the Wakefield Doctrine

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [‘…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood’ Part 1.5 ]

April 4, 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

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.)

Previously in our story: (from Tom): ‘Whitechapel‘ and (from us): ‘Slide‘

Prompt word:

OUTLET

“La naiba de vrăjitoare” (“Godamn witches!”);

my current host, jailor and fashion icon leaned out the open door of the helicopter with a grace that made me think of a tiger crouched in a tree; despite using a single hand on the edge of the opening to prevent his falling the fifty or sixty feet to the ground, he was totally focused on the instructions originating in the cell phone held to his ear with his free hand.

The language was predominantly Romanian, yet even with the roar of the engine, his half of the conversation had a decidedly Samuel Jackson/Jules Winfield tone; that said there seemed to be an awful lot sentences needed to say: ‘Mooncross Industries will need an excavator and bulldozer before they continue their research… and a coroner and a premium LinkedIn account, given the apparent body count’.

Nodding at no one, but doing it with the palpable sense of obeisance of a samurai with none of civilized tradition but way more a feral acknowledgement of a pack’s alpha the man put the phone in his pocket as the helicopter tilted and moved towards the airport abutting the industrial park; Isla leaned against me before catching herself as her eyes went all thousand-yard stare when we passed over the remains of a sign halfway between the frontage road and the building’s blasted exterior: ‘Mooncros.. I..dustr. R&D D..vision.’

We landed next to a Bombardier Global 8000 that had the runway all to itself, the light of the luxurious interior was occluded as Constantin Szarbo stood in the doorway locking eyes with me; I heard the sophomore philosophy fave, Fredrich Nietzsche’s voice intone: ‘look into the abyss and the abyss looks back’ the thought way more disturbing now than any college dorm poster.

I felt Isla pull on my arm and, plugging my headset back in it’s socket, we got out of the helicopter and began to cross the tarmac, skirting the JP4 hurricane as the engines strained the aircraft’s brakes; halfway to stairs up to the cabin, my phone started playing a totally unfamiliar ringtone, something from a band my grandparents liked, called The Beach Boys.

I put the phone to my ear and heard, “Mr. Virgilius, listen to me, if you want to live,” I held the phone at arms length with a eyebrow raised to Isla as a woman’s laughter flooded from the speaker, “Sorry, Rocco, couldn’t resist; but what you will definitely not be resisting are my instructions, that is if you and Miz DeNite ever hope to again see the inside of a certain American Strip Club and Lounge.”

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

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [‘…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood’ Part 1.0 ]

April 3, 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

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.)

Previously in our story: (from Tom): ‘Whitechapel‘ and (from us): ‘Slide‘

Prompt word:

OUTLET

[GCHQ London Branch]

‘Audentes Fortuna adiuvat’; consistently ranked in the top 3 tattoos requested by the hopelessly-romantic segment of the post-adolescent male Gen-Z population, Leftenant Custos sneaked a peek at the Vaseline-blurred letters under the clear plastic bandage on his right forearm, anticipation of his friends’ reaction provided all the analgesic he required.

Approaching the midpoint of the graveyard shift in the Live Monitor Nexus facility, the young man sought diversion in the depths of his cellphone; the thrilling tales of high-tech intrigue and clandestine daring-do the government services recruiter painted on Career Day back in university notwithstanding, Abel Custos was beginning to question his professional trajectory; fortunately by virtue of being young, he was spared the irony lurking in his new, yet very permanent, ink.

Glancing around the vast subterranean complex, active monitors attended by row-after-row of dedicated civil servants, he opened a second window on his display, quickly reducing it to a thumbnail in the lower right hand corner of the screen; it showed, in realtime, a land vehicle and a helicopter both on a heading of east-northeast, their point of convergence the London City Airport.

“Lets agree you are double-checking the track of the two vehicles that we are not tracking and have no interest in, before bringing it to my attention, shall we?”

Watch Supervisor, Colonel Villicus, smiled without humor; as a trainee, Abel Custos wondered if he were the only one raising an eyebrow when the Instructors would refer to Colonel Villicus as Prospero, never, of course, to his face and with an obvious if not fear-tinged deference.

