Personal | the Wakefield Doctrine

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 11, 2017 By clarkscottroger

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

The choice* I was confronting this morning was: a) work on ‘Home and Heart’ 2) write a ‘Doctrine post’ or c) play solitaire**

The choice was difficult. I apparently did make a choice or you are a figment of my imagination, reading a post that exists (however briefly) only in my mind. Lets assume this makes it out to the internet.

The topic of this Tuesday post? The Wakefield Doctrine, what it is and how to discover your predominant worldview.

The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is a perspective on personality, people, the world and life. Not necessarily in that order. The Wakefield Doctrine (‘the Doctrine’) proposes that all of us are born with a potential to experience life in one of three characteristically-distinct realities. The Doctrine maintains that reality is, to a certain extent, personal. Nothing weird or outlandish, like flying or walking through walls or enjoying ‘reality shows’ on TV, simply that the world within a zone that extends from inside our dreams to just before a stranger might notice, is of our own devise. Thats all. (Hold that thought, it will be important to the rest of this). At a very early age and for reasons not yet understood, we settle into one (and only one) of these three worldviews (‘personal realities’). We grow up and develop (physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually) in the context of:

the world of the Outsider (clarks)
the world of the Predator (scotts)
the world of the Herd Member (rogers)

The Doctrine defines personality types as: the best we can do, given the world we find ourselves in. Where most other personality type theories talk about inclination, likes, dislikes, favorite colors, aptitude for, types and axises, the Doctrine says, your ‘personality’ is (your own) best effort to develop strategies and ways of coping with life in the reality of the Outsider, the life of the Predator or the world of the Herd Member. I’m a clark (my predominant worldview, the personal reality that I grew up in was that of Outsider) and so I am inclined to mumble and avoid eye contact, I enjoy a wildly active subjective life, am creative and self-destructively shy. If you are a scott then, provided you’ve managed to stay in front of these words this long, recognize yourself as aggressively confident, mercurial in temperament, impulsive to a fault and a natural leader. The rogers out there, sensing a connection to be made between themselves and the world around them, either already know most of this (without the labels) or have left the room.

We grow up and learn to interact with the world (and the people) who surround us.

That is the second key aspect of the Wakefield Doctrine. The Doctrine does not spend time with surveys and lists, tests and assessments as a way to help others identify their ‘personality type’. We put it all in one statement/question: ‘How do you relate yourself to the world around you? As (would) an Outsider, a Predator or a Herd Member?’ All ya gots to do is learn the characteristics of these three worldviews, which is totally fun. Look at your world through the perspective of each and the one that is ‘clearest’ is your predominant worldview.

Note: the wording here is critical. I did not say, ‘How do you relate to the world around you?’ I said, “How do your relate yourself to the world around you?’ That one word makes a world of difference.

Note: You know how I said, “…are born with a potential to experience life in one of three characteristically-distinct realities“? Yeah, well while we all settle on, (and learn to deal with), one (and only one of these three), we never lose the capacity to experience the world as do ‘the other two’. This accounts for the fact that there are times when we would appear to be one of the other personality types. We express these (secondary and tertiary aspects) from time to time, usually at times of duress. Not to worry. Perfectly normal. Beyond the scope of this Post. If you really need to know, ask in a comment.

For now, learn the characteristics of the three. Look at yourself, (and your life), then throw out the one that’s just plain ‘no way’. That leaves you with two worldviews (most likely scott/roger or clark/scott). Hold the perspective, i.e. look at the world through one and then the other. Clear? Clearer? Clearest? That’s your predominant worldview.

Gotta run. Ask questions.

*Students of the Doctrine smile at this word. It is a smile of sad disdain because we recognize that the illusion of choice is manufactured according to the standards of reality consistent with our predominant worldview. I will leave the implications of the use of the word ‘manufactured’ to another post or as starter fluid to anyone’s desire to write a comment.

