clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

March 4, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This Monday morning’s RePrint post is interesting. It is a point on the continuum of development that is the difference between, ‘Good-That-Explains-It*’ ‘Yeah, that’s the word we really wanted.’

In the first couple of years we, (using the 1st person), explained the perspective of each of the three predominant worldviews in terms of (our) seeing/experiencing the world. Everyone would see the world either as would the Outsider (clarks), the Predator (scotts) or the Herd Member (rogers) and act/react/develop accordingly.

This verb was replaced by various forms of the concept of relationship. Rather than our predominant worldviews being defined as the product of our perception, it became a manifestation of the relationship (more precisely, ‘how we related ourselves to the world’). This is ultimately much more useful. It’s the character of our relationship that determined our experience of reality. You might say, ‘how we saw was what we are’.

whhoah!! dudes, maximal gravitation!

Lets take a beat, post the RePrint and let the day unfold**

Pretty simple, isn’t it?

RePrint!

Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- of pop quizzes and bulletpoints

March 13, 2015

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

Don’t Forget! This Evening… Vidchat at Seven! (‘An Evening at George and Jane’s‘) stop by! it’s hosted by clarks, so that means what it lacks in social status, (“I can’t believe you missed it last Friday!! oh man! everyonewas there!!!!”), is compensated by odd conversations, funny in an interesting way and (sometimes) totally outrageous!

I trust you all know that we’ve found the Wakefield Doctrine to be useful to (any) effort to self-improve oneself. I (further) assume that everyone recognizes that the Doctrine is ‘three things to three people’. (And) that, it’s not even necessary that you determine which of the three you are, prior to trying to using our little personality theory to help you in your efforts. Start wherever you are right now. After all, ‘you can’t break it and, you can’t get it wrong‘. Yep, we still maintain that assertion about the use of the Wakefield Doctrine.

You do know, don’t you, that we can tell which of the three you are, purely on the basis of which of the three you initially say you are…. lol (Hey! New Readers! We have a Rule about identifying one’s predominant worldview. It’s your worldview, so no one can say, ‘By Power of the (fill in something relating to your own worldview) I declare that you are a ….!’ Well, they can say it, and you can even ask them to say it, but no one has any authority to impose their opinion of your worldview (dominant, secondary or tertiary aspects). Doesn’t mean we’re not all willing to share our understanding of the characteristics of the three worldview that are critical to understanding and identifying a person.

For example: one of the more difficult ‘calls’ to make: attractive male person who appears very confident, even to the point of aggressiveness, is he a scott or a roger? You might think, ‘Very aggressive that must mean scott!’ ok… but you want to go deeper than that*
they’re being aggressive, fine! …with/at/towards who? Are they ‘playing to the room’ or are they focused on one person.
Now… (here’s a critical question), is it about them or the person they are focused on? What happens when they are rebuffed and/or told to go jump in a lake? Do they laugh or do they seem to be taking it personally?

another very common situation (more often when a person seeks to determine their own predominant worldview): you see a clark, i.e. the poor posture, the mumbling, the odd, (but interesting), fashion choices, but then this very same person, for a moment, holds the attention of the entire room…. you’re thinking, ‘maybe this is a combination type part clark and part scott‘! You’d be right…but with the wrong conclusion. We all have one predominant worldview, but also the potential to see the world from the perspective of ‘the other two’. For some of us, this ‘secondary aspect’ is so significant that we develop some of the behaviors and strategies and coping mechanisms of this ‘other worldview’…. and these behaviors come to the surface at times usually at times of stress or duress, ( ‘hey! I want ‘cha ta meet someone!! these are my two cousins, Stress and Duress…. aint’ they hot?! you ever wanna to have a wild night lemme know!).

so… bottom line on identifying a person’s dominant worldview: we’re merely trying to infer how that other person is ‘relating themselves to the world around them’. know this and you know them

OK! end of Post. Don’t forget to join us tonight.

….sure! there’s got to be something I can say that will change your life (or have an effect for even just a single moment in your weekend)….

clarks: keep in mind this little fact that is shared by clarks alone…. more often than we allow, ‘it’s them, not us! If you walk away from a surprise conflict (is there any other kind for us?) feeling bad with a tinge of guilt that it was your fault? it’s them not you

scotts: yeah… your gut on this one is right and even though you almost can’t imagine how that family member can believe something so wrong about themselves…. it’s true and….and, chances are they’re used to it, so you don’t need to do anything immediately but, definitely know that they will appreciate whatever you try to do, even if it is ineffective

rogers: give yourself a break…. no, really. while finding and living ‘the Right Way’ confers to others nearly as much benefit as it does to you… they’ll survive if you take the weekend off, hell, they’ll enjoy it and you’ll have a re-energized feeling afterwards

7:00 pm

EDT

* the process of identifying a person’s dominant worldview is a lot like an optometrist eye test. you start looking at the person through the lens of two worldviews (you always throw out the obvious ‘no way’…. in our example above where we said, ‘attractive….confident…aggressive’? the ‘no way’ is a clark which leaves you with scottand roger. From here, you go for more and more intrinsic characteristics and you’ll find that one of the views becomes less clear as the other becomes more and more focused.**