Tapping keys on the controller strapped to his wrist, the supervisor commandeered the primary display, “While we are under orders to direct the local authorities to ignore this intriguing affair of gun battles, helicopters and luxury cars speeding through the streets of Whitechapel,” the older man leaned towards the screen and expanded a satellite feed of a building in the industrial park adjacent to the airport that appeared to be in the process of being blown up, “fortunately for us, we are neither local, nor ‘the authorities’; both men watched the convergence of the SUV and the helicopter on the local airfield.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 3, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

In the spirit of secondhand pentecostalism, here’s a post that, while lacking the sophistication and subtle humor of our contemporary ‘this is the Wakefield Doctrine’ posts, is imbued with the ‘don’t know what we don’t know’ enthusiasm of our earliest writing style. Besides, this is about an alternate perspective on the world, and, is not, in point of fact, ‘The’ or The best’ or any other variation on ‘The Answer’

The Wakefield Doctrine is… not the antithesis of ‘the True Answer’ but it is (the) ‘take-the-‘Member’ embroidery off and all ya gots is a windbreaker. ok, if you’re in a advantaged demographic, a ‘London Fog’.

The most telling deficiency of our presentation of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers is, of course, our totally-weak, anemic, tertiary rogerian aspect. Like a deaf mute music fan hearing by vibrations only…. hey! that reminds me of a science fiction story from the before time… hold on

JG Ballard. ‘The Sound Sweep‘. (sorry no rights claimed. the guy was a monster, back in the Golden Age)

where were we?

oh yeah… the Wakefield Doctrine and the fun to be had. without the crowds.

Fun and productive is the way we describe our little personality theory from the very first year. ‘productive’ now that’s a word begging to be used as an example of ‘the Everything Rule’!

productive:

produce. (transitive) To yield, make or manufacture; to generate. (transitive) To make (a thing) available to a person, an authority, etc.; to provide for inspection.

ok! now the three predominant worldviews:

the Outsider (clarks) clearly the 2nd definition. ’cause if the true curse of a certain Apple is the ambition to provide for others additional knowledge (you thought it was limited to ‘Good and Evil’?!!) as a basis for justifying membership then… come on down! Parker Brothers! (longest tenure as publishers of ‘Trivial Pursuit’). Now can we join your little club?
the Predator (scotts) sure, you can look but don’t try to hold us to any rules… the fun of games is the same fun the cat has with the unfortunate mouse, stuck in the kitchen with no way out other than over the vast Plain of Lynoleum… running won’t help. Well, it does help with the comedic value
the Herd Member (rogers) you did see the word: ‘manufacture’ right? Not create. Not sell. Manufacture. Assemble parts in a uniform and consistent manner. Ladies and Gentlemen We have a Center! (of the Herd)

this should be getting clearer to you people by now

July 1, 2010

(Trying a ‘night-before’ Post. Has not worked in the past, but I am nothing if not insistent on ignoring the lessons of the past. Just because this approach has not yet worked, doesn’t mean that this is one not the charm.)

So let’s just get all Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) on yer asses to start things off…seeing how we will no doubt hear from DownSpring glenn in the Comments section. By now he is starting to feel that this “restraint” that he believes is being imposed on him in terms of the Comments that are published are really, kinda, now-that-I-think-of-it really not fair and stupid and who do they think they are telling me that what I write is not in the interest of the Wakefield Doctrine. Huh?

I am writing this in the morning, not last night. Which means that this is sort of a continuation of the above, which was written last night, therefore I have started a blog the night before and that makes this a pre-written blog. Success. Can see from the the “Comment Scales” that we have quite a heavy load of words added to yesterday’s Post. And we do appreciate DownSpring glenn’s contribution to the Post and to the Doctrine. His position on the nature of change vis a’ vis scotts and clarks (and by inference rogers) is well taken and like everything else found on these pages contributes to the advancement of the Wakefield Doctrine. Rather than continue the debate on the merits of change/self-improvement in the individual, let’s try to find another aspect of the Doctrine and see if the issue comes up, that way we might find other points of contention. Or better yet let’s simply ask the Question:

What is the value of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)?

“the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique, fun and productive tool for understanding the behavior of others. Using the (viewpoint) of the Wakefield Doctrine we can look at the people in our lives, at home, at work, at school and at play and know why they do the things that they do“.

Ok that is a good description of what the Doctrine is intended to be. So what is there to discuss? Should anyone want to understand others? Is the state of our understanding of others to be considered complete as it is, with any further learning deemed a complete waste of time? Is there room for one more theory of personality, albeit a fairly homemade/anecdotal/inferential/non-empirical collection of observations as is the Doctrine?

