the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 6, 2024 By clarkscottroger Leave a Comment

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

Where to begin?

When you think about it, using RePrints to jumpstart a post is, kinda, just like time travel, ya know?

After all, we are, (on some level), what we write. And who can deny that what we write, (fiction, non-fiction, theories of personality types), are us, made loud.

New Readers! There is a thing in the Doctrine referred to as ‘the Everything Rule’. If you’re just getting the hang of this here Doctrine thing here, don’t be concerned if the part of you that felt, for a moment, like this applied to you is now saying, ‘This is all bullshit. I want to speak to the manager. It’s not right that they go on and on like this…” (lol)

While this post began, as many do, speaking generically, i.e. to all three personality types, clearly we are addressing the clarks in the Readiance. The Everything Rule, (which states, ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’) is there to remind us that, while the three personality types exist in characteristically-distinct personal realities, none has exclusive domain over any part or element of everyday life. How a thing, (a job, a love interest, an avocation, an idea, a nightmare or the best way to express an idea), exists for clarks, scotts and rogers without limitation. How it manifests is determined by the nature and character of that person’s worldview. Being a carpenter (manifests) differently to an Outsider compared to a Predator. Being a fan of a popular musician looks like one thing when we’re observing a roger versus a scott. A cop who is a scott will exhibit traits that are arguably more aligned with successful exceution of their professional duties than say, that of a clark who has become a police officer.

It’s all about how one relates themselves to the world around them and the people who make it up. The world is ‘the same’ for everyone. How we experience it can be viewed through three difference lenses, i,e, that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) or the Herd Member(rogers).

We haven’t used ‘the Wakefield Doctrine Promise’ in a long time! (Here ya go): Learn the character (and characteristics) of these three relationships/predominant worldviews and you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

Tuesday too the Wakefield Doctrine (nope! we were not joking about the destiny of the content*)

May 6, 2014

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

(So …we all good with the realness of your personal reality? …the reality of the other person’s worldview?) We’re spending a lot of time on this because, when we get to the part about using the Doctrine in influencing/helping/understanding/impressing/scoring-big-time with another person, it will be your acceptance of the very real difference (between) what the world is for you and what it is for the other person, that will carry the day.

Speaking of trying to change/improve/enhance/fuckin-stop-making-the-same-mistake-over-and-over-again!, lets take a look at a new concept we’re trying out:

Personal Limiting Condition (PLC), a term for the mechanism inherent in all of our lives, that contrives to limit change. (By change we mean anything that we feel we could or should do differently, anything that we believe will, a) improve our lives or 2) decrease our unhappiness (with our lot in life). Lets say you, (a clark for the purposes of keeping this discussion somewhat credible) decide, ‘I need to get into shape’ (or) ‘I need to apply myself more and do better at my job’. Fine. (Being a clark), we will think a lot about how we should attempt to do this thing, whatkind of schedule, necessary equipment and will devote a significant amount of time imagining how great it will be to finally…. whatever you anticipate the ‘new you’ look(ing)/act(ing)/feel(ing) like.

The first day of the jogging program/be serious and ‘on the ball’ at work, goes great! It didn’t hurt too much/it wasn’t too embarrassing. The second day of the jogging/’someone on the move’ at place of employment: hey a little sore, but better shape than you thought (hope it doesn’t take too long)/people seem to be looking at you funny, but the boss seems impressed… Day Three: this is boring/I’m so far behind everyone else…I’ll show them, I’ve got to give 143%/ fine!! I got my regular day’s work done (not that many errors) and the boss seems to be busy with other things…I am so far behind in life, big rewards require big risks!! … until: you run as fast as you know you should be able to run (and something gets fucked up) or you suddenly have the best idea ever for a book (or starting a band) or maybe sending out resumes, cause your cousins sister-in-law is in the HR Department of a big corporation and everyone knows you should be in…

These last, they are the Personal Limiting Conditions.

The power of PLCs is that they are quite real. You don’t have to give up jogging to not be able to get into shape, you can get hurt. You don’t have to quit your job because you know that you’re in a dead-end mode, you have so many other potential possibilities (yeah, zoe, I know lol).
These are real events. We all encounter them. Doesn’t mean that we are not capable of avoiding them. What it does mean is that, as clarks, we should recognize that this kind of thing happens to scotts and rogers (and other clarks), therefore it does not constitute proof of the unchange-ability of your life.

That’s it for now. for the new(er) Readers… and Jak, here:

(from May of last year, a portion of a Post (in part) Titled, ‘want to know the most dangerous, corrosive word used by a clark?)

It’s an innocent enough word. More than innocent, this word is often considered to be one of positive meaning and intent, a hopeful word, an optimistic word. But as a loan shark is to your local bank, the price of the loan is always higher than the value secured.