** Don’t laugh! Solitaire is one of the greatest under-appreciated insights into the variability of personal reality. Serially! Just ask

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, predicting human behavior, psychology of personality, relationships, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 8, 2017 By clarkscottroger

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

Item 8. Phyllis and Una sittin in a tree(house). This photo is taller than wide. The left half is clearly in the foreground and it is half of a bird house made in the shape of a man with a large nose. (Think: Grumpy of Seven Dwarves of Snow White fame) The bird house is stuck to the tree that rises above (and behind) the two downward angles of the roof of the bird house). The bark of the tree is very visible. Like peanut brittle or trying to smooth out corduroy pants that you found at the bottom of a suitcase that didn’t get un-packed. The texture of the trunk is primarily vertical ridges and un-even valleys. The right half of this (taller than wide) photo is of the door to Phyllis’s treehouse. The opening that shows has a dog at the edge of the door and Phyllis in the background sitting in a beach chair. (You know it’s a beach chair because: it’s low to the floor, the legs are thin and chrome-shiny and the back of the chair shows has horizontal stripes of greens-trying-to-escape-into being blue. There is pea-soup green, aqua-marine-ish blue and real blue. You know they’re strips ’cause there are white dividers between them. Sort of a prism of light from the Planet Beach.) Una appears to be glancing around the left edge of the doorway at the bird house. Half her face and most of her tongue shows. Tongue is pink with its central groove (just like humans) lined with a row of white teeth (like some humans). Her right eye shows enough to be able to see the small beige marking in her otherwise black fur. Think: apostrophe mark at the start of her eyebrow.

Lots to cover, it having been a fairly busy week. As I was mentioning to Kerry (in a reply to her comment) this week: The Rock, The Bridge, The Garden and Visitors from another dimension (it’s virtual but only sometimes scary).

First things first. This is the Ten Things of Thankful bloghop. (New Readers: a bloghop is a type of blog that is centered on interaction among the participants. Now, that last part is not as awkwardly-half-redundant as it might read. What our Host, Josie Two Shoes, does is host (ok, that might be a touch redundant), an exchange of things that we (collectively) have experienced (individually) during that past week (month/year/lifetime) that inspires us to say, “I’m grateful that happened’, or ‘They add a certain thing to life that I would be loath to be without’. The exchange part is where Josie provides an invaluable service. Go to her site, (through the link in the icon at the bottom of this post or HERE), and you will be able to read any number of reflections/recounting of/ recollection/remembering of things that made the writer include them on their list, and, ...and! you get to link your own post and be included in the ‘hop, which makes for easy commentationing and such. So come on down. If you’re concerned with following a format that a part of your mind might be whispering to you, at this very moment, ‘Yeah, sounds like fun but suppose you don’t have enough things to list or, worse, suppose you don’t follow some protocol and they laugh. Although, this Doctrine guy seems to be pretty comfortable writing what charitably can be called stream-of-caffiene-metaphysics in his post.’ That’s the spirit! This week only, the Wakefield Doctrine is offering a newcomer special offer! ‘Write 8 (or less) Items and Get One Free! Just let us know that you might be coming up short and we’ll dig through our archives and send you a Grat Item!’ (Offer subject to restrictions and limited to one or three or whatever per participants. Participant accepts full responsibility for dealing with the “what the heck?!!” comments that a ‘Wakefield Doctrine Write 8 (or less) Items and Get One Free!’ Grat Item might generate or instigate.)

1) A Bridge Too Far

The Bridge Before. Photo is taller than wide. The surrounding woods are shades of green ranging from pale to dark, with tree trunks showing as black. The water that divides the scene’s top of green and bottom of browns and pale (and which is is the raison d’être for the bridge) is reflective black. You know it’s water because all you see are the trees reflected. Although, ironically, the only blue is the sky reflected in the black-appearing water. The color of the bridge is browns into nearly white beige. There are two parallel wood beams running from the immediate foreground up the middle of the scene to a patch of light brown (where the vegetation has been cleared on the far shore) for the other end of the bridge to rest. There are rectangular planks that are attached across the two beams. Originally there was a complete walkway of these planks. The majority have been removed. Now its two adjacent planks-space-then two planks, then space. Like a film strip. This bridge, including the two carrying beams, will be taken apart and removed as the new beams (and eventually, planks for the walkway are built in it’s place)

