clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2

Wait, what?! -the Wakefield Doctrine- …somehow, it’s half-past Friday and we haven’t written our Doctrine post

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

New Readers; the content in this blog consists of three categories: 1) Wakefield Doctrine posts Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Fridays (being all things Doctrine), b) Six Sentence Stories (fiction for a bloghop run by Denise) posted on Thursdays and  tres) the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) gratitude bloghop (with a difference) on Saturday hosted (currently) by yours truly, (link to last week’s TToT why not join us this weekend?)

So if you’re curious about this little personality theory thing of ours, those are the days to get the skinny* on the hows and whats of one of the most fun alternative perspectives on the world around us and the people who make it up.

In any event, we are fortunate in having Readers who write comments that more often than not suggest themes and topics for posts (and in recent weeks) series of posts devoted to the question.

Among them are Mimi, Frank, Misky and Denise (with occasional fly-bys by Friend-of-the-Doctrine Cynthia).

So don’t be shy with your Comments or Questions.

Closing out this week: we started with the topic of the reality of personal realities. Central to the Doctrine and fun to consider how each of the three predominant worldviews (aka personality types) grow up developing the perfect personality type…given the reality they experience. Then we went with a RePrint of the Doctrine’s origin story (the Eureka Moment)

As should be abundantly evident, we all have fun learning how to see the world from a peculiar angle. (You into people watching? You will love the Doctrine)

lets close this short post with the essential: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel.

 

 

Share

Wedezdae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

from a Comment from Frank on yesterday’s post.

Since I wouldn’t want to mar the new equipment with a piece of tape, I would have shown the customer how to turn the dial. So, I’m not a scott. A roger might go into greater detail about how dials work than I would. I guess I’m a clark.

ok!.. your Comment provides our New Reader with a good set-up to illustrate how to determine a person’s (or your own) predominant worldview:

a) throw out the ‘no fricken way!’ personality type  2) now compare the remaining two worldviews, ‘side-by-each’ and decide which one provides the clearest/in-focused view of the world.

ProTip: here is where your reading pays off, i.e. sure, you know that ‘clarks abhor being in the spotlight but will not tolerate being ignored, but how does being in the spotlight manifest* for a roger?’ or ‘the Herd Member knows there is a correct way and a lot of other ways that are worse than being merely incorrect, but what does the Outsider think of their responsibility for a mistake on the part of another person?’ You do see where we’re going with this, don’t you?

Who said ‘It’s about how a person relates themselfs to the world around them, (and the people who make it up)?’ very good… but isn’t there something about this statement that really matters?

Yep! The ”…a person relates themselves…’ part. The Wakefield Doctrine isn’t all ‘7os pop psych, ‘oh wow, I can relate to that. …err man!’

The Wakefield Doctrine demands more from those who would advantage theyselfs of the insights it offers. To do this right, one perforce needs to understand, (as much as possible in the current moment), accept (as a working description of the world) and let this self-knowledge afford them the perspective on the other person.

So, our valued correspondent, Frank is (or should be asking himself): ‘What do I think about the solution to the problem of the ‘Misunderstanding Customer’ and immediately afterwards, ‘How do I feel about the lack of understanding of this equipment that this total stranger rudely demands an answer to the question, “Why doesn’t this thing work?”

lol

* reminder: ‘the Everything Rule’ states: ‘everyone does everything at one time or another‘ which simply means there is no exclusivity of actions, interests, sins, ideals and/or expertise among clarks, scotts and rogers… a thing may, however, manifest differently for each

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weekly participation in the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

According to Un-Reliable Narrator magazine: the TToT is the oldest continuously published bloghop (1887 to present) and ranks highest in the number continents where, provided one has sufficient privacy, it can be accessed. One survey in Women’s Wear Daily  cites a ‘Glad-I-Stumbled-Across-This-Thing (Whatever-It-Is)’ rating of AA...ay! No less an authority than Librarian’s Secret gives it a Three-Fingers-To-Pursed-Lips rating.

So, come and join us and see how people, (presumedly like you), enhance their existence by focusing on the good in Life. For the Wakefield Doctrine, our list this week includes:

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Winter? Well, not yet, however… Phyllis will have a field-day stacking the firewood we had delivered yesterday (no, serially, she’s actually into that kind of activity)

Before

6) See that Section just beyond the Husky-proof(ish) fence in the photo below? Thats the base for the  Working Wood Pile where the individual fire units in Grat #5 will be transported and arranged on a pleasing, stable and gravity-resistant pattern.

7) WIP (Home Project Landscaping Division) de-Summering the Cottage Island

8) something, something

9) The co-hosts/co-hostinae, respectively: Frank, Andrew, Denise, Misky, cai, Knitcat, Dyanne, Kristi, Lisa and, as always, Mimi

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music vids

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Bendseday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Now’s the tricky part.

In yesterday’s post you read about three people contemplating having lunch (together) in a crowded restaurant.

