Psychology | the Wakefield Doctrine Psychology | the Wakefield Doctrine

Wedneszdae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Well, yesterday was fun. More fun, in fact, than might be apparent. Stemming from the Comments of our Readers

While we did not get back to respond to them in the course of the day, they certainly are worthy of another look.

Pardon us for being ‘all over the place’ in this post.

(If we must blame someone, let’s agree to blame Mimi)

Why? Why not Misky or Frank or even Reelika?

Because she has that capacity to …not stop the room. …not say a thing that inspires one (and then 66 percent*) of the individuals in a crowded room to say, one decibel short of a shout, “My god! We’ve got to get out of here! Now!!”… no.

(You know the thing we say about how one of the three predominant worldviews manifesting true creativity and how the nature of that (creativity) is to bring into existence something that simply was not of the world before they did what they did? Well, the thing about that is that that ‘place’ where they got it is/was not bound by any rational metric. It’s here and now, not there-over-here. And …and it’s non-chronologic. Bottom line, others of this particular predominant worldview feel the echoes when one of their kind is hurt or in pain (however for-the-moment) even if they’s not aware of the person or their creation. ya know?)

and so we have two music vids that share something and the result is two-out-of-three Doctrine personality types muttering, ‘Well, guess we know who has a lock on this month’s  John Cage 4-33 Post Writing Award.’

So, in closing, embrace chaos up until it begins to unravel your next to last inner sweater.

Don’t forget! Tonight is  Six Sentence Story Eve.

For a special treat check out the ensemble(ish) Six that Chris started with her Six Sentence Story last week!

* there is an accepted ratio of clarks to scotts to rogers in any given population** 66 represents the rogerian component

** remember! The Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral, culture neutral and any other subdivision of humanity free

 

*

 

Share

Túsáde -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Lots of Commentationing (on yesterday’s and other Posts)

Who indeed!

Above is a photo of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia. If you have done your reading you should be able to correctly guess her predominant worldview. AP Readers? Goal? Learn the Doctrine sufficiently to allow you to identify (on the basis of this single photo) her secondary aspect as well.

ok, in no discernible order* lets throw some comments on the blackboard and see what comes of it

Mr. Hubeny! Please stand and repeat your statement for the benefit of anyone who did not see the Post

I think I’m going to change my life and become a clark. If I’m already a clark, this should be easy. If not, well, there are always miracles.

Mimi, if you’d help the class grasp the concept

Not for nothing you wear gloves and be careful when working outdoors, the critters do pop up sudden like.

Misky, would you care to share the contents of that note with the rest of us?

My mother-in-law was scottian (she probably still is — up there in heaven somewhere) and I remember as clearly as a sunny day thinking “I’m going to wear red because it makes me happy, and everyone will think, “Oh, look at her; she’s happy.” And I knew she’d comment, which she did. She was most certainly scottian but there was a good dose of rogerian in her gene pool also.

It’s not that we didn’t get along — we did, exceptionally well at a distance.

Ms. Pie

always enjoyable… always laughter… learn some new insightful aspect of the threes that I can take to the grocery store with me while I’m shopping… processing processing processing

 

Well that certainly provides us with discussionable** topics for today!

Tell you what read and discuss (kinda open book) and we will return after lunch.

you guys know this stuff

and thanks to our four correspondants for helping form an instructive Wakefield Doctrine post

 

* at least not for two of the three predominant worldviews

** well, while not a ‘real’ word, this might provided us with a quick refresher on grammar and pronunciation and such***

***  what?? a bullet point list?

  • clark: one of the three predominant worldviews aka ‘the Outsider’ adj: clarklike (ex. “…is anyone gonna inform our clarklike narrator that correction is not criticism…at least not in the sense understood by Outsiders and Predators?”)
  • scott: the Predator and one of the first of the two ‘say what now?’ pronounciation of the adj and adv form: scott: ss cot; scottian: scoe-shun
  • rogers: the Herd Members and cultural wardens; rogerian is an adjective (scenario: long class wrapping up, even the professor is clearly ready to call it a day, yet says, “If there are no other questions, read chapters….” and, of course, someone raises their hand. visualize thought-balloon: “Oh man, that is so rogerian” (pronounced: roe-jeer-ree-an)

somebody just say, “More ‘Top!!”

more Top indeed.