The word is ‘maybe’.
In the hands (or on the tongues) of clarks, the word is meant well. “It is a good job, maybe I’ll get it“. Perhaps because, when clarks look at the world we see people and institutions, groups and family members who, while certainly not intending us harm, (they all) clearly know something that we don’t know. “Maybe I don’t want to be a doctor, maybe I really want to find my own way”. The words we use when describing the world we find ourselves in, are picked with the hope of blending in, looking to be a member or, one of the guys/one of the girls. “I think I should ask her out, maybe I’ll wait until a better time” “How many times do we have to discuss this, maybe next time you’ll listen to me”

Not really sure what it was that struck me about the use of the word ‘maybe’, it just seems that it has a certain resonance when employed by clarks. It is a word that lets us ‘commit without committing’, a word designed to insulate us from disappointment. clarks fear disappointment almost as much as we fear fear. More in a way. Fear can be run from. Disappointment is a sentence of reduced possibility. And if clarks are anything, we are people who believe that having possibilities is the difference between a possibly happy life and a life where we still have options. In a sense, as long as we have the possibility (of something) there is hope. Maybe.

Filed Under: Lead Stories, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 5, 2024 By clarkscottroger 8 Comments

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. A tribute to the soundness of the Creatorini’s strength of vision (and) the enduring Will of it’s participants, the TToT continues to this day, like…(insert metaphor employing either chain saws or anvils juxtaposed with human infants or the Eiffel Tower HERE)

For the Doctrine, we cite the following people, places, things (and) events as stimulating our sense of gratitude.

1) Phyllis

Una and (most of) Phyllis on our first, away-from-home family vacation

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) serial fiction, writing of, this one inparticular: “”…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood”

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop… Doctrine’s ‘Hey This One is Fun’: ‘Six clumsy sentences!‘ Keith has that much envied gift, (yeah, skill too), of creating enduring, if not fictional, realities. Case in point this: an invitation to stop by the Baamy Inn,

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop… our Pick of the Week: ‘After the End‘ by jenne

7) Hypo Grat*: the quick brown fox… once again quicker than the old grey blogger! (the photo? the yellow dots? a fox, not a apocryphal Road Runner™ ran along the path at 7:04 as it does every weekend. We must’ve had, what, ten seconds? The fox was loping, not sprinting. Of course, in the World of the Young (WYmotto: ‘Sure, but you coulda done a movie, edited it and posted in that kinda time. Unless your walnut-like finger joints slowed… gotta go…. no problem‘. ) it would not have been a prob.

8) finding a workaround to having to buy a new camera. This is big. A lot of the work we do requires photos be date/time-stamped. Always had to buy a camera to get them as, at least up until this week, our phone required a 3rd party app, and to use it required 18 steps of edit. This new one now is one step. cool

9) something, something

10) Secret Rule 1.3 (From the Book of Secret Rules aka the Secret Book of Rules) ‘…using superscript always elevates the appearance, if not, how content is perceived view by the Reader. [P] rovided the Reader is at least fity-years-of-age’ (BoSR/SBoR 2011 op. cit)

* hypo-grat one of the reasons this here bloghop here is still in ‘print’. A hypo-grat is the person, place or thing that is, on the surface, not a good person, place or thing, at least on first blush¹ One of the long(er) term benefits of participation is acquiring the capacity, however rudimentary, to find ‘the positive in the negative’. (Mimi is our go-to for reference in this admittedly advanced gratitacious whatthhellia temporus²)

1) one of our all time favorite old-fashiony expressions, apparently it dates back to the 1300s! (surely if there is a place where time-travelers hang out, those native to the 1300s must have some serious cred “Hey. Hey, man. When’re you from?” “13th C” ‘Dude!“)

2) hey, don’t laugh, that’s some straight-up fakey-Latin. But, serially, M is one of our Grat Misstrae Supreme in this aspect of the field.

music vids

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

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [“…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood”]

May 1, 2024 By clarkscottroger 12 Comments

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

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

It is hosted by Denise and has a strict Six Sentence Limit

Speaking of ‘Penny Dreadfuls’, Tom and I are writing a Serial Six Sentence Story: ‘…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood‘. (If you’re just starting, this link will provide the whole story.)

However, most previously from us (in which Rue and Moonbeam drive to Mooncross Headquarters) and, approaching the location of our Six …from Tom.

Prompt word:

LEVEL

“Damn, we’re at least an hour behind Rocco and Cyrus St. Loreto’s golem, which is not to say I don’t appreciate your helping me with my assignment to check out these Mooncross people,” looking up from her phone, the lead dancer at the Bottom of the Sea Strip Club and Lounge grabbed her companion’s wrist, interrupting his phone’s endless quest to sync to his mind.

