Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 30 Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 30

-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘the price of self-improvement is always almost more than we would pay’

May 25, 2015 By

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

20150525_110009_resized

I went to check the progress of renovation work being done to one of my properties today. I stop by at least once a week and, each time see a different set of contractors working on the house, this being a full roof to basement re-do. Today the dry wall/plaster crew was there. I saw the dog, (in the photo above), as I parked my car. Smiling, I got out of my car and waited for him to be a dog and bark and come over to me and make sure I belonged and/or had any right to come on his property.
I talked to him, (no matter what the breed, how big and ferocious they might be), I always start my conversations with, “Puppy dog! what a good-looking doggie you are!”  [funny, isn’t it? a person’s sense of self-consciousness, when it comes to behavior that might be regarded as silly or inappropriate, is totally tied to how much that person enjoys whatever the reason is…for…acting silly. It didn’t  matter if anyone was watching this real estate broker get out of his car and ignoring everything, have an out loud conversation with the approaching dog].
In any event, we met and he was a friendly dog. I started walking towards the house, (“come on! lets go see the house!”). He was a German Shepherd, probably 6 or 7 years of age, and I immediately noticed the slant of his hindquarters. (It’s my opinion that the most monstrous form of animal abuse I can think of is the breeding of dogs to match some person or breeder organization or show dog judges. The words of this conformance standards can be seen in some German Shepherds. My guard dog today being one them.)

My new friend and I walked towards the front door. As we stepped up onto the raised brick walk leading to the front door, he fell. He half-fell. His rear legs simply did not negotiate the step-up on to the walk.

I turned and looked at him. He looked at me with an expression that… represents what makes dogs so amazing. It was a look that said, ‘hey, sorry. legs gave out. Go on without me, I’ll be alright…just have to get back up.’

I felt sorrow for him. I didn’t ‘feel sorry for him‘, I felt sorrow.

What an awful feeling. My stomach fell, trying to pull my eyes into my throat.

I waited. He got up, without undue distress, clearly he was used to this happening. Once he was back on all fours, I actually said, in all sincerity and seriousness, “hey you should go back to your post, I’ll just go in myself’…. (yes, I said this out loud ), and he did just that.

What does this have to do with self-improvement and the Wakefield Doctrine?

You will read in these pages the statement, ‘…the Wakefield Doctrine is a tool to help you better understand the people in your life‘. This is a true statement. It is also a tool to better understand yourself. Which, when you think about it, can be a much more difficult task than:

  • understanding why your husband insists on using a sharpie to make outlines of the tools that he hangs in the shed or
  • your daughter who totally thinks that her expression of her individuality (purple hair, nose rings and combat boots) should not go against her in the upcoming job interview.

Using the Wakefield Doctrine allows me a slightly different perspective on myself. Which, given that I am a clark, is at once more difficult and more valuable. We all, (clarks, scotts and rogers), have blind spots.* And, if you’re after improving on the way you relate yourself to the world around you, then you had better find a way to see into that area. There might be treasures there.

The biggest blind spot for those of us who grew up and live in the personal reality of the Outsider, is emotion. Not that we don’t have or feel emotion. It’s just that we’re not always on the best of terms. (New Readers? If you read and learn the worldviews as well as some, people like zoe and Kristi and Val…. then, had you heard a person utter that last sentence, (“It’s just that we’re not always on the best of terms’), you would be totally thinking, ‘probable clark‘.  lol

But I felt the raw emotion today. Just for a second. And I knew that it, (the emotion), was, as Castaneda might have said, ‘a thing of power’. It was an indication that there are parts of me that I do not know very well and that, if I am to self-improve myself, I will need to come to know better.

….but, it was so sad.

But hey, no one said it would be easy. In fact, most people will say, ‘if you want to change for the better, there is a price to pay and it’s always going to be almost more than you’re willing to pay.’

 

 

* I will not go into how insufficient the term ‘blindspot’ is in this context. It is. Maybe the next Post.

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘it’s all in the perspective… by chance or by design!’

May 23, 2015 By

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

(does anyone else see the ‘Tim Burton-ish’ flower-man trying to sneak up on Una, or is it just me?)

