clark | the Wakefield Doctrine clark | the Wakefield Doctrine

Wednesday Warmup, Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- (when cleverness flags, alliterate!)

August 18, 2016 By

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

NPD

uh oh! 10:05 pm Wednesday. Nothin  Well, not exactly nothing. I have a prompt word, ‘fire’. And I have zoe’s instructions to us all, write a story of six sentences and involve the prompt word.

Funny,  well, no, I guess, not so funny. (ed note: I’m here again, only it’s 6:41 am and all I have is a cup of coffee, an idea and a totally disturbing lack of confidence in my abilities. I’m tempted to tell you the idea here first, before the story. But that would break the Code of the Six. and it would be so clarklike to try and hedge against failure. But, as zoe must be saying to Joule, at this very moment, “He’s right, ya know. The Code’s the Code. What say we go out back and make sure them damn Jué yuan haven’t snuck back into the woods,  when we get back, he’ll surely have managed to write what he must write. Why, no, Joule I have no idea why there’s a photo of the fabulous Paris Hilton on this post! Well, yeah, maybe, but the prompt word is fire, not Troy. lol… you wanna be the one to tell him?”)

Is he awake?

I fear your son joins so many other young people, his wandering the forbidden places may have resulted in becoming another causality of the UFO phenomena, though I admit I’m surprised, he’s always been so even-headed, never one for such outlandish ideas.

She hovered near the bed where her only son rested, her worry preventing her from staying still and, moving about the room, her long hair streaming behind her, snapped like a whip with each sudden change of direction.

They say there are more and more like this; mostly young people and always in the same areas, the barren deserted areas they’ve taken to calling ‘the land at the edge of the world’.

Mom… you’re here, it was so amazing, it was like light but you could feel it and there were strange people and they wore strange things on their bodies and when they saw us hiding behind the rocks they waved as if welcoming us.

Her husband swam from their home and headed to council chambers, it being his son who witnessed the Unidentified Fiery Object, he no longer doubted the tales and, at the risk of ridicule, would force the Mer Nation to listen, to be warned, that not only did fire exist, but it was wielded by aliens.

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

clarks and the danger of ‘uniqueness’ -the Wakefield Doctrine- a brief interlude

July 1, 2015 By

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

Card_Players_(5th_version)_1894-1895_Paul_Cezanne

It’s understood that a significant portion of the effort behind (understanding, developing and applying) the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine is specifically intended to help clarks.

Which is not to say that clarks need the Wakefield Doctrine more than scotts or rogers. Wait a minute, we do say that. Which is not to say that clarks are the only one, (of the three), to see in the Doctrine the possibility of direct benefits, impacting their daily lives. Wait… we do say that. Which is not to say that the Wakefield Doctrine offers insights and perspectives that our scottian and rogerian friends cannot, and, in fact, do not benefit as a result of coming here and reading and commenting and such. Wait! we do say that? Well, I guess that leaves us where we have always been:

the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique and useful and very much (a) fun way to look at the behavior of people. the Doctrine is a perspective that offers us (an additional) opportunity to better understand the people in our lives. employing this tool, we all can gain an insight into the world, ‘as the other person is experiencing it’, and, because of this increased understanding, we need never again say, “how could they go and do such a thing? I really thought I knew them better than that!“

But we already knew that, didn’t we? Lets, then, broaden our understanding of this here Doctrine here, shall we? We all know that the personal reality experienced by clarks is referred to as, the world of the Outsider. As a person who grew up and developed (their) personality in the worldview of the Outsider, clarks are creative and introspective, funny and hardworking. Because they live in the personal reality of the Outsider, clarks are subject to a seemingly endless cycle between (near-unrealistic) hope and soul-crushing despair (survival being an indication of an inner strength that, were it not expended on surviving what would seem an un-justified and un-necessary level of self-criticism-doubt-fear, would be, like, totally impressive). Thats simply the nature and character of the world as experienced by clarks. scotts and rogers have no picnic-of-a-life either. But today is about clarks.

So what is it about clarks that makes today’s post interesting? Well, to appreciate that, we first must understand the double bind that lies at the core of every clark, and that is: a) clarks maintain that the only path available to them is the intellect, the ‘knowing/learning’ of things and 2) they, (the clark), are Outside(r)[s] and c) there must be a reason for their being different.  (I sense that those Readers who are not clarks and/or those Readers whose secondary clarklike aspect is developed only to the degree necessary to find this theory interesting, but not developed enough to imagine the world of the Outsider (at least be able to imagine it without being forced into a reflex sympathy response), are beginning to drift off, so lets get to the point.)
The problem with being an Outsider (who is) trying to understand their way, ‘back to being a real person’, is that, ‘an Outsider’ is, by definition, unique. As in…. only one of a kind. If I am the only one of a kind, then how can I gain a perspective/understanding of the world that is anything more than what I already possess? If I’m ‘the only one of my kind’, then how can anyone tell me anything that genuinely applies to me? And, besides, if I spend my life looking for ‘the Answer’, then how can I know more than I (already) know?

