Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 1, 2026 By

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

Hey being the First Day of Summer School here at the Doctrine, what say we start with a Q&A?

Here, from the early, no, really, early days of this blog* our FAQ page

I think sometimes I am (a scott) then other times I must be (a clark). Whats up with that?

You’re a clark.

Hey, wait you can’t be that sure on the basis of one question!

Yes I can. (I’m a clark)

The question you should be asking is, ‘why does it seem that sometimes we are one form, other times others’. And the answer is that we have the potential of all three, we just get in the habit of seeing the world one characteristic way, i.e. clark, scott or roger.

Is there any scientific basis for the Wakefield Doctrine?

No. (see the ‘About’ page.)

When I read this site, it seems like there is really only one person writing. Can that possibly be true? What happened to the collaborative thing.

Nothing.

I thought this was a FAQ pages, I don’t see all that many Questions.

…I’m waiting for a question… ‘what part of ‘Frequently asked questions’ are you brainiacs missing? There would be useful information if some of you scottian adhd cases or you middle-of-the-herd rogerian mouth-breathers would conquer your fear of anything that doesn’t already have a DYNAMO brand embossed label stuck to this blog letting you know that it was within your admittedly limited range of initiative and realise that you would not be struck down by Jethro were you to actually  reach out and turn on your computer and asked a question.

Will there ever be new FAQ questions?

Yes, yes there will.

I heard that you have been doing this for nearly a year, what have you learned about the Wakefield Doctrine that you did not know when you started?

Which part of your statement are you calling a question? Rather than wait for you to move your lips as your try to re-phrase the question, I will answer this way. The Wakefield Doctrine appears to have an appeal beyond my immediate circle of friends, in fact, it appears to have sufficient appeal to out-weigh my meager writing skills. By presenting the Doctrine in a blog, the virtue and value of this thing is put to the test. And it seems to be passing that test.
What a well-thought out question.

What?

Never mind, you would not get it. Other aspects that you would not get is that the Doctrine is proving itself to actually be an effective tool in aid of an effort to change life habits. (Given the unlikelihood of your comprehending this answer I will continue), and say that anyone reading this with a true desire to ‘change their life’* should read this blog and do whatever they must do to get actively involved in it. This includes, but is not limited to: writing Comments.

*Is it true that if I have to ask the question, I will perforce be unable to understand the question?

Yes.

oh…kay! This is probably where we should do a Person of Interest** timeline slider thing from 2009 to 2026. But let’s just get us… well, first off, what’ with the ‘tude? ;p

As both Reelika Pedak and Frank Hubeny alluded to in this week’s TToT conversations, the first/earliest posts one writes can be the most difficult. Given that the tone of the FAQ was a bit aggressive if not a touch strident, let’s chalk it up to Opening Night(ish) jitters and let it go at that.

No, not necessary to Update/Refresh or otherwise edit this Page. The Wakefield Doctrine is, as are many things of the mind, kinda alive. We can say without fear of contradiction that the early years were conflict free for us. In point of fact, despite being a clark, the mantra of ‘if that last post sucked, then write another and bury it’. See? No problem.’ One of the undeniable examples of the efficacy of this here personality system here lies with its effect on us. Hard to convey, but compared to the clark we were before committing to this medium, theys surely something going on.

Rambling now.

There is much to the early days of this blog that still strikes us as remarkable. Not so much the content, rather the attitude we had towards going public and, through each post (now in the mid-3k in numbers) reaching out to the virtual world to say:

“Hey! Wanna hear about a really cool and useful perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up?”

 

* hokey smoke! this was written July 21, 20….09!! as in, ‘Well, it’s been a month, where’s the Nobel Committee?!?”

** most excellent of ‘TV series’

hey, chance to head off a mind worm of a song from that Little ‘Ol Band From Texas

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

Frydae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 29, 2026 By

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

Well, that was fun! …the Doctrine posts about the Herd Member, aka rogers.

So, here’s the thing:

Of the three predominant worldviews none are bad or better, good or grating, superior or substandard.

