clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 4 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 4

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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.

New Participants? Rules? Nah… well, wait, now that you mention it, yeah there are a couple of Rules: a) create a list of 10(ish) things that you believe (or want to believe) inspire a sense of gratitude and b) link them up to this here bloghop here. Pretty simple, isn’t it?

Why? (Who said that!! Get them the hell outa…. ) lol. no, perfectly valid question. Because there is more benefit to a person to acknowledging…. no, not quite ‘the positive!!!’ (there’s a door down the hall, says “And it can only be four”, you’ll be fine)…. what we were going for is ‘acknowledging the choice we have between the dark and the light’. Enough of the meta-meta. Bottom line, the one true gift of a particular fruit of a certain Garden is not overly-advertized capacity to identify with others. ya know?

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Unicorn Challenge (bloghop)

5) the Six Sentence Story (bloghop)

6) closing (on a property)

7) ground is almost thawed in the backyard, which means Mia might be free to run around in her hyper-maniacal fashion,

8) something, something

9)…we’re working on it! jeez louise! ! give a moving-finger a break, already!

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

music vids

*

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

T-minus Useday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

damn! with a post title like this, you’d think this’d* be one for the ages.

…speaking of which:

clarks are born old, scotts manifest the essence of youth and rogers are secure in their place in the Herd (maybe not so much elsewhere)

(sure, but let this rest in your Doctrine-reading minds, whilst we reassure any visitors who, through luck or happenstance, might have stumbled upon this blog and are frozen in the threshold, walking in mid-lecture, hesitating on the wrong side of the door, a thoroughly atavistic search for familiar faces in the amphitheater style lecture hall as facing turn, all Larry Niven’s Slaver Sunflowers slowly focusing on you… “Please, don’t leave. We’ve been waiting for you.”  )

New Reader: the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. Nothing to worry about, (in it’s level of novelty), not overly difficult to learn, (skill acquisition being enjoyable in the sense of enhancing the known rather than replacing the familiar) and composed of the same elements of the world as you’ve always known it, but with a couple of new manifestations of the same old, same old. As such, all the Doctrine requires, like one of those ubiquitous ‘Un-boxing’ youtube videos, is that you accept the premise and let the demonstration convince you of the fun and value of adopting this view of the world.

Three ways to relate to the world. The relationship is not merely our grasp on reality, it is how reality grasps us. Personal reality is real, (to a small, but significant extent), and, to borrow from Nietzsche, ‘Our relationship with reality modifies the world and reflects our beliefs.’

ok!! lol

For any New Readers still in the room, (or the meta lecture hall anteroom)… the Wakefield Doctrine is fun, useful and if you are prone to imaging things that have zero apparent value and no discernible utility, then Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine.

Three ‘personality types’. Easy to learn. Fun to use. Endlessly applicable to both everyday routine life and ‘oh damn! what’ve I got myself into now?’ situations. Check the pages (of the blog) for description of the three; clarks (Outsiders), scotts (Predators) and rogers (Herd Members). Keep in mind that we, each of us, have one predominant worldview and while ‘the other two’ remain as potentials within us, we grew up as babies learning to cope and survive and thrive in the world as we experienced it. So, we are happy to inform you that, of the three personality types in this here Doctrine here, you gots the perfect one!. booyah.

probably should link a RePrint post about ‘How to Use the Wakefield Doctrine’ hereabouts… but, we’re approaching 500 words, so, nah. The parts are all here (admittedly somewhat scattered about)… but the fun of this thing of ours is in: ‘OK so what would an Outsider think to do first? How in the world does a Predator respond and… Herd Members, suddenly waking up surrounded by…. how would they feel.’

 

* shout out to Violet for getting aggressively creative with her word dominance, specifically in application of the prompt word in her recent Six Sentence Story

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

As often happens, topics (and themes (and new(ish) fun ways to describe the Doctrine) are often found in Comments from Readers.

This Monday is no exception.

