Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
So you think you’ve gotten yourself learned (you know, ‘learn ed’) sufficiently as to the characteristics of the three predominant worldviews of our little ‘personality theory’. Let’s not start writing recruiting pitches, expositions, graphic novels or sermons quite yet.
If you’re comfortable imagining the world through the eyes of the three, you’ve also encountered a nagging sense of confluence (in the world as each experience it).
It should not come as a surprise (nor an opportunity… roger). After all, we’re not talking science fiction here. With the Everything Rule as a backdrop (or for that matter a drop cloth) consider the proposition:
Of the qualities of each of the three, which is most antithetical (producing feelings of extreme, existential antipathy) in which of the others?
ok! let’s throw the threasus on the floor, and here is the worst thing ever for each:
- a clark? scrutiny (from the rogerian personal reality, this is love transformed in torture)
- to a scott? a world in which nothing is consistently reliable (from the nothing is really, totally real/everything-is-possible existence of clarks)
- for a roger being alone and un-connected in the company of others (from the lone wolf world of scotts and, for good measure, the life of the Outsider)
…to be cont’d