“I never thought I’d be using the qualifying expression, ‘As the kids might say’…” Moonbeam’s smile triggered a surprising trill of pleasure as the fatigue of the previous ten hours simply vanished causing Rue DeNite to nearly stumble as she continued, “But, time to level up, dude.”

The door to Mooncross Industries’ Board Room opened to meet Rue’s out-stretched hand; at the end of a seemingly endless corridor lined with engineering suites, workstations and meeting rooms, all furnished in the contrived casual decor of a Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce video, complete with exotic exercise equipment, arcade-style video games and refreshments.

Rue and Moonbeam stepped to the left to avoid Constantin Szarbo as he left the boardroom, which was to the everyday variety of social mishap involving people narrowly avoiding collision in a hallway as ‘a squirrel and a wood-chipper crossing paths, apologizing and continued on their way’; an impeccably dressed force of Nature, had God not yet created flaming swords, He’d have sent Constantin to evict a certain young couple overstaying their welcome in Eden.

“You, I know,” looking at Rue with what might be described as ‘clinical dispassion’ were it not for a dark smoldering in his eyes that howled of the jungle primordial, Constantin turned to Moonbeam, “You do not matter; Mr. St. Loreto has instructed me to offer to accommodate your return home, provided I am not delayed in my return, so you must…”

As the door reluctantly hissed closed behind Constantin, Rue caught a glimpse of Rocco who stood next to the girl, Isla, her hand, touching his, spoke volumes; Rocco was focused on someone or something just out of view in the shrinking trapezoid of the closing door.

“…decide now.”

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

May 1, 2024 By clarkscottroger 5 Comments

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

While everbody can see the Wakefield Doctrine as ‘an additional perspective’* it takes a little extra reflection to appreciate it’s utility as ‘a tool’* and a whole lot of clarklike imagination to accept that it (can/might) offer a lever*** on the world. It might be more accurate to use the term, ‘personal reality’. (While more comprehensive and conducive to understanding the Doctrine, the description of three ways to relate ourselves to the world around us was, originally, “Σοβαρά, θα εμπιστευτείς ένα google translate για ένα κρίσιμο στοιχείο στο Δόγμα; (ναι, φαίνεται ωραίο όμως, σωστά)”.¹

The concept of personal reality is both simple and irrational. (so, yeah, welcome to the world of clarks). It maintains that we, all of us, experience reality to a small, but not insignificant basis, as personal . Nothing cool, (or scary), like singing toasters or having the ability to fly (though, clarks out there are all too familiar with our capacity for being invisible, deliberately and otherwise), just personal. Therein lies the key utility of our little personality theory. The Doctrine reminds us that all that meets the eye is insufficient for complete understanding while, at the same time not conveying the ability to read minds (damn! was that too much to ask of this serendipitous insight?) but providing (an) additional aid to allowing the world to be different for the other person than that which we are experiencing.

In the early days we spent a lot of time with this concept of personal reality. Mostly because we needed to communicate that our personality types are not necessarily our conscious (or even, unconscious) choice. The clarklike female does not add neon highlights to her perfectly nice-looking hair and the clarklike male does not hunch his shoulders and look at anything other than the eyes of the other person because they’re (as a scott might express: goofin’ on the interviewer)… we do it because it makes sense. To us; in the context of the reality in which we find ourselfs. And that, according to many authorities with books and colleges named after them is a definition of rational behavior.

So, in conclusion:

Εάν δεχθούμε την ευθύνη για τον χαρακτήρα του κόσμου που αντιμετωπίζουμε, τότε έχουμε πρόσβαση στη δύναμη να τον αλλάξουμε.³

Teaser: so, we’re engaging in a live action application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, going all Sy Sperling on this here tool here. Will keep you up-to-date.

(for those with longer tenure, we might reference a period of time shortly after starting this blog that we provided an example of attempting to act as a live demonstration. and, for reasons uncertain but respected we will keep it simple and say ‘This link for that reference’

* “…on the world around us and the people who make it up”

** “…for seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it”

*** “Πᾷ βῶ, καὶ χαριστίωνι τὰν γᾶν κινήσω πᾶσαν [Pā bō, kai kharistiōni tan gān kinēsō” (Archimedes) That thing about levers and moving the earth. Yeah, extra points to the Reader who cupped handed ‘roger‘

1) we trust Nick, if he’s reading, to not so much do the translate check, as let us know if we’re saying something like, “The can of dog food forms the basis of a complete breakfast” or phrases other than what we actually wrote

2) something to the effect: ‘Seriously, you’re gonna trust a google translate for a critical element in the Doctrine? (yeah, does look cool though, right?)

3) damn! let this put to rest the persistent rumor that, at least in the public eye, clarks are totally risk-aversive (That said, everyone lets have a round of applause for Nick and his good-hearted efforts to eq this bad-boy (linguistically-speaking) into something that gets us at least a B-minus)

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 29, 2024 By clarkscottroger 4 Comments

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

RePrint?