Regular Readers will take the next, painfully obvious statement with a grain fault.*

The three comprise an ideal.

proof?

What the hell are you talking about?!? Proof?? fuck you. All yer doin’ is demonstrating a lack of secondary clarklike aspect, which as everyone knows, is the ‘what not?’ gene found in clarks (and suppressed in scotts and rogers)… leave now. Not because you’re scoring points or holding up an alternative persopective in an unflattering light. …you’re wasting the time of everyone who is here because:

  • this is a harmless but oddly challenging view of the world
  • the notion of an alternative perspective is nothing if not a good thing
  • it’s fun to play with ideas, the more unlikely, the better
  • this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers has an element of insight among all the incidental congruencies and taking them in the spirit they’re offered can provide a better sense of how the other person is experiencing the world. which is, for some of us, fricken’ always a good thing

where were we?

oh yeah the clark (Outsider), scott (Predator) roger (Herd Member) which totally rules!!? lol

what we wrote in the early days (here’s the link to that page)

that plus! if we didn’t have rogers you would not want to have to fly from Newark to Biloxi in a plane designed and built by a scott!

  • jet airliners designed by scotts:  very fast with at least 5 or 6 engines (not necessarily required to get off the ground, but make them louder than frickin anything)
  • a part of the cabin has a basketball net/hockey/or batters box
  • the stewards would have to wear bathing suits… male or female  and they would carry those little air horn things (can of compressed air) to warn the unruly passengers or just in case they get bored
  • the flight deck would have windows that open, so the pilot could yell at passing jets

0r a clark:

  • instead of normal seats, there would be couches with pillows and quilts (that would have a disturbing tendency to slide around when the plane has to bank for final approach)

  • the stewardesses would be scotts and stewards would be rogers

  • there would be a bathroom-to-passenger ratio of nothing less than 1:2

 

*damn! we just caught a rogerian expression in the wild! For a more comprehensive list of these totally delightful aspects of the rogerian personal reality, go here and scroll down to the next-to-last block-quote for a fun list.

 

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

Sunday/Sunday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 2, 2025 By

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

Seeing a lot of New Readers out there.

As soon as we present a description of the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, a certain percentage of you New Readers here are gonna be all, ‘Which of those am I? Please, I wanna be a scott they got the moves, they think of fear as a condiment* and a bunch of you, who have delayed moving on to we-are-the-world.com  be all ‘History, what’s not to like?!’

Quick and (damn! I knew it) test/filter:

When you woke up this morning and the day’s demands and promises, threats and enticements began their endless clamoring, did you think of it as ‘dealing with the world out there?’

…Hello! clark. Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine. We’d say, make yourself at home but, a) yeah, sure and 2) yes but no!…mostly clarks here.

Everyone else? You still reading? Then you’re a scott or** you’re a roger and you have (Advanced Concept, don’t worry about it right now), a significant secondary clarklike aspect. No, no! That’s a good thing.

Here are the three predominant worldviews (aka personality types) of the Wakefield Doctrine:

  1. clarks (the Outsider) you’re sure there’s nothing, like, permanently wrong with you. But everyone else seem to know each other on some level or something. You suspect you just zoned out one day when the Human Being Orientation was held. Fortunately, you love learning new things and are sure you’ll discover it sooner or later, but know to totally keep this to yourself
  2. scotts (the Predator) you’re not sure of what you’re supposed to know and you don’t care. The world is all around you now and there’s so much to do… hunt, chase and capture, pretty much says it all. That and when face to face with another Predator fight like hell, get along fine once ranking is established
  3. rogers (the Herd Member) you’re so sure of everything that it’s almost boring. The world is quantifiable, the Rules are…maybe not simple, but straight-forward understandable. And you have a place in it all! Learn every Rule and make sure those around you know them as well.

ohkay!

That’s a good start.

New Raders remaining? We like to provide tuneage (all rights are to those who own them…and thanks!)

 

*true description from a predominant scott.

** sorry, only one predominant worldview to a person. (Advanced Doctrine: It’s all about how you relate yourself to the world around you and the people who make it)

 

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 10, 2025 By

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

RePrint to give the Monday-fingers an easy warm-up stretch?

the funny thing, clarks who encounter the Wakefield Doctrine, if not immediately ‘recognizing’ another Outsider’s effort to organize an understanding of the world ‘out there’, will be comfortable with the concepts underlying our little personality theory.

…nope, nothin’ yet?

Well, sure we could do a few of the more fun, provocative pronouncements from the early days.

‘the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them’

fine.

we’ll deal with that. So, what about this statement puzzles you, scott? roger?*

”if you’ve come back here more than twice then you’re a clark or you’re a scott with a significant secondary clarklike aspect, (and a friend who actually is a clark) and thought, seeing how you’re laid up for a while, (no, nothing too serious, just restricting your free-range energy temporarily) or, you’re a roger with a secondary clarklike aspect and are feeling like everyone has stated to take you for granted and if there’s one thing a roger will not countenance it is not being appreciated, valued or affirmed to being one who presents the way to live that is correct and worthwhile.

ya know?

clarks (out there)? do you concur?

… quick Doctrine predominant worldview description check: ‘in the morning, before the day has flipped all the switches, do you tend to think in terms of dealing with ‘the world out there?’

*

St Valentine was he a roger or was he a clark, the Wakefield Doctrine deals with the important questions of the day

February 14, 2012

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )( psst!  yeah, you!  anyone looking?  I’m supposed to be working on the Wakefield Doctrine book… I promised that I would stop with the nearly every day Posts so that I could apply what little energy I have to putting content down on paper. Long story, that’s not important now… what is important is today is Valentine’s Day!  And there is not a single person out there who writes a blog that can resist the obvious appeal of such a… a contrived, culturally supported, private interest initiated “holiday” as Valentine’s Day.  So a quick, totally self-indulgent Post and then back to work… if Ms. AKH or Molly asks… tell them you haven’t seen me….)

 

St Valentines is the worst, most contrived and cynical, gyno-centric guy-bait(ing), toy-with-the-emotions-of-innocent-bystanders, holiday on the whole damn calendar.  Of course we are all familiar with the origin of the holiday and the internet is positively turgid with countless blogs, and stories and articles that tell us all about Hallmark and the candy industry and the rest of the sordid tale of this day in February. I will not try to compete with these other more skilled and capable Commentators ( and -torinis), as I do not have the time or the ‘writing chops’ to do such a ripe topic justice. Instead, let me tell you about my most lasting memory of Valentines Day.

Third grade, parochial school (St. Imelda*) and a classroom of 25 students. The boys were required to wear blue shirts and blue ties with OLM printed on the front, fortunately ‘clip-on ties’ had been invented by this time, so easy-peasy; the girls wore the catholic school uniform, i.e. plaid skirts white shirt, socks.  damn, little did I realize at that pre-pubescent time of my life how potent that little Roman Catholic Church fashion dictates would become for me and countless other men at a later stage of life.  (In fact, I am feeling the tug on the cynical side of my writing-self, there is something about the whole, church-sexual-abuse-dress-the-children in outfits destined to become so hawt… lol sorry, again I lack the time or the writing skill to do justice to a topic like this… back to the story.)
So with much fanfare, Valentine’s Day arrives and we  9  year old boys and girls are told that in the afternoon, before the end of the school day, we would have time to deliver our Valentine cards to each other. ( The day before we spent ‘Art Period’ making little baskets out of construction paper and taping them to the front of our desks. These would serve as ‘mailboxes’ for the cards we would receive the next day).
The thing was, the horrible twist to this introduction to the world of love, relationships and rejection was that, the time when class stopped and we were allowed to get up and deliver our little cards was not the end of the school day! It was right after lunch… and it lasted 15 or 20 minutes…as in ‘ now return to your desks and we will continue with the afternoon’ classes’. To sit for 90 minutes staring at the contents of the container on the front of my desk… I will leave it to the Reader to decide the emotional landscape of that afternoon on a February 14th.