The easy part: by virtue of being familiar with the character (and characteristics) of the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine, one is able to extrapolate their individual responses to the prospect of lunch:

  • the clark is an Outsider. not a part of, not even a necessary, if not always pleasant, aspect of the cycle of life (hint: rhymes with scott), ‘Outsider’ as in apart from. if you do not appreciate how that translates on a social interaction matrix… off to Remedial Doctrine class with you!
  • the scott is a Predator. what characterizes Predators in the most economical use of words? chase/be chased action-equals-life. Fun Doctrine insight: the menu may be pasted to the window of the restaurant, but it’s also standing on full, live-action display (and, yes, there will be other Predators pretending to be du jour), all the better to start the game of life
  • the roger as an individual is the promise of the Herd, as a Member, (of the Herd), the justification of all they collectively stand for: ‘take, eat, this is my worldview’. there is no sadness in sacrifice if it is part of the greater whole

…now, the hard part!

lol

no, wait! lets save that for Friday. We gots to work on our contribution to the Six Sentence Story bloghop.

we suspect you, the Reader, might appreciate a little time to assimilate and ruminate on the overt implications of our little illustration of the real in personal reality, vis á vis the Wakefield Doctrine. To this end, allow us to pose some potentially enlightening questions. (New Readers who are clarks? You can skip this following section. Unless, of course, you want to indulge in the vicarious sense of belonging as you answer the questions for yourself.)

  • if you ‘wake up’* to the fact that you are an Outsider, how do you feel?
  • well, yeah, you’re kinda busy trying to figure out what they, (everyone but you), seems to know that you do not
  • ok… it’s clearly a secret that the others have forgotten they know… don’t assume otherwise. Even an Outsider has instincts for self-preservation and bugging everyone around you about this matter is surely not a good idea.
  • decide to ‘pass’ and get to work finding the thing they know, the information in whatever class in ‘Being a Part Off’ you unwisely played hooky from, thanks goodness intelligence is so not huge on peer comparison at an early age (at least among peers) (ish)

*no, roger. stop. no point or need to seize on the wake up. we all become the personality types we are because we deal with the world as we experience it as little baby children. our attempts to cope and our strategies to survive and thrive is in direct relationship to the personal reality we find ourselfs in.

Share

Week’s Wrap Up -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Comments:

Mimi (on Wednesday’s Post)

It all depends on the source of your hope.

Our Bible study group tonight was talking about our Scottian female member and one noted if she sits on the couch, it only seats two instead of three because she seems to take up more space, not physically but presence wise. Someone else overheard this and noted she takes up the whole room, and she really does, and we love her and wouldn’t have her any other way.

I concur. Love the sense of a person with presence. scotts do that quite naturally.

Frank (on the Second Six of the week)

Nice phrase: “time-clogged senses”

Also, nice tale of crossing the river to the other shore.

Frank, hold that thought! Actually, hold both those thoughts. (Reader: our correspondent, Frank, has a remarkable proclivity for anticipating lines of thought/story narrative/wild supposition that is rather curious. In this case, he has hit upon a new project of ours. The telltale? Citing: “time-clogged senses’. (As Vincent Vega says, ‘To be continued…’)

Finally, Misky (Warning! Warning! Craino-over-sufficiency Danger Will Robinson!) To the Second Six.

That is an amazing piece of writing. Well done.

Thank you. (One of the better rogerian expressions is also one of the oldest. meant to reference a state of not-entirely unpleasant states of self-consciousness and is quite apt to my initial reaction to her compliment: ‘My head swelled-up and my face fell.’  (ikr? ya can’t make this shit up).

 

oh..kay!. we’ve reached the limit of both our desire to increase the capacity to feel further development of our tertiary rogerian aspect.*

Time to get ready for the final Doctrine post of the week, the TToT.

You, (inferred Readers and slow-to-click-away wanderers), are invited to stop in this weekend. The TToT (Ten Things of Thankful) is a gratitude bloghop with a difference. It’s fun, challenging and worth your time to check out.

Hell, if you like the idea of linking your own list of ten(ish) things that’ve incited the experience of gratitude but are concerned with it being too much, the Doctrine’ll spot you two Grats… (to get ya started)…inquire within. some restrictions may apply, nothing bad.

*New (and newish) Readers: While we, all of us, develop our ‘personality type’ from coping with one of three personal realities, (the Outsider, the Predator and the Herd Member), we never completely lose the capacity to ‘see’ the world(s) of ‘the other two’. They, (the non-predominant worldviews), can have an effect/influence on our lifes. Using myself, (your Curator), as an example: I am a clark (predominant worldview of the Outsider) with a strong secondary scottian aspect and a weak tertiary rogerian aspect. As such, in certain situations, (oh, we don’t know…say writing a blog), we can be all kinds of direct and aggressive and ‘Hey! You! Read this!!’ That is the ‘benefit’ of a secondary scottian aspect. Our tertiary aspect, that of the Herd Member…more of a work in (reluctant) process. The inclusion of Misky’s compliment is totally at odds with my predominant worldview. But, hey, no pain no gain, right binyons?

*

Share