** this same process is used when you identify your own worldview

* to clarks, at any rate¹

1) it remains true that anyone returning to this blog more than twice is a clark or (a) scott/roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect

** sure, extra credit any Reader who just now got a visual of:

the muy creepy box thing in the HellRaiser franchise
an automated mechanical-rabbit thing at dogtracks
the intro-scroll from the start of the first Star Wars movie

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

March 2, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Doctrine’s weekly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Heralded by institutions, both professional and civic, this grat blog is considered by many to be ‘the place to go in the blogosphere after the toxic exhaustion of daily news alarums and the incessant mid-numbing chittering of much of what passes for social media wears on us’. As an exercise in Will, the TToT is second to none. While the choice remains inherent, if not unfashionable, to deliberately perceive the positive in the world around us and the people who make it up, is not the worst thing a body can do.

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story the Doctrine’s ‘Six Pick of the Week!’: ‘Time and Space‘ from D. Avery

5) the Unicorn Challenge the Doctrine’s ‘If you only have time to read one, this is it: ‘CSI‘ from the co-host of the bloghop ceayr

6) Our new Serial Six Sentence Story, “…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood

7) hey! the Quick Brown Fox is back!! And even quicker than in previous years, Which between you and us, is not such a dramatic assertion, at least in terms of your Humble Narrator’s physical response time. To our credit, we did look down at our desk and almost immediately spotted our cell phone. However, this particular morning, Mr. Q.B. Fox was clearly on a mission and did not stop to pose for photos. (the path he followed diagramed in the photo at the top of this post). Looking, btw, healthy and well-fed, and, (to quote W. Z.) his brownish-red coat was perfect.

8) something, something

9) Made it to March (booyah!) Of course this is telling when contrasted with previous year’s posts and their reasonable hesitancy to express elation at the achievement of survival. But as, Chuck Palahniuk wrote: “On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.”

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music vids

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

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood.” [a Rue DeNite Serial Six]

February 28, 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.

(Still searching for a convention to make it easy on the new Reader to catch up. How about we say, ‘Last installment: Tom’s ‘Tattoo’)

Prompt word:

NAIL

“If our little ninja-ette doesn’t wake up in the next ten seconds, we’re outa here; screw the deposit, the airbnb rental contract is through one of Lou’s holding companies and besides, I’m pretty damn sure I declined both the optional homicidal au pair and enhanced-human butler,” Rue glanced at the girl on the floor whose arms were twitching as Rocco did something to her ear lobe with the nail of his right thumb and forefinger; without further comment she turned to the man who called himself Moonbeam.

“Tell, me, Mr. Beam, did someone hit a mute button on me when I wasn’t looking?”

Moonbeam, looking down at the girl briefly, immediately touched his index finger to his ear, sub-vocalized a short interrogative and received a barely-audible, but clearly negative response; never taking his eyes off the girl and Rocco, addressed Rue, a frown putting his words in italics, “We’ve all been subject to a certain degree of social ‘what-the-fuck’ this evening, Miz DeNite, but your companion ministering to the girl on the floor appears to have acquired a red dot on his shoulder.”

Seeing the suspicion in Rue’s eye, the envoy from the Co-ordination of Supervillains parried with a wry smile, “Ain’t none of my people, chica. Such a ham-fisted attempt at violence as using snipers and laser sights is beyond gauche, we’re citizens of the last civilized monarchy, after all.

Fortunately my transportation two doors down the street is a quite sufficiently kevlar’d Maybach GLS; I suggest we repair to the getaway car, my boss frowns on excessive use of superpowers with it’s inevitable collateral damage, the local constabulary get so worked up and my mission included a directive to be discrete at all costs.”

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Six Sentence Story, the Wakefield Doctrine

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…in which our dauntless Curator empties his pockets in a Courageous Search for Clues”

February 28, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

While this is, (and will always be), ‘that blog about those three personality types that, as strange as it seems at first, not only makes sense and is useful, and a total hoot once you learn the basics’.

Yeah, that’s us.

The ‘Curator’ in the Dickensian subtitle? That would be us, your Humble and (mostly) Reliable Narrator. Say what you will about RePrints, we’re finding the process of reading old, (especially the ‘old old’ as opposed to ‘recently old’). One change in writing that jumps out at us is the POV of the early ones. Counterintuitive, at least to us, is the use of the first person singular up until… damn, don’t know (at the moment) when we shifted to this, the ‘editorial we’.

(Funny story. So I just searched for something along the lines of 1st person versus 3rd person POV and, being a clark, the ‘APA Style’ in the first search return I clicked on transformed itself, (all without telling us… I mean me….) into ‘CMS Manual of Style’! It wasn’t until I read it again did I notice the APA was American Psychological Association…. lol damn! We love it when (we) notice that kind of shit happening.

Anyway, back to our citation

Referring to yourself in the third person

Do not use the third person to refer to yourself. Writers are often tempted to do this as a way to sound more formal or scholarly; however, it can create ambiguity for readers about whether you or someone else performed an action.