Construction of the new bridge. Regular landscape orientation photo. Top half is of the deck off the back of our house where Phyllis and Denise assemble the beams. The lower half is Una keeping watch over their work. The beam is quite long, twenty-eight feet to be precise. It is made up of two fourteen foot lengths end-to-end. They are (both) secured to a second fourteen foot board which is runs seven feet along both of them. Sistering, I believe is the carpentatory term for joining boards, side-by-each (which, I believe, is a local Franco-Canadian expression). Denise is standing at the left end of the beam, which is long enough to overhang the deck to both sides. Phyllis is to the right at the far end. Denise is drilling holes for the bolts that attach the boards together. Phyllis is hammering the bolts in and securing them with nuts which must be quite tight. Una is keeping an eye out for job site safety. I’m taking the photo…. lol (I know, work, work, work)

Phase One Complete! The scene (another photo, taller than wide, due to the subject matter) from the opposite shore shows two parallel beams resting on top of the old bridge, spanning the stream. The new beams are a very light brown almost cream-colored. Being spruce, the dark brown, circular knots show at seemingly random points along the length of the beams. The beams are closer together, starting in the lower foreground (where you can see the square cement pad that supports the beams), over to the other side. Phyllis and Denise stand at the far end of the bridge, on the opposite shore, justifiably proud of our accomplishment. (The house and deck where we assembled the beams are about five hundred feet away. The beams had to be carried, one at a time, out of the backyard, past the Rock-at-the-Edge-of-the-Forest, down a hill through pines and ferns and thorns (oh my) to the site.) This photo would not have existed had they not been there.

2) A Rock at the Edge of the Forest

The Rock at the edge of the woods. Tough to make out much about the rock in this photo, due to the lighting. It is generally ovoid in shape, rough-smooth granite of a size that if you interlaced your fingers and held the rock it would touch the insides of your arm at least to the elbows. (It would then touch your toes, ’cause its got to weigh 150 pounds) The rock sits on a low tree stump that is not visible due to the shadow cast by the rock, towards the camera. The ground around the rock is low green growth, mostly vines and low bushes. In the foreground left there is a good-sized tree trunk (branches too high to see). The trunk is sorts smooth, being a white pine. There are small, vertical streaks of very light green which is moss. Oh, yeah, that structure in the background, above to the left of the rock, is the remains of a wood swing. Two triangles joined at the top by a single pole. There used to be a swing suspended from the horizontal piece. Now there are bird feeders that Phyllis adds food to. (lol… I included that last to remind myself to write about what is in the photo for real, as opposed to… never mind)

3) A Dog at a Window (to follow on Sunday be sure to stop back!)

4) Friends from the Virtual World, in Three D! (accompanied by canine companion)

Visitors! (Landscape orientation photo) Cynthia and John and Vinny say goodbye to Denise as they continue on their Summer Journey. (I just laughed because I saw something in the photo that I hadn’t seen before, and even then I would only see it, remembering that it was raining at the moment.) Anyway Cynthia and John are standing and looking down at their Labrador (with a white chest) and Vinny is looking back at them, his tail caught in mid-wag. Denise is bent at the waist over Vinny patting him. She is holding an umbrella. This is where I just lol’ed. The only umbrella is over Vinny who is the center of attention of the three humans. I personally agree with those priorities.

5) The Wakefield Doctrine simply one of the coolest, most entertaining and useful perspectives on the world and reality and such.

6) Una’s Garden

7) Home and Heart ( ‘a Sister Margaret Ryan novel’)

8) Phyllis and Una (here in Number 8 but photo at the top of Post)

9) Sunday feature

10) SR 1.3 (Book of Secret Rules (aka Secret Book of Rules) First discovered Rule which states, in part, “…approaching completion of a List of Ten Things, is, of and unto itself, something to be grateful for; [therefore] as an Item (precedentus repeatus pro quo: try to make this discovery at or near Item 9 or so) therefore may serve as the 10th and/or concluding Item in said List…. er, factorum yo.”

Bonus music vid

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, personality types, psychology of personality, relationships, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Six Sentence Story short, impromtuous re-print Post -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 5, 2017 By clarkscottroger

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

Here we are in the holiday-created-no-mans-lands-day-of-the-week, Mondnesday! Aiyyee… do I get going and try to make up for the possibly-three days (or two) lost or do I relax and try to sprint into next week? If I do, can I hope for a landing in the proper (or, failing that, psycho-calendistic day that corresponds to the day I should be/could be/would be were we not interrupted by that most scottian of The Big Four Holiday, the Fourth of July?)

