Psychology | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2 Psychology | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2

Whenzdey -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 17, 2026 By 4 Comments

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

lets set aside the lesson plan for today and consider: random truth and spurious insights

Hey, so clarks, they’re like introverts, right?

How come we can’t be sometimes a scott and then, maybe certain things change and we’re like really pissed off but do the opposite, we’re being a clark?

wth! everything around here seems to come back to clarks… that’s not fair

no, really

if the three predominant worldviews got into a fight… which one would win?

how come you people don’t like rogers?

a girl walks into bar and there are three people sitting there: one at the far end, one at the near end and the third in the middle, which should she talk to first?

no way! you’re not gonna leave these open-ended!!?

right?  right?!?!

oh. that fishbowl

full of little strip of like fortune cookie…fortunes

real clever

 

 

*the clark*you remember round fishbowls in Saturday Morning cartoons*because clarks are the ones who actually need it*we don’t dislike them, they’re just very…triggering*sure we are*the clark again*thats not the way this works*no. no they are not*thank you*sure we are*correctomundo*exactly!

 

Don’t forget! Doors open at Denise’s Six Sentence Story bloghop promptly at 6:00 pm EDST (here in Oceania) Word on the street we can expect an appearance by Chris, Misky, Reelika, Frank and, of course, Mimi

Be there or acquire the characteristics of a four-sided figure created exclusively with ninety-degree angles yo

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Tuesady -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 16, 2026 By 6 Comments

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

So! You’ve done your reading. You now have a rudimentary sense of the identifying behaviors, social styles, fashion choices of the three predominant worldviews.

We enjoy the analogy (or parable or metaphonics…whichever, you know what we mean) of the Wakefield Doctrine as a language. This does not supplant the view of the Doctrine as an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. That is still the…official position advocated in these pages. The thing of it is, any perspective would have, attendant, a vocabulary (and. strictly speaking), a vernacular. And so you will see references to fluency in the Wakefield Doctrine. This reflects the ease and facility one may demonstrate when describing a person/situation. “She showed up at her interview at the bank with enough cosmetic metal and leather to trigger the metal detectors at the door. Her take away was, in part, ‘shoulda gone with the blue accents in hair to convey a calm demeanor’. She was such a clark.” Like that, except fluency permits a level of accuracy in observation of the situation and person vis á vis the Doctrine, in realtime.

As with any reputable language school, the best way to move up in comprehension, pronunciation and… (cough sound: <Misky>1) and grammar. Tomorrow we’ll beat deceased equine by suggesting common social settings to better practice the semi- lingua franca of the Wakefield Doctrine.

fun!

Where were we?

oh yeah, relying on our clarklike confidence to avoid either: a) backing our ownselfs into a corner or 2) looking silly.

Exactly! The three qualities beyond reproach in the three predominant worldviews (personality types) of the Doctrine:

  1. clarks (Outsider) soundness of intellectual capability. no, not how ‘smart’ or even intelligent. A fundamental faith in the sufficiency of intellect.
  2. scotts (Predators) total efficacy in judgement of (a) need for action
  3. rogers (Herd Members) rightness and virtue inextricably linked to one’s view of the world

 

Thanks and a shout out to Misky for gracing us with a very useful example (and illustration) of Doctrine-specific wordage.

1) what? who said that? no, there are no stupid questions* While the Doctrine famously maintains that ‘you can’t get it wrong’, we would be remiss in our duties to not help Students and Friends of the Doctrine avoid simple errors of vocabulary, grammar and syntax and the like. In this case, our scottian friend is leaving the zero derivation stick in the workshop when it comes to the substantive scott. or something. ex. By virtue of my self-admitted predominant worldview, I can say, “As a clark, well, I just did, didn’t I?” It is, however, considered improper use of Doctrine lexicon to say, “As a clarklike, I am the butt of…” no, not snickers and muffled laughter… wait, that is plausible. If, however, the speaker in this increasingly tenuous if not clumsy example were a scott, …well, less fun-making and more sidelong glances towards the exits on the part of those in our imaginary lecture hall.

* one of our favorite jokes from the early, carefree days of the blog, to wit: ‘There are no stupid questions. There are only your questions

 

 

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…to return briefly to our discussion of Time and the Outsider”

June 15, 2026 By 7 Comments

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

Let’s return to the topic of Time and clarks, shall we?

A quick review, dip our toast, if you will, in the topic of personal reality (as a nod to our early risers a little tiffin) and then we, all of us, will best be prepared to sally into the world await us out there.

Before diving into the nature and role of personal reality as manifested in the Wakefield Doctrine, we’d be loathe to ignore a 1940’s giant of psychology, (back when the biggest budget item in grad school was: text books.*) We’re referring, of course, to Maslow’s hammer. Adapted to everyone’s favorite personality theory, he reminds us that if you’re a:

  • clark (the Outsider) then everyone else knows something you do not
  • scott (the Predator) everyone not attacking is prey
  • roger (the Herd Member) everyone else is a potential member of your Herd

But you, the Reader, you ‘believe’ in the concept of personal reality. Because unless this is a ‘what-the-heck-are-these-people-talking-about?!?!’ random click into a list of suggested links (and, for the record, ‘Bye Bye!’), then you know what we mean. That the world we experience is, to a small, but significant degree, for us, not them.

So to our the brief reprise of ‘clarks and the Burden of Time‘

A marked and persistent tendency to cut short the effort, i.e. leaving a task not truly finished. In fairness to our Outsider friends, this is usually expressed predominantly (ha ha) in the case of assigned tasks, those with little, if any, personal investment. And, even then, this short-cutting is nearly always justified as a leveraging, the better to free up time, in the service of multiplying good.

