Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 5 Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 5

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 10, 2018 By

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

‘Phyllis and Una and Home’

This week’s TToT is gonna be on the photo-centric side. Josie Two-Shoes opens the doors to this bloghop and invites one and all to share the things that inspire the state/emotion/experience of gratitude that we might care to share.

(We interrupt this intro narrative to exert editorial authority and usurp an Item, for this purpose referred to as, ‘Man! Look at what wikipedia says about the editorial we!” Otherwise it will be considered Item 7)

A nosism the use of ‘we’ to refer to oneself

Main article: Royal we
A common example is the royal we (Pluralis Majestatis), which is a nosism employed by a person of high office, such as a monarch, earl, or pope.

The editorial we is a similar phenomena

The editorial we is a similar phenomenon, in which editorial columnists in newspapers and similar commentators in other media refer to themselves as wewhen giving their opinions. Here, the writer has once more cast himself or herself in the role of spokesman: either for the media institution who employs him, or more generally on behalf of the party or body of citizens who agree with the commentary.

Similar to the editorial we is the practice common in scientific literature of referring to a generic third person by we (instead of the more common one or the informal you):

  • By adding three and five, we obtain eight.
  • We are therefore led also to a definition of “time” in physics. — Albert Einstein

“We” in this sense often refers to “the reader and the author”, since the author often assumes that the reader knows certain principles or previous theorems for the sake of brevity (or, if not, the reader is prompted to look them up), for example, so that the author does not need to explicitly write out every step of a mathematical proof.

1, 2, 3:

 

4, 5, 6:

Gratitude for the others in the interworld, both as individuals and groups: You should visit Finish the Sentence Friday, they’ve got the most basic of all prompts this week. We’re in the very beginning of Open Enrollment at the Gravity Challenge… come over, sign up and lose!* It’s no secret that we talk about the nature of reality and such, a fair amount in the Doctrine. Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia is the person to go to when you, ‘want to see it in stores’1. Stop over to Intuitive and Spiritual and tell her the Doctrine sent ya. And, finally if you gots a hankering to arrange words in new and surprising sequences, head for the Six Sentence Story, Denise and them will total blow yer mind.**

7, 8, 9:

Sorry, only 8 and 9 left (see above)

‘The Wakefield Doctrine’ spanning the globe.
Friend of the Doctrine, Alex somewhere in Greece invoking the Rite of Hat.

 

THIS SPACE AVAILABLE (If any Reader wants to participate, however are not certain, in light of this Post, they are yet comfortable contributing to such a…. literary mélange as is this here bloghop here, feel free to send in your Grat Items and we’ll be happy to post them in this space.

10: Secret Rule 1.3

 

 


*  Gravity Challenge joke. Despite what a cursory inspection might lead you to believe, the emphasis in the Challenge in not losing weight; it’s practicing the art of altering one’s reality. (No! Really, ask anyone!) We participate by sending in photos of the readout of our scales each morning (‘cept Sunday). Kristi’s Rule is the best illustration of this principle, i.e. the photo (that is a requirement) need show only that portion of the number that you would post. It’s about change, not status. Ya know?

1) To ‘see it in stores’ is an old colloquial expression for, ‘ok, I get the concept, and sure, the Wakefield Doctrine offers a fun, useful and productive perspective on the world around me, but sometimes I’d like to gain reference points that, while helping me learn to live better in the here and now, has less of the ‘raised eyebrow factor’. Talking about mindfulness and centering oneself in the here and now does not make people look at you funny. Exclaiming, “Wow! She is such a scott!” or “Man, rogers sho do keep us on our toes, emotional-combatively-speaking”, tends to inspire the look.”

** it’s a writing challenge, one prompt word, six sentences, fun.

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…of tree stumps and self-improvement, instability is the key’.

May 5, 2018 By

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

‘A change both for the former tree and the earth that gave it meaning. One moves on, the other remains, subtly changed forever.’

Lets go for brevity

1) the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for self-improving oneself. If for no other reason it is predicated on the notion that we, all of us, live in a reality that is personal. (Nothing weird or spacey, just personal… as in: my perspective does not create the entire world (the world in common, the world ‘out there’) it does, however, impart values, emphasis and, like the blue-and-red cardboard 3D glasses that we used to get back in the day, to see Thirteen Ghosts, (the original, not the recent version with Tony Shalhoub and the always excellent Matthew Lillard), you put them on and your see the ghosts. Of course the ghosts are there all along, the glasses allow you to see them. Perspective is a lot like cardboard 3D glasses. (cont’d Item 3).

