hey, that’s the thing they like about you. You’re so crazy …and you don’t try to compete.

So what the hell is this!!! ⇑ ?!?!

Thank god we sent away the New Readers!

Where’s the good-natured fun, the silly metaphors of the early years?

Here’s a question: (Despite the voice in our heads going all, ‘You know what they’re gonna say man’). Do we look upon our change in writing style as a deficit or an asset. Clearly our posts are far more self-aware and, arguably less fun/funny. But, what about the New Reader? Do we assume they’ve grown up over the years or do we need to incorporate the early style into our current in the hope of providing an insight into our little personality theory that is sufficient to the task of providing enough for them to start seeing the clarks, scotts and rogers in their world?

… tomorrow we’ll return to the task of discussing why practicing seeing the Wakefield Doctrine at work in your own reality will dramatically enhance the benefits you derive.

ya know?

* renewed resolve to present the Wakefield Doctrine to a new generation of Readers

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, predicting human behavior, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 10, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

Well, we’re back.¹ Trust all had non-lethal weekends. That said, we had several constructive/instructive conversations revolving around a variety of uses and applications of our little personality theory.

Lets start with what’s considered by some as nearly a ‘Mission Statement’:

‘With the perspective afforded by the application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, we are better able to see the world as the other person is experiencing it‘.

At the heart of this ambition is the concept of translation (kinda). The thing of it is, the Doctrine maintains that we, all of us, experience reality, to a small, but significant extent as personal. Not an excessively outré concept anymore. Example: last week we described a situation in which three people stood on the sidewalk opposite a popular restaurant. There was a line of people waiting to get. From this scenario we offered a certain insight, but don’t take our word for it! Go read what we said HERE. (The exercise posited the three people being a clark, a scott and a roger. This made it doubly useful. a) as a demonstration/illustration of personal reality and 2) the differences inherent among the three personality types (aka predominant worldviews) of the Wakefield Doctrine.

But first: New Readers? The Wakefield Doctrine posits three personality types:

clarks (Outsider) if you wake up in the morning, optimistic or pessimistic matters not, and start the day with the idea of dealing with ‘the world out there’, there’s a better than even chance your worldview is that of the Outsider.
scotts (Predator) the one of your friends who is the most fun, exciting to be with but can be exhausting, (in a good way), they are never not paying attention (ProTip: focus on their eyes, see what we mean?)
rogers (Herd Members) most of the population. You have the exactly correct number of rogers as a close friend. (Yeah, total trick question.) (No, don’t get mad, you know the answer. ok one hint: ‘You know the answer but still rather run it by your focus group.)

Here’s the quick Monday morning def: Everyone reading this post is experiencing the world from the perspective of one, (and only one), of the three aforementioned ‘predominant worldviews’. While you have ‘the other two’ (the non-predominant worldviews) as a potential you are a clark or a scott or a roger. (And no, you are not the exception to the rule. roger. Lets make this our little secret aiight?)

Helpful hint: the word perspective is all over this here personality theory here. Most often accompanied by the qualifier (or whatever the grammaticon*) ‘additional’. The reason is that the Wakefield Doctrine does not purport to be the Answer. It is simply one more of the endless encounters we all have with multiple choice exams.

1) We are resuming our little discussion kinda where we left off Here last week

* lol damn! how did we not stumble on that joke-lette before now?

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, psychology of personality, relationships, the Wakefield Doctrine

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 9, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine We continue with the efforts to write ‘This is the Wakefield Doctrine; posts on weekdays. While we totally enjoy, (and benefit from), our fiction writing, this blog has, in the final analysis a singular mission: explaining the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and the benefits of applying them to one’s life to as many people as possible. Of late we find our selfs thinking, “Damn! Random New Readers shouldn’t have to hold their forearm up against the blinding glare of the klieg lights attendant to our bloghop posts each Thursday and Friday. (This part of our writing week is totally essential to developing our skills with the wordifying and such). New Readers are the lifeblood of this blog, so if you’re out in the world this week and you hear someone say, “I really thought I knew them better than that, how could they say such a thing?” Do us a solid, stop them and say, ‘Not for nothin’ but there’s this place/site/blog online that may be the answer to your conundrum. Go there, look around and, if anyone asks, tell them, “(Your Name Here) Sent ya”

4) the Mow-or-Meadow Project See photation in Grat 7

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Six-Pick of the Week: ‘Back in her Cubbyhole‘ by Chris Hall