Friend of the Doctrine, Mimi, in her Comment on our last Doctrine post*. Wrote:

If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing. Even if you don’t do it too well at first.

To which we responded:

… about aggression, in general and a Doctrine insight, in particular: it helps to remember that scotts fight (overt aggression)  for ranking and, for the most part is not personal.*

True Doctrine story. I once asked my late friend, Bernadine (photo at top of post), a scott (with a strong secondary clarklike aspect), I asked,  “So, when you engage with other scotts to establish ranking, how do you feel when you are not alpha?”

She laughed her remarkably enjoyable laugh and said, “You knucklehead, (or words to that effect, nothing but affection in her tone), I don’t feel bad, if that’s what you’re asking. Why would I? Ranking is about relationships, it’s about where I am in the pack. It has nothing to do with my value as an individual. That value is established. I’m in a pack. All scotts need to establish ranking in a social situation to, you know, separate the other predators from the… buffet table, (subsequent laughter). Ranking has nothing to do with value of the individual pack members.”

Second topic(ette) this Monday is drawn from a discussion on the topic of resentment, in the middle of the call-in this Saturday past. A statement was made, “When it comes to resentments and holding them, no one (none of the three) do it as well as rogers.”

Very fun insight was inspired, no surprise, by remembering ‘the Everything Rule’.

While it was without contention that rogers, being constituents of a reality of emotion, certainly have a high-profile when it comes to having (and maintaining) a resentment, the key is to ask, “OK, high volume, great intensity and way, high fidelity in the expression of a “We hate ‘cha”.

It was then suggested that one of the reasons rogers are the masters of holding resentment was due to the quality of longevity, (of said negative regard for a person. place or thing). They do that stuff forever.

And the aforementioned ‘Everything Rule’ did a total cartoon lightbulb over our collective heads.

Given that everyone does everything at one time or another, how does this half-life of negative emotional manifest in the personal realities of  ‘the other two?”

cha …ching!

rogers being Herd Members exist in a reality (personal as opposed to common) of emotion, feelings. the fabric of this reality is totally non-rational. Being non-rational, the world rogers exist is, essentially, non-chronologic. Time is not linear. Time is a bag of groceries packed by a first-day-on-the-job kid at the supermarket. Without the traditional, then-now-soon ordering of time, a stubbed toe at three am this morning is indistinguishable from the stabbing pain of being dumped in the final of final exams in one’s Sophomore year.

To an objective observer. the latter would be impressive, as most of us in the common reality, associate longevity with inherent value.

We concluded our debate with the suggestion that clarks are the resentment-masters-of-the-world, because when they get aholt of a delicious ‘ow!/wait!/what?’ resentment, well, lets just say, “No! Not a problem, we have the perfect spot, right next to the end table, no! that one with the magazines and coasters. It fits the decor like it’s always been there.’

or something

thanks Mimi and Denise and roger… fun post today

* ikr? what now? lol

 

 

Share

Friday(ish) -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Doctrine’s contribution to the Unicorn Challenge.

A word-count constrained imagination contest* hosted by jenne and ceayr, the prompt is an image and the only limit is ‘tell your story in under 250 words’.

 

 

A cat.”

Say What Now?

Being the First Week, there was no shortage of new things. Think: in the realm of the objective, stones to stub naked toes on, in the shadowy kingdom of the subjective, ‘tone of voice’.

You said I should name all the animals and fowls and everything in the world.”

The First Man, staring at the feline, did something with his lips, all the while glancing at the Creator from the corner of his eyes. Bible scholars, in the interest of conciseness captioned Genesis 2:19 ‘…naming all the animals’; eschewing the more comprehensive ‘…and invents pouting’.

“Fine. I Did.”

A smile, crawling back on Adam’s face, froze as the One spoke,

But, What’s With The ‘tude?

The naked man’s eyebrows decided to wrestle and the first scowl was born.

That’s on You. It’s not my fault it thinks it’s the height of Creation.”

Light Flared Non-Directionally.