2) Josie Two Shoes. Proprietoress of this here bloghop here. The doors are always open, the lights are on ever weekend, without fail. Thanks, J

3) So, you know how we suggest the best way to determine your own predominant worldview? What?! You don’t?! Welll You learn the descriptions of the three worldviews, the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) and the Herd Member(rogers) well enough to allow viewing the world through the perspective of each of the three. The view that is least blurry is your predominant worldview. The cool thing is, you have, with the aid of the Wakefield Doctrine, access to two additional pair of cardboard 3D glasses. Get them and you can see the world as ‘the other two’* experience. The amazing thing is that you will find you are able to cope with the worlds of the other two. Maybe not smoothly or automatically at first, but with practice? Definitely. I’ll refer you to one Lizzi Lewis and Cynthia Calhoun. They’ve experienced this. Of course, both are exceptional woman-people, so maybe they’re not the most impartial. But it’s true.

4) Una because she reminds me that today is the only real day there is.

Una surveys the surrounding woods. The broad expanse of flat, green(ish) lawn remains peaceful and un-trodden, little suspecting the presence of the balls, one blue and fiercely dense, the other large and disposed to identifying with the flat earth.
They both bide their time accepting the fact full self-actualization lies with the vigilant dog, who in turn delays her own enjoyment in deference to duty.

5) Phyllis  ya know?

6) The Six Sentence Story is a bloghop that we recommend. It’s a fun way to sharpen your wordage skills. No, seriously, not to make it sound like work or some kind of writing class or something. Well, kinda is, but the big difference is it’s a comfortable, totally supportive environment. I’m like almost always reading a Six by say, Pat or Val or Paul and sit back and think, ‘How did they manage to do that?!’ And then you try to imitate it for your own Six and ain’t nobody be in your face with ‘Copycat! Go get yer own words!’ lol Nope, not even once.

7) The Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules) (inquire within) At least on Item is brevitic.

8) THIS SPACE AVAILABLE (Any new Reader or random visitor, like what you see? Want to participate? Have only one of two Grat Items? Fret no more! Send them in as a Comment and they’ll totally be placed here with full attribution.)

9) Sunday Supplement: ‘Instability and the Beast’

“The Beast begins to make his bid for freedom…”

“Employing a very risky vaulting maneuver, the Beast attains the edge of freedom…”

 

“A sleeping captor is no captor at all…”

“Embracing the power of instability, the Beast heads to the car in the enclosure. Every bit a God to the formerly earth-bound Beast, the wheeled vehicle awaits in the canvas cathedral.”

 

“To walk or to drive, that is the question. The top of the earth is both freedom and restriction to the Beast.””

10) SR 1.3

music goes here:

* example: I’m a clark. ‘the other two’ are scott and roger


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

Phinish the Photo Pfriday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 26, 2018 By

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

Today we join Kristi and Kenya at the newly revamped Finish the Sentence Friday bloghop. The primary change was to provide a different ‘theme’ or prompt, each week. There’s a chart out there that Kristi put on the group’s page on ‘the Facebook’. It tells one what needs to be done, wordistically-speaking.

So this week it’s… (hold on, let me do a copy paste)

Finish the Sentence Friday is a link-up where writers and bloggers come together to share their themselves with a particular prompt (different formats each week of the month). If you’d like to participate, join our Facebook group. Link up your prompts below! Please no “link dumping.” If you include a link, comment on other posts.

 

Photo Share Friday – share a photo and share the story behind it.

So.

The story behind the photo.

This photo is, in a very real, yet quite imaginary sense, my very own: Wardrobe (CS Lewis), Tornado (L Frank Baum) Rabbit Hole (Lewis Carroll). The people in the photo are the namesakes of the central idea that brought me to the virtual world: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

The Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective on the world and the people around us. It is easy to learn, fun to use and available only to those with the kind of curiosity that welcomes new ideas and the intellect to permit major league suspension of disbelief.