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop. the Ear of Delight(?!!) (lol): ‘Party of Unusual Proportion‘ by Liz H

7) front ‘lawn’

8) bridge project still in pre-luminary stage, aka thinking about it. consensus: build new bridge first. primary benefits are twofold: a) simplicity of planning, conservation of energy (there’s an odd, ‘project fatigue’ effect when it comes to requisitioning, allocationing and otherwise working-up energy for large scale home projects that is not enhanced by the passing of time; 2) shorter timeframe schedule for functionality, (of streamlette crossing), and finally iii) the post-apocalyptic effect of building the new in the shadow of the ancient, decrepit. (The bridge, not the builders!) …ok, maybe a little.)

9) something, something

10) Secret Rule 1.3

Music Vids

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, psychology of personality, the Wakefield Doctrine

Fraedie -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 7, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Doctrine’s contribution-of-the-weak to jenne and ceayr‘s bloghop, ‘the Unicorn Challenge‘.

A mirror of unreliable silvering, all invitees are told one thing: ‘this is an image, now tell your Readers and we few, we creatively-driven few, we band of bloggers a two-hundred and fifty word story.

“Shit.”

Surely the most concise and, therefore, powerful of invective.

The human animal often holds up language as its crowning achievement and distinguishing characteristic. Above all other animals, on a throne supported by a stubborn consistency of sound, at once remarkable and, yet, in it’s tendency to branch off into dialects and pidgin in fact, diminishing. Nothing is more emblematic of the curse of the fruit of a certain Garden than to choose, among the countless choices of sounds… words, than this:

“Shit.”

I looked down over the terrain. The blue of the sky made more the abyss by banks of grey-on-white clouds. The first to navigate the River of Time and my first impression is ‘an Artist’s studio minus the nude’. Of course I recognized the buildings, there was no mistaking my location.

When I was, as the Bard so tactilely invoked, there’s the rub.

The Mound was as it must be. The approach to the Baths was as conspicuously missing. Compounding my sense of dislocation were black pathways running in too-even rows among trees that had shed circumference by a factor not possible to yet remain alive. The afterbirth of Man’s effort to sire Nor Loch was there, but possessed the smoothed contours expected of the very young and the too-old.

“Damn that Professor Egmont and his infernal machine!”

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [an Ian Devereaux Six]

June 5, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Six Sentence Story bloghop.

Hosted by Denise. Regulated by the Department of Sentenae Limitation, Ordinal Section; Sextuplet Division.

Prompt Word:

ENGAGEMENT

“Hey, teach, nice to meetcha,”

Lou Caesare is many things; a complete list would necessarily involve contact with a variety of law enforcement organizations and, if a totally comprehensive measure of the man was the goal, employing a medium wouldn’t hurt as some biographical resources were, ‘at-a-distance’; but for all of his societal-shortcomings, being a poor host was not one.

I pride myself on my sense of people when, early the previous week I said, ‘Sure, it’ll be fun,” in response to Leanne’s suggestion that we have dinner at the Bottom of the Sea Strip Club and Lounge.

Chair of the Department of Advanced Anthropology and Cultural Semiotics, friend, former client, sometime lover, Leanne had driven down from Radcliffe to lead a symposium at Brown University; Dr. Leanne Thunberg, ever the considerate houseguest for the weekend insisted on having dinner at my favorite ‘restaurant’ and ‘meeting my friends and dancers and mobsters’; what could I say other than, “Of course!”

“Tell me one thing about Devereux that you know he doesn’t and one thing I do,” Lou offered his Great White grin, an elevation of his shoulders and the slightest of nods, all from his side of the last booth on the right; the gestalt was as direct and formal as a bow over a ladies hand in a Victorian parlor.

Returning his smile, Leanne did something with her voice and eyebrows that put ivy on the walls of the Lounge side and caused the bump ‘n grind music from the strip club to acquire a baroque lilt,

“The woman is always right and hearing someone begin a sentence with, ‘Rules of Engagement’, tells you who’s the first to cheat and on top of that, a fuckin’ hilarious oxymoron.”

Lou Caesare laughed with characteristic lack of restraint that made a person want to be funny, it was full-bodied and totally disarming;

“Hey Devereaux, first of all, you’re clearly playing way, way out of your league with your lady-friend here and second, you better pray I don’t take it to mind to open a branch Bottom of the Sea up Cambridge way,” Leanne and Lou lead the ensuing laughter.