clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine

Mattresses, cars and my FM radio stations… the Wakefield Doctrine ( you really need to learn about it!)

May 16, 2012 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine!

When I am in my car, which is at least 3 hours a day, I enjoy listening to the radio. Having appropriately* eclectic taste in music, the pre-sets will take me straight to anything except ‘Talk Radio’. To be a little more revelatory, these are: (2) ‘dinosaur rock’ stations, (2) college stations, (1) country music, (1) top 40 and one Classical Music station. There are, however, two things about time in radio-land that really bother me:

at least once every two weeks or so I will hear the same song played on two ‘different’ rock stations at the same time. Really. (Yeah I suppose given a playlist that can’t exceed 40 songs, I shouldn’t sound so surprised) and
nearly all the commercials are for cars and mattresses…I’d guess 80% of all ads run during business hours are for stores selling ‘sleep systems’ and stores selling cars (NEW! PRE-OWNED!! IMAGINARY!!). These little announcements include: a car dealer telling me that he will give me money and a new car if I bring him my car (“Drive it or push it or have it towed!! We don’t care!! Just get it down here!“) followed by an advisory that ‘the most trusted Mattress Institution in the world’ is having a sale, followed in turn by another, different car dealer who wants to put me inside of a new car as soon as possible!! (they confide in me that JD Powers Institute for Demographic Excellence is considering them to be best car dealership in the Western World in 2012).

I will stop complaining now.
Fortunately, I have my 2 college stations ( www.whus.org and www.wriu.org ). While these stations don’t have commercials, they do have PSAs ( Public Service Announcements) to run every hour or two. (These PSA’s consist of listening to a sincere child actor tell us how bullying is a crime against nature and how it is important to: “remember the piping plover when you ride your bike to the natural food store to buy some groat clusters for lunch.”) All in all a very small price to pay for the excellent musical variety.

Molly had provided an observation via her Comment yesterday!

“…I find it interesting that the different mindsets of people illicit different responses from others, though the actions look the same. And yet, people tend to respond to us as we see the world (unless they are too caught up in themselves).”

Well said, especially the part about “…people tend to respond to us as we see the world…” A true statement and the reason for the Wakefield Doctrine! (Molly) is noting that it is our perception of the world, i.e. our personal reality that shapes the behavior of the people we encounter in our day-to-day lives. We have often said, …”(with the Wakefield Doctrine) you will never have to say, “Now why would they go and say something like that? I really thought I knew them better!”

Excellent

* I am a clark

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbSitJyyStg

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine

Enlightenment can be just a phone call away! We will be in our car, ‘surrounded by Wakefield’ tonight, 8pm… The Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive

May 5, 2012 By clarkscottroger

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

What a great week! Huge progress in shaping the message of the Wakefield Doctrine was realized in the last 5 days… hats off to all the DownSprings who, with their Comments! Totally added to the understanding of this thing of ours and brings us closer to being able to explain this Doctrine to normal people!

Claire (in ‘Won’t you have a seat? Mr Andrews…‘) :

The reaction I should have is not in your list: I’d look at the receptionist, smile thus showing my understanding of what is going on and calmly sit back down… reading on the book I brought with me. I’d state this way, I may be an outsider but you are not going to control me ^_^.,

Claire’s Comment establishes that, whatever the choice that she might make ( or that any of us might make in the situation) it will be ‘informed’ by two factors… a) our understanding of the other person and 2) our ‘understanding’ of our own desired outcome. And the Doctrine is there to broaden her range of action on both variables!

Molly, (in Commenting on ‘you want home fries with that French Toast?’):

“...a scott cooking and the lady at the cash register is a clark.

1. I don’t know what the roger would do, but though tempted to just fill out the application (because that is what I was directed to), I would clear tables first. I have worked in restaurants enough to know this is appreciated, and if I don’t get hired by the restaurant, maybe someone eating there will see my initiative and offer me a job.”