The people in the photo? They are the people from which we derive the three personality types1 of the Wakefield Doctrine. Before we go any further, I will state un-equivocally: the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, age and culture neutral. As it happened, the people around which the concept of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers took form were three guys by the name(s): clark, scott, roger.

As with any personality type schema, the names are markers, the characteristics of the three types is where the fun (and usefulness) are at.

I’m thinking, ‘OK, the instructions for this week are clear enough, ‘share a photo and share the story behind it’. Do they mean the story of how the photo came to exist or do they want to know what the photo represents, symbolizes or simply ‘why this photo’.

Gotta go with Door Number Three.

You know how all those personality type systems with their clever little surveys and tests and all are so much fun to take and even more fun to share? “”Honey? Come here, there’s this Quiz on the Facebook, it so has you down to a ‘T'”.  The Wakefield Doctrine is exactly like that, except different.

Being a perspective, rather than a thing, the purpose, use and value of the Wakefield Doctrine is aid us in our efforts to better understand the world and people around us. The Doctrine approaches this by challenging us to discover how a person is relating themselves to the world around them. It (does this) by proposing that we all experience the world, to a small but certain extent, on a personal basis. This is referred to as a ‘worldview’. The theory holds that we are, all of us, born with the potential to experience the world (and, very importantly), grow up and develop in one of three worldviews, that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) or the Herd Member(rogers). At a very early age we end up in one and develop our coping strategies appropriate to the character of that worldview.

“But! But what the heck does this have to do with CS Lewis or, for that matter, the blogosphere? What about that?”

Guess I should describe the path from a chance insight in 1981 and typing today’s post.
In the summer of 2009, I was driving around with a friend talking about life, reality and ‘the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers’. For whatever reason, I said, ‘This theory is so true and so much fun, I got to do something more with it’. My friend replied, ‘I agree and, in my work in counseling, I do in fact use the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers at times. But the name is not good, too college dorm. You need a better name.’ I then said, ‘Alright then. From now on it’s the Wakefield Doctrine.’ He laughed, ‘That’s an excellent name. What are you going to do with this Wakefield Doctrine?’ I replied, ‘Well, I guess I need to start a blog. Let the world know all about it.’

The weird part? Until that Saturday evening, my opinion of blogs and bloggers was the rather typical, ‘Sure, now what makes you think that you have anything to say on this blog that anyone would care to read? What you had for breakfast? Maybe your opinion on the state of the world! Yeah, right.’ The thing is, with the decision came a passion that I cannot recall experiencing before, at least not in public and in the daytime. I found that writing posts was the opposite of work. I couldn’t wait to start the next one.

Now the really weird part. I didn’t change. I was still a clark. (I will leave the fun of discovering the full implications of that statement to new Readers). Suffice to say, all of my insecurities, fear of scrutiny, fear of looking like an idiot, fear of meeting people, all stopped existing in the context of writing this here blog here. Seriously. I found a strength (I already used the ‘passion word’) that not only had me going beyond my lifetime-accepted limitations, I enjoyed doing everything and anything I could to get the story of the Wakefield Doctrine out to as many people and readers as I could. This ‘everything’, included joining my first bloghop. Yep! Finish the Sentence Friday (and the Facebook) was a threshold I crossed that brought me into contact with many I still value as friends.

…the actual photo? Taken in the mansion at Harkness Memorial State Park on the shores of Long Island Sound in the town of Waterford, Connecticut.

Guess that says it all. The photo I’m sharing this particular Friday explains how it is I’m here sharing this photo.

1) hey! I was down here getting ready to disclaimer whatever it was I thought I should, to head-off any criticism of ‘over-reaching’ or ‘being silly’ with the terms I use to describe the Doctrine. You know, something to the effect that ‘this is all based on anecdotal evidence and does not claim status as…’ then it struck me, ‘Well, duh, clark. Give the readers some credit, why don ‘cha?’ Ain’t a chi square, distribution analysis or bell curve within fifty metres* of your blog.’
I thank you, future Readers, for reminding me to stay with what makes this Wakefield Doctrine so unique and fun… the fun and uniqueness of it!

* lol, sorry, couldn’t resist

 

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of practical advice and insightful questions.”