*

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Hey being the First Day of Summer School here at the Doctrine, what say we start with a Q&A?

Here, from the early, no, really, early days of this blog* our FAQ page

I think sometimes I am (a scott) then other times I must be (a clark). Whats up with that?

You’re a clark.

Hey, wait you can’t be that sure on the basis of one question!

Yes I can. (I’m a clark)

The question you should be asking is, ‘why does it seem that sometimes we are one form, other times others’. And the answer is that we have the potential of all three, we just get in the habit of seeing the world one characteristic way, i.e. clark, scott or roger.

Is there any scientific basis for the Wakefield Doctrine?

No. (see the ‘About’ page.)

When I read this site, it seems like there is really only one person writing. Can that possibly be true? What happened to the collaborative thing.

Nothing.

I thought this was a FAQ pages, I don’t see all that many Questions.

…I’m waiting for a question… ‘what part of ‘Frequently asked questions’ are you brainiacs missing? There would be useful information if some of you scottian adhd cases or you middle-of-the-herd rogerian mouth-breathers would conquer your fear of anything that doesn’t already have a DYNAMO brand embossed label stuck to this blog letting you know that it was within your admittedly limited range of initiative and realise that you would not be struck down by Jethro were you to actually  reach out and turn on your computer and asked a question.

Will there ever be new FAQ questions?

Yes, yes there will.

I heard that you have been doing this for nearly a year, what have you learned about the Wakefield Doctrine that you did not know when you started?

Which part of your statement are you calling a question? Rather than wait for you to move your lips as your try to re-phrase the question, I will answer this way. The Wakefield Doctrine appears to have an appeal beyond my immediate circle of friends, in fact, it appears to have sufficient appeal to out-weigh my meager writing skills. By presenting the Doctrine in a blog, the virtue and value of this thing is put to the test. And it seems to be passing that test.
What a well-thought out question.

What?

Never mind, you would not get it. Other aspects that you would not get is that the Doctrine is proving itself to actually be an effective tool in aid of an effort to change life habits. (Given the unlikelihood of your comprehending this answer I will continue), and say that anyone reading this with a true desire to ‘change their life’* should read this blog and do whatever they must do to get actively involved in it. This includes, but is not limited to: writing Comments.

*Is it true that if I have to ask the question, I will perforce be unable to understand the question?

Yes.

oh…kay! This is probably where we should do a Person of Interest** timeline slider thing from 2009 to 2026. But let’s just get us… well, first off, what’ with the ‘tude? ;p

As both Reelika Pedak and Frank Hubeny alluded to in this week’s TToT conversations, the first/earliest posts one writes can be the most difficult. Given that the tone of the FAQ was a bit aggressive if not a touch strident, let’s chalk it up to Opening Night(ish) jitters and let it go at that.

No, not necessary to Update/Refresh or otherwise edit this Page. The Wakefield Doctrine is, as are many things of the mind, kinda alive. We can say without fear of contradiction that the early years were conflict free for us. In point of fact, despite being a clark, the mantra of ‘if that last post sucked, then write another and bury it’. See? No problem.’ One of the undeniable examples of the efficacy of this here personality system here lies with its effect on us. Hard to convey, but compared to the clark we were before committing to this medium, theys surely something going on.

Rambling now.

There is much to the early days of this blog that still strikes us as remarkable. Not so much the content, rather the attitude we had towards going public and, through each post (now in the mid-3k in numbers) reaching out to the virtual world to say:

“Hey! Wanna hear about a really cool and useful perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up?”

 

* hokey smoke! this was written July 21, 20….09!! as in, ‘Well, it’s been a month, where’s the Nobel Committee?!?”

** most excellent of ‘TV series’

hey, chance to head off a mind worm of a song from that Little ‘Ol Band From Texas

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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. Created by Lizzi R in 1894, the St. Bride Library being established in London just three years prior being most advantageous for our founderess as they waited on the internet to be created.