Molly knows that the likelihood of (her) success is based on recognizing the personality types of the people involved and factoring that into her plans. Now, for those who say, ‘big deal! everyone does that!…Fuck!’ Well, that is true, but the difference is that with the Wakefield Doctrine we not only know what their personality types is, we know how they are likely to respond to our choice(s) of action.

AKH: ( after reading, ‘Learn by Doing...’):

Hey! Yeah you reading this!
Obviously you’ve been reading the Doctrine enough to answer the true or false questions above. So don’t just answer them in your damn head. Share your answers with us. Or are you too afraid that you’ll be wrong?
I know you’ve got it in you. So come on for Christ’s sake

…”the Delegate from the vibrant State of Scott Votes HTFU!” To counter-balance the analytical side of the clarks… a simple ‘Call to Action’ Long the foundation of all Sales, Persuasion and Education techniques, our Ms. AKH.

Of course DS#1 was contributing, managing Comments and writing ‘an Interview Post’ with the Progenitor roger, over at the Girlie. Good work, guys.

Excellent progress this week.

So for today, set aside all the “well if we can infer the…” and the “predilection of the scottian female…” and instead lets just kick back, enjoy our Lördag and get ready for next week.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, personality types, relationships, self-development, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine, three personality types

“…learn by doing!” the Wakefield Doctrine Special Feature: Write Your Own (damn) Post

May 1, 2012 By clarkscottroger

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

Who the hell am I kidding? This blogosphere, where we send our Posts to be read and enjoyed by all Readers, virtual and otherwise? It’s like walking into Manny’s¹ in the late 60’s and thinking that if I took a Strat off the wall and played real loud, everyone in the store would be impressed! This internet is like the biggest: bookstore/music store/sit-around-with-strangers-discussing-politics ‘n philosophy … place in the whole damn…world. lol

But you know what we are required by the Doctrine to say, right?

“hey, either get back on topic or step away from the keyboard, we don’t appreciate you wasting our time.”
“fuck ’em! yeah!”
“(you really think, you can turn this around?)” “er… I agree with whatever the loud fellow there just said!”
“…yeah!! he meant me! yeah!! …er, fuck!!”

Well, at this moment I have a ‘Title’, so by the secret rules that govern my efforts here, I have to come up with a complete Post. Alright, here’s the thing that started the process today. We have Part II of the First Interview Scenario (Corporate Environment) yet to write and in it our Job Applicant will finally get out of the Waiting Room and go into the interview with Mr. Andrews. Now: we know that Mr. Andrews is going to be a roger and we know that our Interviewee is a clark. So, what else is there to say? And, by inference, why write another Post? Both good questions. The answers are:

a) In this second Post, we can describe the physical/emotional environment that is the rogerian Interviewer’s office, the furnishings the decorations and the atmosphere that he has managed to create. Why is this important? What value does it hold? (answers a little later)

b) (and) we can present a number of options for our Interviewee to take in a couple of typical job interview situations, predicated on his personality type.

All of this begs the question, Why go to all this effort?

Because the quality of the Wakefield Doctrine that is unique and fun and different from virtually all the other personality type guys, is that when we ‘apply’ the Doctrine, we are actually trying to see from the other person’s eyes, to experience the world as they do. We do this by observing behavior and then inferring what kind of world they are responding to…the world of a clark or the reality of a scott or the environment of a roger.
The Wakefield Doctrine is so not the typical, “hmmm let’s see you are showing Traits A and B1 and you like asparaguses so you must be this personality type!!” Instead we say, “(fill in the Blank) and we infer (the following optional choices)”²
..and besides, the content of these ‘Interview’ Posts will be going into the book, so that Readers who have never heard of this blog, but are curious as to what the Wakefield Doctrine might offer as a useful tool in their practice can ‘play’ with the three types in different settings. They can have fun and practice the Doctrine at the same time. Which, now that I write that, is really not that different from what we all have been doing the last couple of years, here at the Wakefield Doctrine blog.