Correct: I explored treatments for social anxiety.

Incorrect: The author explored treatments for social anxiety. A

(APA STYLE as opposed to CMS)

Damn! We’ve totally lost the train of thought, as often happens to we scholarly types. Also lost the Clipboard Copy of the RePrint post that was to serve as a example of our early writing.

Suffice for the moment to say, at the point we currently are, the editorial ‘we’ is preferred. It serves as a reminder of the serendipitous nature of the decision to start (and continue) writing this weblog.

Speaking of reminding, remind us to return to the topic of the writing style of the early years at the Wakefield Doctrine.

segue!!

Tonight is the unofficial start of the week’s Six Sentence Story. (as Christmas Eve is to Christmas Day… for those us less mature and adultistic* the former is the exciting time). In any event, we’re engaged in a Serial Six. Co-written with Tom. It’s a story of Supervillains and ordinary folks (well, as ordinary as characters frequenting a certain Strip Club and Lounge, at any rate) so be sure to stop in tomorrow for a bunch of fun with flash-fiction.

* not a ‘real’ word

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 27, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

So what if we say, the following is an example of a meta-Doctrine post?

Reader’s response (in reverse the traditional ordering):

rogers: well, I don’t know how to tell you this but, that’s not quite what is happening, it’s simply a normal RePrint post with a power chord on the first beat
scotts: (grin) lay it on me
clarks: I’m listening

A quik Wik:

Metafiction is a form of fiction that emphasizes its own narrative structure in a way that inherently reminds the audience that they are reading or viewing a fictional work…”*

Yeah we can live with that. But of the three, clarks clearly have a deep-rooted affinity for meta (hell, they live in meta-time, narrating a life in which the audiance, on average, really wants to like the play, but they have lives. Real-person lives.)

We were going to go for something profound, but time is not our friend. (Time is no one’s friend. Time is the original incubus/succubus of the spirit*)

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “… of Mondegreen(s), reality and clarks”

March 19, 2019

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

Live! From the waiting room of a dentist office. George Michael is singing an example of ‘the writer not realizing the true power of his own work*.

Which surely leads us to the wonderful word/concept ‘Mondegreen’

(…back in real time. A little more to tell you about)

This post is so for clarks (and scotts and rogers with significant secondary clarklike aspects).

It wasn’t ‘Careless Whisper’ that made me appreciate how interesting being a clark can sometimes be. It was Electric Light Orchestra’s ‘Don’t Bring Me Down’.

So I’m sitting there waiting for my hygienist (who is a clark) to call for me, so I did what any (of us would do) I looked things up. As it was, ‘Don’t Bring Me Down’ played from the ceiling. Naturally I thought, ‘so who is Bruce?’ And went to wikipedia (the best thing about the internet, from a clark’s perspective) and looked it up. I cite:

A common mondegreen in the song is the perception that, following the title line, Lynne shouts “Bruce!”. In the liner notes of the ELO compilation Flashback and elsewhere, Lynne has explained that he is singing a made-up word, “Grooss,” which some have suggested sounds like the Swiss/German expression “Gruß.” After the song’s release, so many people had misinterpreted the word as “Bruce” that Lynne actually began to sing the word as “Bruce” for fun at live shows”

OK I accept that.

Now this is where the fun we have (as clarks) begins…. mondegreen?! What might that be… all blue in linkage.

A mondegreen /ˈmɒndɪɡriːn/ is a mishearing or misinterpretation of a phrase as a result of near-homophony, in a way that gives it a new meaning. Mondegreens are most often created by a person listening to a poem or a song; the listener, being unable to clearly hear a lyric, substitutes words that sound similar and make some kind of sense.^[1]^[2] American writer Sylvia Wright coined the term in 1954, writing about how as a girl she had misheard the lyric “…and laid him on the green” in a Scottish ballad as, “…and Lady Mondegreen”

of course!

I smiled (to myself). This is part of the better part of the world of the Outsider.

The fun and genuine pleasure in knowing the Wakefield Doctrine began when I heard my name called, ‘Clark?’

Given that we spend a few minutes twice a year together, naturally I had long since told my hygienist about the Wakefield Doctrine. And, equally naturally, by virtue of being a clark, she immediately ‘got it’.

So as I sat back in the chair this morning she said, “So whats new?”

I smiled the smile of one clark to another.

“So you know that ELO song… I forget the name, its the one where they say ‘Bruce’?”

She nodded “I know the one you mean.”

“Well I looked it up and there’s this thing called a mondegreen and it’s a term for the times we hear one word and substitute it with another thats different but makes sense in a weird way, ya know?”

She smiled and nodded in acknowledgement and appreciation for the concept.

“You realize, of course, the implications of this for how we deal with reality, right?”

She laughed out loud and proceeded to tell me what it was I was thinking.

Thats the fun of the Wakefield Doctrine.

* ‘Careless Whisper’ I would argue that Seether’s cover of the song is one of those rare ‘better than original’