I bet it is all about how each of the three look at this thing, if a clark sees a different use in all these words from a scott who has a totally different opinion of (it’s) utility than does the roger, is that not proof the Wakefield Doctrine is to some degree a unique, productive and fun way to look at the behavior of others?
And since none of us reading and/or writing in these pages is a “real” clark, scott or roger, it falls to us to offer our perspective on what good this thing is and how would it be improved so that more and more people could benefit from it.

That is, unless everyone is already all they should be so that if anyone does not already read the Wakefield Doctrine, they should not start and conversly anyone currently reading cannot ever stop reading it. Or something like that.

But hey we ain’t no fuddy duddy life forms looking to enhance our curicula vitae by writing Posts and/or Comments, is we? So let’s have some fun here folks!

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 2, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

damn!

we are such a clark. we totally missed what most would consider a reasonably-significant milestone in the world of blogging and post-writing and such.

Apparently our three thousandth post has been written and posted and without so much as a rogerian ‘Everyone keeps telling us how amazed they are at how many posts I’ve created here at the Doctrine.’ ‘and how wonderful everyone tells them they are… the posts, not the people. well, ok, the people. but they still like the posts. the ones that they read, mostly.”

that is so clarklike. (tho in our defense, we’re grateful for our significant secondary scottian aspect. ’cause, this post)

so, (remaining everybit a clark) what was the 1439th Post here at the Doctrine? (plus or minus, as is the inherent right of our people to, like, estimate… (no sense giving up all options by submitting to a determinant number, are we right?)

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “the second best day of the week for school lunch (not hamburger fricassee, but close!)

January 10, 2017

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

(not everyone may know this, but that red building in Chicago? World Headquarters for the Omni Corporation… read all about in ‘Blogdominion‘

Lets discuss religion.

lol wait! come back! no, serially, I won’t say anything bad! Well, I’m only speaking for myself, my secondary scottian aspect hardly ever listens when I try to advise moderation. But, hey, what are ya gonna do?

For the sake of brevity and to leave me time this morning to work on the final edit of Chapter 40 of ‘Almira‘, following is a reprint (of a reprint) of a Post from a couple of years ago.

We say with complete authority/certainty/confidence that the Wakefield Doctrine never challenges or otherwise criticizes (an) individual’s religious beliefs, unless it forms the basis of a really good Post. But since you raised the question, lets look at what the Wakefield Doctrine tells us about religion and it’s appeal to each of the three personality types.

When it comes to religion and the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, the answer boils down to two words: rogers! It is not just that rogers are the personality type that is drawn to religion, they are/is the one who invented it! The link between the rogerian personality type and religion is so strong as to form the foundation of the description of the rogerian worldview.

As we do know, it is integral to the rogerian worldview there be organised religion. This is true simply because rogers have the need not only to establish rules and order for everyone, but to have these rules posess a degree of moral imperative that can only derive from a deity or deities

Simply put, rogers are religious, clarks are spiritual and scotts… well, that’s kind of a long story… no! not a bad thing, it’s just that for scotts religion and spirituality are more about the features of the environment and therefore can be good or bad.

If rogers have the baseline lock on organised religion, where does that leave our other two personality types?

clarks?, they’re easy! clarks believe in the unbelievable. Unfortunately this capacity prevents them from ever having complete faith in anything. In regards to religious dogma, clarks will give convincing lip service, particularly the clarklike females (who have a slight edge over their male counterparts in terms of protective coloration); a clarklike female, especially one with a family unit, will conform to the local norms for religious activities. But the odds are, even these devoutly religious clarkmoms will be filling their downsprings heads with all sorts of apostolic nonsense at random points in their upbringing. If backed into a corner, most clarks will confess to a definite spiritual tropism, but you better have a thesaurus and a comfortable chair nearby! If you read the page on clarks, one of the primary characteristics of this type is the love of knowledge…useful knowledge…useless knowledge, knowledge for good and knowledge to anger people, does not matter to your typical clark. So as to organised religion, lets put the clarks in the woman’s auxiliary section.

scotts now, they totally relate to religion, even organised religion! scotts relate to the ‘product’/ the result/ the ‘output’, if you will, of organised religion. (Ed note: this section is written more to the male scott, though not inappropriate, as the Doctrine is gender neutral, it might leave a new Reader with the impression that all scotts will view religion simply as an opportunity, as opposed to a skill, which in the case of the female scott, it can be… I’ll leave the bullet-points in place, but check back for a Post on the scottian female and her pack.)
Back in my parent’s day, there was a ‘restaurant’ called The Automat, it was sort of cool for us suburban kids in the early 60’s to hear about a restaurant that was totally mechanised. (This was all pre-fast food as we know it today). The Automat’s ‘hook’, was to offer a variety of choices of foods to customers with no intermediary such a waiter or waitress, everything there was available and purely the choice of the hungry customers.
….Throughout history, organised religions have basically served as Automat for scotts.