The theme is gratitude, the narrative is lists, freeform poetry, haiku* or discursive finger-painting. We have only a single requirement for participation and that is to have good intent. Pretty simple, isn’t it? Citing the people, places, things and events that inspire the state of gratitude is the point. It’s been found that reading a TToT post has nearly the same effect of writing one. So come on down!

Following is our TToT:

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Front Meadow update

6) Wanna hear/read a really weird Grat? We all know that clarks are rather facile when it comes to imagination and spontaneous imagery. Sometimes this gift comes at a cost, albeit temporarily.

Here’s the set-up: we were working on the current landscaping project, i.e. clearing a very old brush pile. Check out the photos in Grat # 8 & 9. Our tools are a landscape rake, a snow shovel and a wheel barrow. Rake out the decaying wood, use the shovel to put it in the wheel barrow and dispose of it elsewhere on the property.

We pulled away an old log that apparently was being used as a burrow. A small animal immediately ran from the hole. It was grey with a pointy nose, whiskers …fine. As it ran away we couldn’t help but see what appeared to be a fan tail of feathers trailing from its hindquarters (think: peacock with tail down on the ground). Being a clark our imagination pulled up an image from the movie, ‘Annihilation’  Something like:

Can we get an aiiyee. Immediately, one of the mouse-ettes that were clinging to the mother most fell off and the world reorganized itself along more conventional lines. The mousette caught up, re-connected and the mouse family disappeared into the underbrush.

We decided to call it a day. The hair on the back of our neck and forearms needed a rest, don’cha know.

7) something, something

8) Current Landscape project. Before

9) Current Landscape project. Today

10) Secret Rule 1.3  from the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules

 

*haiku the original “You think you can write poetry? Of course you do.”

music vids

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Frydae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Well, that was fun! …the Doctrine posts about the Herd Member, aka rogers.

So, here’s the thing:

Of the three predominant worldviews none are bad or better, good or grating, superior or substandard.

Regular Readers will take the next, painfully obvious statement with a grain fault.*

The three comprise an ideal.

proof?

What the hell are you talking about?!? Proof?? fuck you. All yer doin’ is demonstrating a lack of secondary clarklike aspect, which as everyone knows, is the ‘what not?’ gene found in clarks (and suppressed in scotts and rogers)… leave now. Not because you’re scoring points or holding up an alternative persopective in an unflattering light. …you’re wasting the time of everyone who is here because:

  • this is a harmless but oddly challenging view of the world
  • the notion of an alternative perspective is nothing if not a good thing
  • it’s fun to play with ideas, the more unlikely, the better
  • this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers has an element of insight among all the incidental congruencies and taking them in the spirit they’re offered can provide a better sense of how the other person is experiencing the world. which is, for some of us, fricken’ always a good thing

where were we?

oh yeah the clark (Outsider), scott (Predator) roger (Herd Member) which totally rules!!? lol

what we wrote in the early days (here’s the link to that page)

that plus! if we didn’t have rogers you would not want to have to fly from Newark to Biloxi in a plane designed and built by a scott!

  • jet airliners designed by scotts:  very fast with at least 5 or 6 engines (not necessarily required to get off the ground, but make them louder than frickin anything)
  • a part of the cabin has a basketball net/hockey/or batters box
  • the stewards would have to wear bathing suits… male or female  and they would carry those little air horn things (can of compressed air) to warn the unruly passengers or just in case they get bored
  • the flight deck would have windows that open, so the pilot could yell at passing jets

0r a clark:

  • instead of normal seats, there would be couches with pillows and quilts (that would have a disturbing tendency to slide around when the plane has to bank for final approach)

  • the stewardesses would be scotts and stewards would be rogers

  • there would be a bathroom-to-passenger ratio of nothing less than 1:2

 

*damn! we just caught a rogerian expression in the wild! For a more comprehensive list of these totally delightful aspects of the rogerian personal reality, go here and scroll down to the next-to-last block-quote for a fun list.

 

Share