Item Number 1: Una and non-snow covered ground

Metm Number 2: Comment from Vanessa… it was, (of a), content and, (a), timing that I am really appreciable for*  (The Comment: “I will be sure to keep this reference guide handy to assist with translating future posts. I think I might be a clark – and I’m not fond of many of those saying although “drill down” had it’s place until it became popular management buzz speak.”)  I felt the feeling that has (always) served as a reminder of the reason for writing this here blog here.

Item Number 3: The TToT co-hostinae and them… I continue to feel grateful for being included in that very exceptional group of bloggerini

Item Rebmun 4: I will cite, (as we all do, from time to time), the current technology that makes all this not only possible, but enjoyable (through the relative ease of use of the computers and internets and such.

Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules): Where to start? The Book is growing weekly by virtue of the contributions of clever (and desperate) bloggers who, like a modern day Indiana Jane(s), sees the idol, knows there is a trap, senses time running out and…cites Chapter, Section and (at times) verse. one of the reason that this is the best of all blohops.

SGV: (Seven Guard Virgins) the Enforcer(s) and Temptrae charged with adjudicating challenges and solicitations from writers since…well, since this blog hop started! (New Readers? zoe/ivy is the Mistress of Dance and Hope, and Intermediary par exemplar

7: soo you didn’t get what I was referring to in the photo caption at the top of this Post?

see?!! see?!! "Una!! Look out behind you!!"

see?!! see?!! “Una!! Look out behind you!!”

 

8) grateful for not being so caught up in work that I’m not able to find the time to spend getting this photo ‘to work’.

9) yeah, more photos from the road won’t be a bad thing  ( oh yeah,  thank you to Kristi for the Drexel photo that’s on this post…on the landing page at the Doctrine, coming here by the link means you wouldn’t see it. excellent dog.)

10) 1.3 baby 1.3!

Ten Things of Thankful

 

 Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group

* yes, yes that is a rogerian expression (-ette)


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

Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘lets begin again at the beginning….one more time’

May 22, 2015 By

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

Bono-three-way

It is understood that this blog is intended to present, explain, convince and otherwise allow those who might stumble across it, (on their way to someplace else in the blogosphere), and that, among (this group), there is a certain percentage who not only might benefit from the use and application of the Wakefield Doctrine, but possess the requisite  personal qualities (or qualities of personality, one might say), to stop, read, understand, apply and enjoy… this here personality theory, here.

(…for our scottian Readers): HEY!! lots of laughs and fun and interesting stuff here. Come on!! What’cha got to lose?!

(…yeah, no! I know)(on the outside chance that Mr…er  Bono* happens across today’s post and wonders what about his image did this writer find so fascinating as to cause  us to use it, surely it was the sincere and sensitive expression on his face as he patiently waits for the ‘other two’ people to stop chattering so that he might further help them to find the correct way to proceed):  What a lot of the new Readers have said and, are spreading the word is about how effective and useful the insights into the lives of the people that surround them, this Wakefield Doctrine has proven to be, even more than what they originally felt it offered.

You know, in the early days of this blog, I was convinced that what I needed to do was develop my writing skills to the point that I could write in the scottian and rogerian language(s). By doing so, I believed, I would reach all Readers. We all know that that was not a correct assumption. What is clear now is that the Readers will get from (this blog) everything that has a value to them personally. (Which is, in the passive, indirect language of clarks, to say, if they ‘get it’ and enjoy it, they’ll stay. If they don’t, they won’t). So, like Ellen, in the photo above… she chooses to believe that there is something in what Mr Bono is, no doubt, going on at interminable length about, worth listening to, and,  knows that it would be impolite to tell him to just stop talking…. (if that were not enough to aim a ‘pretending-to-be-interested-and-listening-face’ at the guy, she would not be 100% certain that Portia is hearing the same thing, the same way that she is, and would not want to deprive her partner of any (possible) enjoyment.)

ya know?

P.S.  ‘writer’s block’. the subject of so many un-published posts. I’ve mentioned my own theory about this horrible affliction, haven’t I?  It isn’t that we don’t have ideas and such about what to write, it’s simply a matter of our own internal critic, (and we all have one of those!), somehow getting too prominent a place in our heads. Just thought I would share that.

P.P.S. … er, nope, thought I had some clever final punchline. I guess I was wrong.1

1) no, wait! All this talk about Readers, (new and otherwise), lets be sure everyone has a ‘take-away’2

the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is a perspective on life and human behavior. Predicated on the notion that we, all of us, experience life from one of three characteristic viewpoints:

  1. as clarks. We grow up and develop as Outsiders, we develop strategies and coping mechanisms that allow us to remain in the background as we try to discover the information that we lack, the knowledge that everyone else seems to share in common
  2. scotts… the life of the Predator. everyday is the only day that (really) matters. Life is meant to be lived, and the one rule is: stay alert! the day is filled with opportunity and threats, while one is preferable to the other, neither is Bad or Worthless… mercurial in temperament (to hold grudges requires too much introspection), decisions are made on the fly… natural leaders (for better or worse)
  3. Member of the Herd. that phrase says it all! to ‘be a part of’ assures that the world is (potentially) knowable, always quantifiable and you never are alone. The only responsibility a roger would admit to is that they must work harder than anyone to learn, (and then), be an example of ‘the Right Way’ to live

That, for today, is the simplest description of the Wakefield Doctrine. The only thing (it) asks of us, in return for the fun and such, is that we try to ‘see the world as the other person is experiencing it‘.  (they’re out there!  you’ll see the scotts first, followed by the rogers… then the clarks.) (no! really!)

 

2) someone out there, not a clark, please tell me that you don’t find these modern sayings all kinds of annoying… ‘take away‘ ‘reach out to‘…. ‘drill down‘…. all those half-good, middle-management facilitating expressions… there! see? I said ‘facilitating’! sorry guys

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- (‘…of faith and self-improvement’)

May 8, 2015 By

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

Casablanca3

It is surely no secret that the (true) ambition of the ‘telling of the Wakefield Doctrine’ is for other clarks in the world to find it and benefit from applying it’s principles to their own lives. (However), much of the ‘proof’ of the efficacy and value of the Wakefield Doctrine is presented obscurely within these pages, hidden in parentheses, disguised in proto-clever prose and smart-ass videos. That the Reader is required to find his/her own evidence for using the Doctrine in their own life is obvious, if not intentional. Readers who are:

  • clarks (those people who grew up as ‘Outsiders’, seeing the world as a place that is apart (from themselves), their (life)time invested in the effort to learn the secret of ‘belonging’;
  • scotts (the Predators, aggravated often by the un-necessarily complex rules, restrictions placed on the individual in society’s endless seeking of Conformity, a world composed mostly of people who value peace over danger, cooperation over competition, these very same people nevertheless encourages them to contribute their spontaneous enthusiasm for life, all the while, reining them in…just when it gets exciting or
  • rogers (the Herd Members aka the person who from the earliest stage of their life, knows that the world is quantifiable and would be quite satisfied being left alone (in the company of their Herd), the Herd that is both literal, figurative and totally metaphorical to tend to their business of executing the steps of Life in a perfect a manner as they might manage.

That these Readers will identify with the stories is not in question, it’s whether I can develop the skills to present the stories, situations, allegories and ‘hey! you-want-to-hear-what-happened-to-me-today?’ in a simple, engaging and informative writing, is.

Allow me to offer an interesting example of the nature of a clark’s worldview and how, while still maintaining that this Wakefield Doctrine can serve as a useful tool for self-     development, I continually appreciate how difficult change can be, at least, enduring change:

[please indulge me as I hijack my own Post.]

…so, the thing of it is, the story that I’d intended to tell at the start of this Post yesterday, was a simple cautionary tale about how when we set out to gain or acquire or make some sort of change in our lives, we don’t always fully accept the results, even when our efforts are successful.  We, (some of us, at least I did and still do), continue to act as we’ve always acted, ironically we act as if we had never tried (to change or develop or win a coveted office). I’m tempted to address this specifically to our clarklike Readers, knowing quite well that, though scotts and rogers might not experience what I’m describing, we all possess the potential of ‘the other two worldviews’. Hell! Let me retract that last part of that last sentence, I say that everyone who has read this blog more than 3.5 times has a significant secondary clarklike aspect. So, this story should resonate with any Reader. That being said, the need, the drive, the desire to self-improve oneself, is a peculiarly significant aspect of the clarklike worldview. This is not to say that scotts and rogers don’t have a drive for self-development. The distinction is more about the ‘why’ of self-improvement.  scotts and rogers tend to view self-improvement as adding to what they are, while clarks look at self-developement as a way of changing what they are.