Shout-out to Misky for giving us a smooth(ish) transition (intended or otherwise) to this topic of personal reality, vis á vis secondary aspects. We really should devote an entire post on this topic, but for now, know that our secondary aspect (when sufficiently strong/ robust/ get-the-#&@*-outa-my-way) offers an invaluable insight and, therefore, appreciation (well, for clarks and maybe scotts) of ‘the other two’.

In the interest of preserving what soul we might claim, lets end with a statement of the goal of this Doctrine thing:

‘through the insight into the personal reality of the three predominant worldview, permit us to: better appreciation the world as the other person is experiencing it.

 

 

*foreshadowing a future of commoditized communication? text books?!?! Serially, we’re referencing the late ’60s early ’70s Why would they even feel it necessary to qualify the character of the content?

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 13, 2026 By 9 Comments

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weekly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. It’s a growing trend among write-actual-words-ophiles of all ages, around the fricken’ world. Due in no small part to (the) Hostinae and Hosts sharing their experiences with gratitude (old TToT saying: ‘A Grat, once Typed, can wicked-often be shared’)

1) Phyllis

In the Before Time, the first year of Una’s garden

 

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Doctrine Plant of the Week! Found in profusion in our side-meadow (this year), fresh and ready for the presses. Yes, we did have ambitions to host Oscar at a Winter’s Eve fête1 but alas, he is previously indisposed.

 

6) ever one’s favorite prehistoric plant

7) For reference (no! not a job reference, for academic reference (ok, maybe a job ref too (in which case, we’d be all: yo! Mimi, Dyanne*, Misky, Frank Hubeny**, Lisa, Kristi, Knitcat, Andrew, Denise and cai)))

8) something, something

9) the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules). In recent ‘backstage’ conversations with Hostinae cai, she has been offering suggestions and thoughts on how we might increase the currency of this bloghop among the more broad (and men lol***) demographic of the blogosphere. Always good to remember that ‘horizons’ are meant to be expanded, as the old saying holds, ‘The edge of the 8.5×11 yellow pad may be the end of a page, and a ruler in a pinch, it is not, however, the final sheet.’ In any event, we had an opportunity to cite, (to cai), the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules) which in it’s very Preface states: ‘…you can do anything you want when creating a TToT post provided two(2) conditions apply: a) there is [p]resent an unambiguous respect for the intent of the bloghop and 2) th[e] author cites the appropriate Rules for their Thankful (ibid ¶ 444 ‘BoSR/SBoR’ 2009-3233)

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

  1. First Day of Winter June 22. Sommer, we hardly knew ye

* well, yeah! ’cause though you don’t see her posting on weekends here as much as once did she, in Doctrine terms Dyanne (appears to be) of a predominant worldview best suited to have your back if’n you’re ever drawn down a dark alley (of course, it’s a better-than-even chance that it was her suggestion: ‘hey! lets see whats down there!’) So, yeah, put her down as a reference on your job app.

** Full Disclosure: totally gotta keep practicing the correct spelling of our newest Host’s name. While we don’t hold it as deficiency in our personality, we are loathe to have our Hosts and Hostinae think we don’t care enough to spell it write.( Matthew 7:12 ‘Therefore all things whatever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.’)

*** bar-rum…bump!

music vids

*

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “of Outsiders and Time”

June 12, 2026 By 9 Comments

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

AP level Doctrine post today. prerequisite: predominant worldview of the Outsider (clarks) / scott or roger with a seriously significant secondary clarklike aspect.

Why the emphasis on the level/degree/intensity of one’s secondary aspect? Well because the thesis today is mostly fringe-creative/just-for-the-sake-of-discussion/imagine for a minute…not so much speculation as we’re playing with words, phrases, ideas and concepts

Lets jump right to it.

A clark’s (the Outsider) relationship with Time is that of: Ocean-to-the-Island. clarks experience Time as an (unspoken) measure of the distance between themselfs and the real world/real people/real live

for a clark Time is either in too short supply or ‘wait!! just a little longer.

wanna know one of the drawbacks to embracing genuine creativity, as clarks do?

Hint: it is not the response by those who encounter it (aka the audience/market/friends-and-family). In most cases the response tends towards incomprehension (‘What the hell is that supposed to be??!”) anger and resentment (“Now you’re just mocking… in a patently obvious way.”) or even (“Grow the hell up! This is childishly indulgent.“)

hey! you! (the Readers still here) know a good definition of Outsider in the context of the Wakefield Doctrine? Apart From.

Wanna know (one of) the costs of genuine creativity (i.e. not remodeling existing ideas, but rather bringing into existence something that did not previously exist)?

Thing of it is, to go to where all is possible, one needs to be capable (and willing) to believe in anything. to believe in anything (which is a touch more than ‘everything’) one must surrender the right/privilege/comfort inherent in believing (something). We could make this simpler, aka less ‘wtf’? Sure why the hell not?

By saying there are things, innumerable things, that most people (scotts and rogers) believe in that are not counted: sky is blue, down and up, here and me. And it is the natural, incontrovertable truth to these (and other) beliefs that put the… ‘real in reality’

Now imagine you know this. ah ha! the great separator! knowing vs accepting-with-distinction

Back to today’s theme: Outsiders (clarks) and Time.

Real simple: Time is the closest measure we possess to assay/grasp/accept the distance between us and the real world/real people (scotts and rogers)

Now get back out there and add what you can of this idea the better to enhance your own appreciation of the crazy-high proportion of non-sensical to reasonable in the day ahead

ur welcome

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »