Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Funny, the process becomes the end in itself.
It’s a matter of fact that. of the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, clarks are the creative ones. That being said, we have the ‘Everything Rule’ to remind us that, ‘everything happens to everyone, at one time or another’. So, when it comes to creativity as a quality (available) to people of the three worldviews, it’s not correct to say that scotts and rogers are not/cannot be creative, they can! It’s simply that how (a quality) such as ‘creativity’ manifests is where the difference lies. (And the cool thing is, when you consider the manner in which a thing/quality/characteristic exists for each, the character of that personal reality becomes all the more easily appreciated). Lets take creativity. (please!)
clarks will create (or perhaps it might be more accurate, if not more obscure to say), bring into existence that which has never existed before
rogers will create by taking that which exists (be they tiny tubes of paint, of pieces of wood or even notes on paper) and reconfigure, re-arrange into something unlike any previous arrangement of (tiny tubes of paint, of pieces of wood or even notes on paper)
scotts will take from themselves that which exists within everyone else and present it in a context that no one has, (or can recall), witnessing before
there! pretty simple, isn’t it?
clarks create, rogers innovate and scotts evoke
so the Post subtitle? why do I seem to cast creativity in the role of a temptation that might be better off fed? Because as clarks, we create because we’re Outsiders, we are able to create because we’re Outsiders and, yet, we cannot create within ourselfs the thing that might change our Outsider natures.