 

note: ‘faith’ is in lower case, simply to imply that quality found in some people who go through life knowing/acting as if/feeling as appropriate to something that is not objectively verifiable. Most often associated with religion, I maintain that it, faith can (and does) exist independent of dogma, belief, or other rational framework. When it exists (in a person), it stands out. There is no mistaking faith (or Faith) when a person has it.  At least to those who are willing to (allow themselves to) see it. That would be pretty much everyone who persists in coming back here… the ability, the self-confidence to be open to ways of being, reality that is not the same as our own.

ya know?

 

 

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- “..Ood-gay ob-jay on the allenge-chay” (Dyanne) and other valuable insights

May 5, 2015 By

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

images-17

No, I’m not only being serious, (with today’s subtitle), I am sincerely appreciative of the insights that are to be found in the Comments on yesterday’s Post. Before I tell you why I can make that statement, let me cite two other Comments:

Oh, yes, that phrase fits very well! :-) Knowing that everyone was laughing at me (or at least at my mistake–no one except John actually knew I was the author of the title), really the best choice was to laugh, too. That way they were laughing WITH me, not at me. (Kristi)

(and)

Here’s the sad part. As clarks, we set such high standards/expectations of ourselves we often lose sight that others most likely do not have those same expectations (of us). Therefore we’re not really in danger of “failing”. Only in danger of “failing” ourselves. (Denise)

(New Readers? the above Comments were written by people representing the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine. As such, you can, (after learning the characteristics of the three worldviews), obtain a glimpse of three different worlds! No! really, we are quite serious. Read on.)

If there is one, simple-to-a-fault, statement about the Wakefield Doctrine, ( as a roger might express it: the condensation of the Doctrine), it is this:

clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel

Why these Comments? What insight into the three worldviews do they offer?

  • (we’re being a little unfair to Dyanne),  in using only one of her Comments.  That being said, we know that she would not complain about how we’re not using her Comments in the ‘correct context’, not framing them to allow Readers to appreciate the full and comprehensive meaning that she intended…  (if you turn your good ear to face the middle of the country and ask every in the room to please stop talking, just for a second, you might hear a sound, off in the distance,  “Hey!! I said good job in pig latin ’cause your Post was about languages! That’s it! Lighten up! Move on! Lifes too good to sit and ponder implications!“*) scotts tend to speak with ‘special characters’…a lot! (lol)
  • Kristi illustrates the identification with the Herd… as a roger, she is not immune to feeling uncomfortable or ill-at-ease, however she lives in a world that she knows that she is ‘a part of’… (you know that meme out there, seen on many a spare tire cover on the back of jeeps and SUVs. “Life is Good’? Kristi, if she did not own one herself, would smile when a car with that saying on the back passed her on the highway.) Heck! you really want to know how different a roger is from a clark?! do you?  well, if that car (maybe a jeep cherokee with the spare tire on the back door with ‘Life is Good’ on it, or even just a bumper sticker), cut her off on the highway because she was driving too slowly,  she, (Kristi not Denise or Dyanne) would smile. She would not be happy at such driving, she would not be approving of such rudeness, but she would not be swearing and thinking “what a jerk!”  Well, maybe a little… lol But what would happen is that she would know, (or one might insist on saying, ‘choose to believe’), that this other person might be in a situation that made the aggressive driving unavoidable.  This is not to say that Kristi, (or rogers in general), are very forgiving people (anything but!)… but she would tend to identify with that other person, and understand, even while being annoyed at such dangerous driving. (that particular inference, i.e. the driving being a threat to other drivers is a huge insight into how the rogerian worldview is experienced).
  • Denise (who is a clark) writes and writes, offering not one solitary answer (and therefore only a single, valuable insight, i.e. high risk bet), she provides us with everything she has, offering all she knows (in the context of her Comment) on the subject, assuming that we might want to play with the parts and possibly come to our own, different conclusions. …all for free. No demands that it be acknowledged, satisfied that she was considered a significant participant in the conversation.  We all know how much most people value the free stuff, right?

 

 

* this, to use an old cultural reference, is like me saying, “I will now do an impersonation of Ed Sullivan.  “Its been a really good shew…really good shew…”**

** famous TV guy in the early 60s. This is, of course, meant to imply a badly done impersonation… that I might have simply said, ‘this is a badly done impersonation’ never even occurred to me…. no, really, did you not read the bullet point about Denise’s Comment?!

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