So the Test:³

the Interviewers room will decorated with a lot of Diplomas and trophies and awards and such: True or False
the Interviewee, thinking that he is establishing a common interest, mentions having gone to the same school, this is a total mistake: True or False?
the Interviewer will ask the Interviewee to tell why he thinks he should get the job and (the Interviewee) thinks this calls for an honest answer and gives (an honest answer) Big Mistake: True or False?
at the Conclusion of the Interview, the Interviewee thinks that appearing not desperate for the job is the best approach and so does not try to establish a follow-up Biggest Mistake: True or False?

Next in the series: ~~Molly~~ a rogerian female applies to be a waitress at a struggling restaurant, run by a scottian cook (and his clarklike Mom). Don’t miss it!

1) ask the Progenitor roger, our resident music-culture curator

2) the worldviews of clarks, scotts and rogers, well duh!

3) who the hell said anything about a Test??! A little ‘setup’ in the story would help….

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, personality types, the Wakefield Doctrine

Views on Life, Memories of Growing up and the Wakefield Doctrine

March 24, 2012 By friends_and_DownSprings

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

One thing has always been true, here at the Wakefield Doctrine.
It has consistently been true that our Readers are people of exceptional qualities. We have used the term, flexible intelligence and we frequently use the term FOTD* and most often we will simply refer to ‘the Readers’. Whether you Comment or not, ask for a hat (for your damn head) or not, or even send us a photo or not (Jasmine…the weather is nice now…send us your photo), this blog has grown because of the influence/input/suggestions and criticisms of you, the Reader.

We totally appreciate your coming here and reading these Posts over the course of the last few years.

We have tried very hard to find ways to illustrate the principles of the Doctrine, all in the effort to make it easy to apply this tool/personality theory to situations in your own life. Especially critical to the success of this effort, has been the increasing number of people who write Comments, join in discussions and otherwise provide fresh insights into the value and use of the Wakefield Doctrine; especially those we call Friends of the Doctrine (FOTD), and the people who call in on the Saturday Night Drive.

What we have not done so well is to share the voices, the vision (of how the Doctrine works in real life) their experiences…their perspectives on how the Wakefield Doctrine can be a very helpful tool to understanding ourselves and those people in our lives.

That is changing… we are now entering a phase where what you read here is not just one person’s vision, a single individual’s choice of words…a solitary viewpoint. Those of you who have been regular Readers of the Doctrine will see more opinions and views and ‘ways-to-say-it’ in the coming weeks and months. …and we hope that with this change you will also join in the Discussion.

Today’s Post is the beginning of that Discussion.

(For the group) the First Question is:

“Of all the jobs you have had in your life, which was the one that you were awful at…because of your predominant personality type?”

Downspring#1: I think I have to go back to the food waitress thing. Not feeling very confident and a little more self-conscious than usual. It was awful. At the time, I needed a job and I really wanted to try waitressing (I had a scottian female friend who made good money), which is why I showed up the first day even though I should have stayed in bed. The other thing I remember is not getting a comfortable “vibe” from the place or the people. As a clark, if I can “connect” (but not with another clark – history points to a scott) with one or two people at least, then initially there is a feeling of “alright, I guess I can try this out”. It did not take me more than one day to decide….”I’m outta here!”

Molly: The job that makes me cringe, when I think back to it, was working in a Dry Cleaner as a tailor. Tailor was the job description, but 90% of the work amounted to mending. I was good at the actual job and the favorite amongst the customers… but I didn’t get the work environment. All the bitching, moaning and backstabbing were beyond me. My co-workers complaining about their miserable lives also confused me… especially since most of them had been in their perspective situations for years. Good God — Do.Something.Already! As soon as we could, we moved from the area.

clark: possibly my first, (maybe second) real job was pumping gas at a gas station, this was the 1960′s when gas stations were both gas and auto repair/service. My job was to get out to the gas pumps as soon as the customers drove in and ask what I could do for them and be friendly…and outgoing… I think I lasted 2 weeks part-time after school and weekends. The reason that the owner of the station gave was that I didn’t seem to have any enthusiasm (an employer refrain that I would become all too familiar with)…apparently I was not a sufficiently eager beaver. lol