January 23, 2018 By

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

So here’s the starting point (as found in this past weekend’s TToT):

Cynthia and Denise and I were discussing workplace applications of the Doctrine. And, to use one of the examples we were working on, lets say I’m in an interaction and feeling very stressed. I can stop, ‘circle around back and enter the situation through the rogerian (or scottian) ‘backstage entrance’. By doing so I have the opportunity, (knowing what I do about the realities of scotts and rogers) to get a sense of how the other person is experiencing the situation in question. Very often I discover that what they are doing that is causing me stress has little or nothing to do with me personally! Talk about taking a load off one’s shoulders. You really should try it.

Cynthia then commented with the following:

It’s rarely ever personal, is it? LOL. In fact, maybe it’s never personal. That would be in line with Don Miguel Ruiz who said to “never take anything personally” in is Four Agreements book. I wonder what Castaneda would have to say. Anyways, yeah, Ruiz argues that we’re all in our own “dream” (worldview) and that if we experienced life as they did, we’d know that it is never about YOU but always about THEM.

Followed by Denise’s question/inference:

Clarification please. When dealing with scotts for sure not personal, but it’s not personal with rogers? I don’t have Doctrine vocabulary words to express what’s in my head at the moment. With rogers, it will first be about them, how, whatever is going on in their interaction with us, affects them, the herd and or reflection thereof, yes?

 

That should get us going for a mid-week Doctrine post!

Quick refresher: The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that all of us are born with the potential to experience the world in one of three characteristic worldviews (personal realities): that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) and the Herd Member(rogers). At a very early stage, for reasons not yet understood, we settle into one of the three. The thing is there is only one predominant worldview and yet, ‘the other two’ potentials remain with us. When it seems like we’re being a scott when really we’re a roger, that usually is at a time of duress and is an indicator of a secondary scottian aspect.

One of the benefits of the Doctrine is found in the arena of self-improvement (the ‘third date’ of the new personality type couple…lol). Most people seek to become better…at whatever it is the perceive they are; mothers, workers, performers, thinkers and fighters. Natural. What can be unnatural (found in many other systems of self-improvement) is the belief that one needs to acquire, learn, borrow, imitate behaviors and other ways of interacting with the world in order to improve. The Wakefield Doctrine holds that it’s not necessary; that quality or characteristic you desire is already a part of you. It is simply not expressed.

Wait, I said that not quite the way I wanted. Remember the part about settling into the world of the Outsider or being left in the reality of the Predator or waking up in the land of the Herd Member? The predominant reality? Well everything that follows are our efforts to develop strategies to get through life. A scott learns to be quick, aggressive and not spend a lot of time in reflection, a roger sees a quantifiable world and knows he/she must study, be organized and deliberate. A clark… they kinda wing it. lol. No, the defining style of negotiating with the world and it’s people for clarks is grounded in the belief that knowledge holds the key.

In any event, my point about already having what you believe you are looking for, want to be more assertive? You have a scottian aspect. Need to be more detail oriented? Hello roger! You have what it takes to be the person you think you want to be. The thing is, you practiced a lifetime to be the clark, scott or roger that you are. So don’t be discouraged if you try to assert your inner (whichever) and it doesn’t work the first (or 21st) time. The main thing is that those characteristics are yours to develop.

Holy smoke! I totally got off the topic. (So much for the quick refresher).

So the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective that can be especially useful in the workplace. The use of the Doctrine requires learning the character and nature of the three worldviews. Now before anyone leans back and says, “Great! Now I got to go read and memorize a bunch of charts and descriptions! At least the Oscar-Myers EOSH people have only four letters to learn to use it!” Allow me to say, don’t worry, all you need is the most cursory understanding of the three worldviews The scary thing about the Doctrine is that when you spot your first roger or scott or clark, in all probability they will proceed to put on a demonstration that will have you thinking, ‘Wait a minute! What are the odds that my supervisor/grocerystore clerk, teacher, friend, wife could be a follower of this blog?’

No, seriously. When you get to the point of identifying the three worldviews, I guarantee that you might feel a little creeped-out. With good reason, but not the way you think. I always warn people at this point, ‘If you get to the point that you can see the rogers and scotts and clarks in your world, there is a very strong possibility that you will not be able to not see them.’

You been told.