see what I mean?

gots to cut this short. work calls. if there are any clarks (or, hell, scotts or rogers) who want to know what I believe the answer to this conundrum is, the answer is: identification  I’ll have to follow-up, later in the day to this tease-ending. tempus fugits, yo, tempus totally fugits

 

 

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

Friends of the Doctrine: Guest Post by Cyndi Calhoun

March 29, 2013 By
Rose Bud Leaves

Being a clark has its perks: you’re creative! This is a photo of tiny budding leaves from a red Rhode Island rose bush in my yard.

I want to thank Clark for giving me an opportunity to guest-post.

I enjoy being a Friend of the Wakefield Doctrine and always look forward to reading all Wakefield Doctrine posts.  They afford me the opportunity to learn more about clarks, scotts and rogers and increase my understanding of the world around me.

From the moment I discovered the Wakefield Doctrine, I was hooked.  I figured out I was a clark almost immediately .  Being a clark is precisely why I enjoy reading the Wakefield Doctrine so much.

So what’s it like being a clark according to the Wakefield Doctrine?

It’s validating.  According to the Wakefield Doctrine, I’m supposed  to daydream.

It’s full of great information.  For the clark personality type, they like learning for learning’s sake.  That’s great because I need an entire room to house all my books and files in my house.  Let’s not talk about all the bookmarks I have on my browser for sites that feed me more information that I ever thought was possible.

I “think” all the time.  I can’t help it.  At the Wakefield Doctrine, I’m in good company.  I’ve met so many other clarks who need to think, too,  and can’t turn off that voice in the head.

Being an outsider is normal.  With every new post, I realize that it’s completely acceptable for a clark to be not part of the herd.  For once, I belong.

It makes me comfortable in my own skin.  Don’t people like that make you slightly crazy?  How they can be so comfortable with the likes of themselves?  Maybe it’s age and not the Wakefield Doctrine at all, but since becoming a regular reader, I understand that when I deal with certain people, they’re going to be emotional (the rogers) and prone to doing things – action – (the scotts) and I can just sit on the sofa in the corner and get lost in my thoughts.

The scotts and rogers may think of clarks as slightly strange, but knowing that it’s who I am, that I can’t change and must keep thinking, I’m more comfortable with the idea that people don’t have to “get me” for me to be myself.

To be sure, the part about “being myself” got easier after I digested information from the Wakefield Doctrine.  Before, I would try harder to fit in (okay not really…I’d just pretend).  I’d have an internal dialogue going on in my head: don’t say that, act quiet, you’re talking too much, you’re too stoical, you’re being weird. That dialogue would get rather difficult to keep up with such that in my attempts to turn it off, I’d really look like I was talking to myself.  Somehow, the Wakefield Doctrine – which is naturally very appealing to clarks – affirms that there is a whole segment (though a minority) of society that is like-minded in the same way.  How refreshing.

The thing about the Wakefield Doctrine, though, is that you always have the potential to learn something new.

In fact, I participated in the last Saturday night call-in and up until that phone call, I thought I was a clark-roger as opposed to a clark-scott for the secondary perspective of my personality.  I thought  I could be part of a herd mentality if I wanted to, right?  But then I found out that the fact that I’m aware that I don’t conform – having a blueberry colored house with a pink porch might be a giveaway – is a dead ringer for not being a roger.  And since I have a scottian secondary aspect, if I am ever backed into a corner, the scottian perspective comes out and it’s not pretty.  Reaction (a hallmark for scotts) takes over.

That’s kind of funny, too, because those rare times when I lose my temper really grab people’s attention.  It happens once every few years – at least for me.  I have a lot of patience, but when my frustration builds up, watch out!

Who knew that that is a clark–scott personality trait?

And I’m definitely not wired to be one of the herd.

The Wakefield Doctrine is a great place for scotts and rogers, too.  It stands to reason that we all can benefit because it helps us to relate ourselves to the world around out there – not how we relate to the world, as Clark would say.

Now that I’ve shared so much about the inner-workings of my thought-process (yet another clark-like characteristic), I will graciously close this post with:

The Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.

About the Author

Friend of the Doctrine

Cyndi Calhoun is a freelance writer, artist and photographer.