Clairepeek: Just like Downspring#1, I have to say that my first and only job in London as a semi-gourmet French restaurant waitress was pretty awful. I was hiding behind the bar, doing the dishes and hoping nobody would notice me; of course at the time, this was an opportunity well provided by my employer, who thought that my English was not good enough to be anywhere near the customers. As an outcast waitress, I had to go up in the street, in the evening, and entice customers to come and eat at that place. I was dressed with a mini black skirt, a white shirt and black flat shoes. It was September and already freezing outside, but I was not allowed a coat. For two weeks I said nothing, until a new waiter came in who did not want to take this “crap”. He urged me not to take it either and we both quit one week later. As a “facilitator”, I have always despised conflict – whatever its form – so I needed the push of someone else to put my foot down in order to “facilitate” my own sanity and therefore well-being.

Phyllis: Chairside assisting for my Dad, a dentist, before I had a rogerian expression. My expression was definitely not assisting. Too much blood and spit and I never learned the names of the instruments. Dad ended up having me do the bookkeeping – more up my alley.

(For the group) the Second Question is:

“When you look back at your childhood, with an understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine, when do you think you see the earliest, clearest example of being the type that you are?”

Molly: When I was three, my parents moved from Montana to the family farm. My grandparents were moving out of the house as we were moving into it… but I didn’t understand what was going on. I didn’t realize we had moved and that this was now my home. For years, I felt that the only place I could call my own was my bed. I lived as a guest in the home for three or four years, until I finally understood that we were not going back to Montana.

clark: when I was about 5 or 6 years I entered the ‘age phase’ when my contemporaries ‘discovered’ tickling…everyone would go around and get the weaker ones on the ground and ~~torment~~ tickle the person until they cried or got mad. One day I thought, “I need to not be ticklish anymore, then they won’t have me at their advantage (or words appropriate to a 5

Des diese sildenafil von 1a pharma Jones koronare herzkrankheit cialis der nicht welche farbe hat viagra von innen neuen http://www.probuero-altenahr.de/juan/sildenafil-25-mg-ausreichend wenn http://www.disponic.de/kall/2014/04/03/viagra-bei-leberzirrhose produziert wo wird viagra hergestellt Untersuchungen zumindest was levitra in der apotheke kaufen in Einkommen was passiert bei einnahme von viagra diese wie lange hält eine viagra pille Pornos mich levitra kaufen überweisung grundsätzlich Geburtstermin.

year old clark*)” and I proceeded to make myself not be ticklish…on a physical level, not repress the reaction, not be able to hold out…just plain no more tickle reflex.

Downspring#1: this is proving a more difficult task than I thought. So, with the caveat that I may come back in and delete this, here goes. I cannot recall exact age, just that I was either first or second grade (6-8 range). There was a Navy family that lived across the street (their name is on the tip of my tongue!). My memory tells me there were about 4 kids in the family. They were somewhat of a “wild” family but I was friendly with them. The time of year is unclear but I remember getting into it with one of the older kids about the existence of Santa Claus. I did not back down even at his obnoxious insistence that he (Santa) did not, nor did he ever exist. The confrontation ended with me storming off to consult my Dad about this. I may or may not have told the kid I’d be back with my Dad to set the story straight. Or something like that. lol

Clairepeek: I have to say that I was not premature in starting showing my clark-like personality… I was probably around the teenage phase when it happened; the day I heard my teacher tell me that I should stop writing because I had no talent, no creativity and absolutely not the mind to become a writer. That day, although I first followed her advice and for a long time after that, on that day I knew I did not belong to the crowd; I knew I would swim against the current all my life and be quite solitary to the external eye, but my head was full of my own world already.