Anyone out there not comfortable with finishing the story, or satisfied with their conclusion of this little tale, write us a Comment! Regular Readers know that the rogers gave the biggest cards, the scotts received the most cards and the clarks delivered the most cards….secretly without the recipient ever knowing who the really fun card came from…

Now I better get back to work, before I get in trouble.

 

*

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

QuintPrint -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 14, 2024 By

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

Quick post. Saint V theme. Semi-reflective of the effect of the Wakefield Doctrine on it’s curator.

First the QuintPrint1

“No, it’s ok. I’m a saint.”

 

St Valentines is the worst, most contrived and cynical, gyno-centric guy-bait(ing), toy-with-the-emotions-of-innocent-bystanders, holiday on the whole damn calendar.  Of course we are all familiar with the origin of the holiday and the internet is positively turgid with countless blogs, and stories and articles that tell us all about Hallmark and the candy industry and the rest of the sordid tale of this day in February. I will not try to compete with these other more skilled and capable Commentators ( and -torinis), as I do not have the time or the ‘writing chops’ to do such a ripe topic justice. Instead, let me tell you about my most lasting memory of Valentines Day.

Third grade, parochial school (St. Imelda*) and a classroom of 25 students. The boys were required to wear blue shirts and blue ties with OLM printed on the front, fortunately ‘clip-on ties’ had been invented by this time, so easy-peasy; the girls wore the catholic school uniform, i.e. plaid skirts white shirt, socks.  damn, little did I realize at that pre-pubescent time of my life how potent that little Roman Catholic Church fashion dictates would become for me and countless other men at a later stage of life.  (In fact, I am feeling the tug on the cynical side of my writing-self, there is something about the whole, church-sexual-abuse-dress-the-children in outfits destined to become so hawt… lol sorry, again I lack the time or the writing skill to do justice to a topic like this… back to the story.)
So with much fanfare, Valentine’s Day arrives and we  9  year old boys and girls are told that in the afternoon, before the end of the school day, we would have time to deliver our Valentine cards to each other. ( The day before we spent ‘Art Period’ making little baskets out of construction paper and taping them to the front of our desks. These would serve as ‘mailboxes’ for the cards we would receive the next day).
The thing was, the horrible twist to this introduction to the world of love, relationships and rejection was that, the time when class stopped and we were allowed to get up and deliver our little cards was not the end of the school day! It was right after lunch… and it lasted 15 or 20 minutes…as in ‘ now return to your desks and we will continue with the afternoon’ classes’. To sit for 90 minutes staring at the contents of the container on the front of my desk… I will leave it to the Reader to decide the emotional landscape of that afternoon on a February 14th.

Anyone out there not comfortable with finishing the story, or satisfied with their conclusion of this little tale, write us a Comment! Regular Readers know that the rogers gave the biggest cards, the scotts received the most cards and the clarks delivered the most cards….secretly without the recipient ever knowing who the really fun card came from…

Now I better get back to work, before I get in trouble.

Now the refraction*

Let’s make this quick. (Yeah, like that’s ever been a problem**)

How efficacious is this here self-improvement tool, here? We wrote this, way back, in, like 2012. Told a story on our selfs. Am a clark. ok, with a significant secondary scottian aspect. Even still, given how the existential fear (and, we would maintain, the single most powerful ratio-emotional drive) is scrutiny. We read this post, even today and can’t help but say, ‘Damn!’

ok that’s all you get

[New Reader’s? while we all have but one predominant worldview, we have the potential of (a significant) secondary and tertiary aspects. They serve as … as the italics of life. Doctrinistically-speaking of course.]

 

1) next to Thanksgiving, this has gots to be the most reprinted of posts

* ha ha a little joke2

2) don’t tell anyone, but it remains a constant source of frustration that my current writing style is so limited

** ba rum bump!

 

 

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