Aight… enough with the free-form, echolistic rambling.

Final thought this Tuesday: rogers provide structure, scotts push and clarks create…. all in the name of god.

Hey! World of Doctrine fiction insight: the red building at the top of the post? World HQ for the Omni Corp. the one that a certain Anya Claireaux operates from. (As executive administrative assistant, Not being one to put much in titles and honoraiae.)

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 1, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

Full Disclosure: starting some posts on Sunday afternoon. You know, the boiler plate intro stuff. Lots of writing this week, after last week’s stumble (due to a slight case of Dengue fever. lol)

So: continuation of the Serial Six ‘of Heroes and the MisUnderstood’ (co-written with Tom), at least a couple of ‘This is the Wakefield Doctrine’ posts, a return to the Unicorn Challenge (hosted by jenne and ceayr) and, finally the first TToT of the 2nd Q of the 224th Year of the New Order (‘Ordinal Novena’).

aiightt?

First up, RePrint!

(eeee doggies! lookie here, Uncle Jed! Not only found a 1st of Apricots post, but the one that marked our only foray into the blog-o-Herd! the 31 Day Writing Challenge!! (I believe Friend of the Doctrine Kristi is participating this year… be sure to go over to her blog and show her some support)

on with the RePrint

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘one dress rehearsal, a day off and we be so ready for them alphabet mfers’

March 30, 2015

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

Lets see:

donate to wikipedia? ✔
youtube updated and standing by? ✔
online dictionary?? cheque!

comic sans font… when brow gets too high?… well, of course! er ✔

images from 5 years of Posts…. illustrating, emphasizing… bizarre innuendae ?? yahtzee!

‘kay, looks like I’m all ready to take on those rogers of regimented rhetoric, the fabulous A-to-Zers… the Blog Hopping Challenge of all time. April 1st through the 31st … alphabet?! we got ya alphabet right here!

(shit! the alphabet, that will be easy enough, I can always go look at Kristi or Z or Val’s Posts… now the theme itself… I better review the Doctrine, lets see:

perspective on the world around us…

personal reality/worldviews

three personality types

clarks, scotts and rogers

(ok… 21 more to go)

‘the everything Rule’…

three types,

one predominant with two as potential. secondary and tertiary aspects.

know the other person better than they know themselves,

infer how a person is ‘relating themselves to the world around them’,

off-color jokes (?!), (off-color jokes?! what the hell kind of alphabet category is that?!)

simple: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is a perspective on human behavior, a way to see the actions and reactions (and interactions) of the people who make up our lives, in a way that not only provides us with insight, but is (also) quite amusing, without being mean or off-putting. As a ‘lens’, the Wakefield Doctrine provides us with a glimpse into the world of ‘the other person’. Predicated on two simple ideas: a) there are three characteristic worldviews (i.e. personal realities), and that, although we have the capacity to live in any of the three, we all settle into one, at a very early age and 2) our personality type is simply a reflection of the reality that we grew up, developed in and are currently experiencing, and 3) if we understand the nature and character of each of the three worldviews and we infer how the other person is relating themselves to the world around them, we can be in a position to see the world as they are experiencing it. This can only mean that we will come closer to understanding the other person. In fact, with practice and determination, it is quite possible to know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

As a benefit, of the practice of, seeing the world as they are experiencing it, you need hear yourself say, “How could they go and do such a thing/say such a thing? I really thought I knew them better than that!” A further benefit of the study and application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine is the realization that how we relate ourselves to the world around us, (as would the Outsider/clark, the Predator/scott or the Herd Member/roger) is at the heart of the give and take, the problems and conflicts, the joy and passion that manifests itself in the unfolding of our everyday life.
By knowing that my world is of a certain character I am better able to understand how I contribute, not only to actions and reactions with people throughout my day, but to the nature and quality of those actions and interactions. Rather than giving us cause to say, ‘well, it’s them! they’re the ones being unreasonable!’ we now are in a position to, (be able to), accept that how I relate myself to the world around me today plays a totally significant role in how the people around me act…and react….and annoy the hell out of me…and are so attractive…. and stubborn. Although sounding very self-centered and egotistical, there is, within the Wakefield Doctrine, an inherent responsibility to understand the other person which, in turn, conveys a freedom (from our own limitations).