It’s not. Is it? You said…”

The First Laugh of the Privileged rolled across the Garden, all creatures instinctively froze or sought shelter.

No. You’re Still The Pinnacle of Creation.

Adam, relaxing only slightly, continued,

OK, about that thing I asked? You know a companion, someone that would keep me from getting bored?

I Knew You Wouldn’t Give Up On That.

A new emotion, barely noticeable, the amusement at the interaction of Man and Banana peel

Gimme Some Of That Clay.

TA DAH!

Adam? Meet Lilith. Lilith… Adam. Give us a smile, Lil.

 

 

 

Share

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Sure, the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. At it’s very most casual, a lens to don when in people-watching mode.

It is also a way-efficacious tool for self-improving ourselfs.

But what about, as you* look upon the borrowed image at the top of the post, and typety-say,

“Well, I try every day to remember how we, each of us, grow and mature in a context of three characteristic relationships with the world around us. I totally get how the reality of my world is but one of three. And, how, in order to survive and thrive as a very youngster, I learned and practiced certain styles of social strategies. Sure, I do believe I have the perfect personality type for living in a world as I experience it. I even remember not to forget that although my reality is one of a possible three, I am endowed with the geophysical right** to look at the world as do the other two predominant worldviews and therefore am halfway to relating to the world in a new (to me) manner and be all kinds of the person I hope to be. But then, as soon as I get out there***, into the world, I forget! And totally act in the ways that makes me read the back pages of magazine and their ‘Personality Quiz the will change your Life in Twenty-three minutes (if, that is, I’m an old person) or… click on the ‘Scientists Uncover the Secret to Unlocking your Potential in twenty-three steps…CLICK HERE. What the hell good is this Doctrine? ”

Plenty o’good.

As you read these pages and, even better the Comments, you will see others of your kind1. Identify with them. Don’t worry about any other detail. The Wakefield Doctrine is, as you should know by now: Gender, Age, Culture, whatever-other-conditions of day-to-day life Neutral.

 

* clarks, ’cause… well, you know why

*** aren’t words and language fun? we can see you smile, even if you don’t. and that…that is your strength. You know about knowing. The one area of your existence that is immune to self-doubt is the ‘knowing stuff’ thing. So, while knowing stuff does not automatically confer changing things (about yerself)… it’s like puttin’ on the slacks and perfect shirt to the killer suit you’ve been determined, since you can remember, to find and wear in the everyday world.

*** we believe we’ve already indicated who the most likely of the three ‘personality types’ of this here Doctrine here is likely to still be reading along.

1) ok, ok, we’ve been kinda preaching to the elect/the choir, but for New Readers here today, dig this: the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine are:

  1. clarks (the Outsider) quiet, curious and prefer to stay out of the limelight… ha ha! fooled ya! you are forgiven for thinking ‘Oh, I know this one! Introverts.’ sorry, wrong. this close but not quite. clarks live in their heads, so excessive vocals are limited. they are searching, always searching for the one thing they believe everyone else has (ProTip: ‘…what everyone else knows‘ and therefore are always on the lookout) and, finally… that thing about ‘being an Outsider? can’t be sure why that should be, so avoidance of scrutiny is a Prime Directive
  2. scotts (the Predator) not-quiet, curious in a prey-drive sorta way and limelight?? yum!  (lol) fun people, never not alert to their surroundings, (the eyes of a scott are remarkable… study your Doctrine posts and, before you know it, you’ll be able to spot a scott by photo alone. serially! look at the photo in the upper right of the Doctrine homepage. those three well-dressed lifeforms? one’s a scott. (ProTip: fun people…we said that, right? err… no sudden moves, and no running away, once engaged. aiight?)
  3. rogers (Herd Members) not boisterous but certainly not quiet, unless they’re confiding in you (ProTip: what they will be conveying is more than likely about someone else) not the center of the the limelight as much as the focal point of whoever has gathered but seem to lack a sense of purpose… they are the social ones (as in ‘social contract’) (shh… we’ve said too much already!)

 

*

Share