Who said that?

(thank you, very much)

(all we had was a couple of examples/illustrations/manifestations of ‘the Everything Rule’*)

* ‘Everyone does everything, at one time or another’

But, interestingly enough, it (the Rule) has become less necessary than it was in the early days. Most likely this is attributable to a) the frequency of visits from people coming to the blog for the first time, 2) the percentage of rogers confronting the lack of herd evidenced in the posts, comments etc or c) developing the idea of predominant worldviews (the ‘personality types’ of our system) as relationship (‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’) as opposed to the notion of encountering three characteristic personal realities. i.e. that of the Outsider, the Predator and the Herd Member. We suspect Readers are more comfortable with the former paradigm than the latter: ‘are you saying I am stuck in the screaming dimension‘ / ‘no, sorry, but you have overlooked one thing, ‘my opinion‘ / ‘cool‘.

damn! interesting but not as invigorating as this Monday warrants

wait! shit! all this way before the topic appears! ‘Aging and the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine’

nah

the level of comprehension, (if not natural affinity for the concept), of Readers these days is too great to stay interested in a topic as simple as:

‘While age neutral, the Wakefield Doctrine accounts for the subtle changes in one’s personality as time goes by. This is not simply because there is, on the whole, less energy for the individual to express and manifest the effects and products of their interaction with the world around them. The interesting thing is that a person’s secondary aspect rises in relative prominence as their predominant worldview declines.’

Just as in the early days of this blog, the question tends to be: ‘I know my (spouse/friend/boss) is a (clark/scott/roger) but sometimes I’d swear they were not. Worse, sometimes they act inconsistently with your theory! I know the Doctrine is perfect in it’s basic premise so what gives?’

As the predominant wanes, the secondary, (and on occasion, the tertiary), aspect becomes more apparent.

ok… RePrint

snippets, tidbits and snicky-snacks, stop and set a spell at the Wakefield Doctrine personality spa

October 2, 2011

Welco

Welcome to ( ah! much better! ) the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )

As the title purely implies, today is an easy day…easy font, easy title and easy on the complex, OMG! I had no idea how totally insightful you people are…kinda way. No grammar concerns, no worries about ‘story arc’ just going to have a little conversation. Well, we know it is not going to be a ‘conversation’, because that would require a give and take, an exchange of ideas, a frickin effort to get out of your Chair-of-Total-Self-Idulgence and and actually do something. ( And we know you are too fuckin lazy to bother doing that! Life in the Virtual Zone!! ain’t it grand?)

Lets play with fonts, seeing how we’re all ‘comic sans-ly this morning’. Like the following short statement:

This is type on wing dings font what the hell!

now, would someone out there please tell me why this ‘font’ would be permanently installed in my software? Seriously, other than some pudgy-fingered, greasy-hair, bad-complected roger (male or female) using this font to send secret messages to other rogers, why do we have it? No answer, is there? (And we now arrive at the Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day):

We all know that this Doctrine is based on the premise that there are three characteristic ways/manners/styles that all people perceive the world, i.e. ‘as an Outsider’ (looking on) if you are a clark, ‘as a predator’ (watching out) if you are a scott (or) ‘as a member of the group (looking around) if you are a roger.
With me so far? good! Then you know that at an early age, we all become predominantly one of these three, (and this is where the magic happens):

If you are a clark: you are different, you know that everyone and everything around seems normal and you know you are not crazy (well, not crazy crazy) but everything is out there and you are here watching and hoping that you can understand what it is that everyone else seems to know (and then) you will fit in and you won’t be out here

If you are a scott: you just got to do something, you see people act and move and you feel….you move you suspect that you are different but everytime someone does something you re-act and you are …not glad…not happy…it’s just right. Sometimes you feel like you maybe, shouldn’t do so much so fast, you feel bad when others seem to not enjoy it…but you know thats the way the world is

If you are a roger: you are busy, all the time, things need to get done but they must be understood and appreciated and …and enhanced You feel the responsibility, the sense of duty but it is not oppressive, sometimes you know that there are people around you who are in the way, but for the most part, everyone has a place and life will unfold as it should

What we are talking about here is not the dominant aspect, the fact that we are mostly clarks, scotts and rogers (most of the time), what we will look at is the role of the two ‘non-dominant’ aspects. Remember! We never lose the capacity/capability/drive/instinct to experience the world as any of the three types, so what happens to the other two that we are not (mostly)?

*

Hey! That was interesting in a dissappointing-but-haven’t-we-matured-so-we-don’t-feel-the-need-to-get-upset way. The font effect of the original did not copy forward.

Oh well, Readers will have to use their not-inconsiderable imaginations to visualize the effects we were going for back …. er holy shit! thirteen years ago!! ayy-fricken-yeee