Ok to Denise’s question about the conflict between accepting that what a roger might be doing to you is not personal, while knowing that everything in the world of the roger is personal. My reply in the Comments:

everything is personal with rogers

if the coffee in the break room is burnt-tasting and stale, they will take that personally and seek someone whose fault it is or…. if there is a traffic accident and the highway is tied up….

… knowing that, makes it less a personal responsibility for us as clarks (and never let it be said that clarks shirk responsibility for…. everything but mostly the bad things lol) it is a way of short-circuiting our own autonomic entanglement… with a lifeform that is to emotions as a scott is to anything that darts away…. lol

 

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

Finish the Thought Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 20, 2018 By

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

Today is Saturday and so we’ll hasten to complete a Finish the Sentence Friday post and then write us one of them TToT posts.

Last week, as you will recall, we combined our participation in the two bloghops into one long, and somewhat perplexing (to some of the newer Readers), post. The thing is, Kristi and Kenya and them, have altered the format and so, each Friday the ‘theme’ is different. Which should be an interesting change. Unlike winter. Sorry, getting ahead of myself. (Ayiiee, when you consider the theme of this week’s FTSF, and that last sentence, surely you recoil in empathic horror or lean-forward in identification with the conundrum I almost put myself into… have I lost the thread?  Good! Back to the intro).

This week the theme is Stream of Consciousness (in general) and our feelings towards Winter(specifically?) Here, let me let Kristi tell you, I have to go find a timer…

In the new format, which I host with Kenya from Sporadically Yours, each week is a little bit different. Week three of each month (this week), is a stream-of-consciousness post where you write for five minutes (or more) and just post. That’s it.

And yeah, yeah, yeah… I ended up adding some photos because I couldn’t NOT add them, but we promise, you’re free to edit as you’d like but editing is unnecessary.

Finish the Sentence Friday is a link-up where writers and bloggers come together to share their themselves with a particular prompt (different formats each week of the month). If you’d like to participate, join our Facebook group. Link up your prompts below! Please no “link dumping.” If you include a link, comment on other posts.

OK, I got the timer… not ready?  no problem I’ll wait…. (Why no! I don’t think that ‘preparing to engage in a stream-of-consciousness activity’ is contradictory. Have you talked to a clark recently? lol  Old joke: Q: “How can you tell when a clark is engaged in stream of consciousness? A: “His/her lips move.”)

Some of you might be thinking, ‘Did they just imply that they need to prepare for writing a Stream-of-Conscious post? Isn’t that kinda self-defeating?

Yes and No* lol

So I have my timer ready and, in case this ends up too jabberwockerish, I’ve put a photo at the top of the Post that says it all.

(go)

There is nothing I enjoy about Winter. The photo above illustrates its nature better than I can describe it: cold, life arresting and yet taunting in what it is that it (Winter) holds in its inhospitable grasp.

alright!  What 4 minutes left? damn!

hey! wait… this just in. Una enjoys the snow! And, now that I think of it, so did Bella and Ola. So it is not that the season itself is bad, it’s simply that I am not inclined to embrace its character and nature. I had a video up last weekend that shows how much fun Una had with the snow. (link here).

Boy, my five minutes have about lapsed. I got a feeling that I do not want to reflect on the implication of that! lol

So this week, my Finish my Thought Friday is: ‘…because Una enjoys the snow.‘

But now that I think of it, she enjoys all four of the seasons. That’s why she’s my role model. Una, as do her kind, has a natural appreciation for ‘what is’ as opposed to ‘what it should be/might be/supposed to be’. That’s not a bad reminder to me today when it’s too damn cold outside to remember that I’m able to go there and prove how right I am about that assertion and what a total gift that is. And, since it’s never too late to engage the present, I will stop with the stream of conscious writing and try to have a stream of present day.

Don’t forget to stop by the others (to my figurative right, left and above)… there you’ll find insight and reflection that will surely carry through your weekend.

 

*hey! one of the earliest tests for determining if a person is a clark is found in the simple question: “How much is Two plus Two?” a roger answers “Four” without the slightest hesitation because, well, that’s the correct answer. a scott might say “Four” or he/she might reply, “Who wants to know?” a clark? we’re inclined to answer, “uh, under what circumstances?”

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