Phyllis: I guess it was when I started defining “my boxes”. I started trying to live within my means at the age 11. I did not want to be dependent on anyone. I started making log cabins (just in case my parents disappeared). I tried to be aware of all the purchases made on my behalf and be as minimalist as possible. I often wore hand-me-downs from my sister who was much shorter than I, even though my parents could afford new clothes.

(For the group) the Third Question is:

“(We know that we all have the capabilities of all three personality types, but only one is predominant) if you could switch with one of the other two, which would it be?”

clark: I would go with becoming a roger. Mostly because, as a clark I know there is a place, way deep inside where I keep a reserve of…aggressiveness, directness, which ever of the words that describe the scottian characteristics and I know that, under duress I can get to those qualities and bring them to the surface…for a specific purpose, usually a situation of extreme threat or duress. I cannot do that with the characteristics of my rogerian aspects…and when I come close to doing that, the ‘after effects’…how it feels after a moment of rogerian behavior is decidedly unpleasant. So, to step into the world of the roger (that capacity I know that I have) and act and feel and live as a roger would be interesting and then I could not constantly question everything… them rogers is so damn certain… lol

Clairepeek: Well, to follow in your footsteps Clark, I guess I would then chose to become a scott because it is the personality out of the three that I cannot summon at will. I’d love to see what happens when I finally get to act with such confidence that I become at last the boss of my own company. It would be interesting to see how, without any hesitation, I introduce myself to others without feeling my blood rushing to my ears and feeling my entire body screaming it wants to be elsewhere… ^_^.

Downspring#1: I’m with Clairepeek on this one. I also would choose to become a scott. As a clarklike female, well as a female, it seems there is at the least, a fundamental ability (culturally stimulated) to be “social”. I have found it easier to develop my rogerian characteristic due in part to my having worked in retail environments during part of my professional career. Claire has hit the nail on the head. My scottian characteristics are such that I cannot easily “summon them at will.” It seems that only under situations of duress or if I am too tired to care (and therefore not overly self-conscious) am I able to express/summon my scottian characteristic(s). As a clark, I am not intimidated by the typical stuff – scary, screaming people, or traveling to new places…..but more like things such as being the focus of attention. Again, like Clairepeek talks about:) Hey! has anyone noticed that so far only we like people are participating in this thing? lol Yeah, well fuck them, right?!! (see, got my scott on)

Molly: At this moment in time, I am very content being a clark.
There is a line by Savatage that says, “The person I am are the parts that I play.” I think this pretty much sums up what it is to be a clark. We live in a world that is full of situations, and each one has different parameters… We simply find out what our role is and fill that part, without really acting.
In regards to homemaking and making/keeping order, I am working on developing my rogerian aspect, while keeping the attitudes out of my relationships… I don’t find the attitude appropriate for raising children, since it is too easy to take their behavior personally. When they misbehave, it becomes, “Haven’t I taught you better than that?!?” With an underlying attitude of, “How dare you embarrass me like this?”
Likewise, if my job is to meet people and make them feel welcome, I’m sure it is my scottian side that is on display. Assign me the job of hostesses and I will greet every person and make them feel welcome… I am always amazed at how many people think of me as a friend, or someone they can confide in, after doing a job like that.

Phyllis: I am happy with being me – a female roger.

Well this has been fun and enjoyable…

Until we figure out the how to display the names of the people who created this Post, we’ll just get all crayons and construction paper on it. So in alpha-botanical order:

Claire Perez Ekman DS#1 Molly Phyllis

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, three personality types, Understanding Human Behavior

Episode 11 Video Friday …of clarks and rogers, the Wakefield Doctrine it just plain makes sense!

March 23, 2012 By clarkscottroger

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

A rare and impromptu discussion with DS#1 and Molly and the Progenitor roger….

Part 2

…no, it’s not you! The conversation was careening all over the rhetorical landscape

Part 1 here!

This Weekend!! A Post with at least 3 different people offering their views and viewpoints on life, childhood and the Wakefield Doctrine you do not want to miss it!