You can find her at her website: Pictimilitude

She’s also on Facebook:  Cyndi Calhoun

Twitter: @ccliteraturegrl

And you can add her to your circles on G+: Cyndi Calhoun

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

(“a piece of the action…”)

October 28, 2010 By

Lady Downspring here.  I’ve decided to suit up again.  I quite enjoy it on occasion but I digress.  My first and last Post for this blog was about a year ago.  “What is wrong with that?” you may ask.  Everything and nothing at all.  I am, after all, a clark.  It is within my purview to procrastinate, take for granted, lose urgency/energy, be fearful, wonder that there is anything pertinent I can contribute, castigate myself – wait, that’s reserved for my “other” friends…..  to the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers.  So why would I think I have nothing pertinent, nothing of value to say? What is it that keeps me reading but not writing? Could it be connected to how I view the world? (with fear CY – with fear.  the clue to your clarklike nature lies within the domain of fear.)

 The question and subsequent question of the day for the veteran “25” and new readers alike?  “How does one learn to view the world differently?”,  “Can I view the world differently?”  This presupposes the desire (“shh… no, not now…”) to change how one views the world.  First, let us assume the position (no glenn. get up!) that one has identified oneself as predominantly a clark, scott or roger. What would be next?  If you identified yourself as having clarklike “symptoms” not to worry too much (yet). You will continue to read the Wakefield Doctrine as long as it amuses and challenges you, you can learn from it; you do not find yourself distracted by something else.  If on the other hand you recognize your primary status as that of a scott, (no!. all egos must, I repeat must….….. check at the door) then it depends on how hungry you are and whether there is enough to satisfy you.  Thirdly, if you lay claim to being of rogerian descent then it becomes a little more complex.  Assumptions have been made.  If the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine aligns with your interpretation, with your world view at the moment, Godspeed.

clarks! This session you may sit.  I will speak of our little scottian friends.  “You!  In the seat by the door!  Go get that roger and drag him back here! ” rogers do not like to be told what to do (unless it is by a scottian female – a male roger will always defer to the scottian female.) For more on how the Wakefield Doctrine can be applied to relationships I will refer you to our very own Ms. AKH.)

 To be scottian is to be dominant or submissive (to another scott only).  One or the other.  There are dominant scotts and lesser scotts. (not in a diminutive way)  Keep in mind: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel, you will no doubt catch on quickly to the nuances of the many ways a clark views the world, how a scott views the immediate landscape, and how a roger views the world as it should be.  scotts are high energy individuals with a short attention span.  They make decisions quickly (because they are so certain of themselves).  scotts can be quick to anger however they hardly ever hold a grudge.  And why? scotts are of the present.  They like to be the focus of attention. (down boy, almost finished)

scotts are often misunderstood.  There is no delicate way to say it – they are often thought of as assholes.  Many of them are but more often than not scotts possess a soft, tender side.  My advice:  learn the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers and you will learn how to handle not only the scotts in your life but the clarks and rogers as well.  It may take a little time but once you catch on it can not only be fun but it can bring positive results to both your work life and home life.  Who doesn’t want to live a less complicated life?

View the vid clip and take note to the scotts attempting to establish ranking.  Take further note to the ultimate, good natured (but do not test me) roger that is our Capt. Kirk. (“No way like the Federation way”.)  

Next session:  Where there is a clark there is always a scott/where there is a scott there is always a clark.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiAtCD-gIM(a piece of the action….”)

 

 

 

Share
Filed Under: About the Wakefield Doctrine aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, Featured Tagged With: , , , ,

of clarks, scotts and rogers

August 4, 2009 By

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that behavior is a response to perception. Within individuals, these behaviors tend to repeat themselves over time, resulting in a characteristic type of behavior, personality.

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes to describe personality on the basis of perception rather than the behavior that results (from perception).

The three characteristic ways to perceive the world are identified as: clarks, scotts and rogers. It is a given that we all start our lives with the potential/’tendancy to perceive’ the world as any of and all of these three. At some point we become predominantly one (over the other two).

We become clarks, scotts or rogers.

The goal of this Blog is to present the Wakefield Doctrine (aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) to the world in the hope that view of people and behavior represented by this idea will provide someone/somewhere  entertainment, education, enlightenment and the eventual modification of the world.

As will be immediately apparent, this blog is a collaborative effort and because of that (at least in part) the organization of the information is a bit, shall we say, casual? The posts are meant to be an introduction to the blog and the Wakefield Doctrine. The pages (listed above) are more specific to a topic, each of the three types of personality, an Overview and a couple of pages that are more of a blank canvas, intended to encourage contribution and participation of any and all readers.

So take a look. You might see a reflection in one of these pages. We welcome and invite comment, it will be appreciated as we continue to gather information and example, illustration and explanations, all with the intent of helping you, the reader, to see the clarks and the scotts and the rogers that are all around you.

And try to remember,as you read this blog, this is about tendencies, about being mostly one or another of the three types.

Share
Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: , , , ,
« Older Posts