Yeah, now that I think of it, I really need to write more. I was going to start my Six Sentence Story, as I often do, today, for publication tomorrow. But thats like going to Church on Saturday*.

The fact of the matter there’s (was) as much to have said about the Fourth as there is about Thanksgiving, aka St. roger’s Day. Please allow for a little chrono-shrinkage in the excerpt, seeing how the 4th was yesterday instead of tomorrow. But if what I see for subtext in virtually every commercial on TV, targeting Generation Next, it won’t put them off as they (the people who are young now**) believe that if it’s not immediate then it doesn’t exist. (also the truth that small, when it comes to food, is best). That I do not get. Ask yourself, ‘When did I last see a food commercial that used a family-seated-at-a-table visual?’ Or better, if not more obscure, when did the element of shopping for the benefit of having plenty of food in the house play strongly in a commercial? The range of answers: a) I can’t remember b) never c) I think I remember but must be mistaken and d) Did I already say, ‘I can’t remember?’

Enough of the heavy chrono-cynicism. If you have any questions about the scottian worldview, just ask.

Quick reminder about the Holiday tomorrow: If you do not know that July 4th is one of the most scottian of holidays, then you need to write in one of the Comment boxes below 50 times

“scotts love loud noises, it lets them believe they can have an effect on the world“.

Seriously, picture the coming Holiday:

takes place at the height of the Summer season

eating and drinking to excess is encouraged

minimal clothing allowed in virtually all public places (including churches and hospitals)

outdoor sports activities including chasing frisbees, being dragged behind a boat and the use of explosive devices (such explosives, that were it December instead of July, a visit from Homeland Security would be the immediate result)

…minimal clothing

So for you non-scotts reading this, three July 4th Survival Tips:

stay indoors

keep the lights off and the glow of the TV shielded from windows and doors

turn up the air conditioning and ….wear extra clothes

We hope that helps.

*way, way old reference and, even then, the marginal and too-young age for this reference to apply is sketchy at best. Suffice to say, back in the Sixties, (or early Seventies), the Church introduced the Saturday Mass, which punched the avoid-a-mortal-sin card for a lot of people who found the (necessary) attendance to Sunday Mass off-putting.

** as opposed to you***

*** by definition, (and paraphrasing an old saying), “If you ask, ‘does he mean me’, he does.“

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Personal, predicting human behavior, psychology of personality, self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 29, 2017 By clarkscottroger

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

Wednesday warm-up. Kinda dragging a bit, so lets pep things up with some bullet points… everyone likes bullet points, they’re like those chocolate sprinkle things that show up on ice cream sometimes, totally superfluous, but, well, they’re just fun.

Six Sentence Story
zoe’s bloghop
write a story of six and only six sentences
go to Uncharted and link up and join in the fun
…oh yeah, the hard part, (at least this week), there’s a prompt word… ya gotta incorporate it in your story. the word this week?
PEACH
(yeah, I know!)

“I remember now, He said, ‘There are two trees in the Garden, one you must stay away from and the other one,’ and then seemed to lose interest in my questions, which, not to seem unkind, makes your Friend kind of rude,” the Woman’s hair, seemingly with a mind of its own, began to writhe and twist over her breasts and across her torso, in an unconscious effort to make certain she had his un-divided attention.

“Yeah but I’ve the distinct impression that if we disobey Him, or make the wrong choice, we’re in big trouble,” the Man looked distracted. He was supposed to name everything in the Garden and was very proud of himself to think to look at the roundish-shaped things that hung from the branches, he called them fruit, but now realized he’d forgotten which went with which tree.

Her flowing waves of hair withdrew from most of her body and oriented on her face and back; frowning, she tried to see the long tresses behind her, seemed about to say something, shook her head and said with a certainty that surprised both of them, “One is the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the other is the Tree of Life; since you’ve only named two of the round things that hang from the branches, how hard can it be to remember which goes with which?”

He put one fruit from each tree in the woman’s hands and, staring off into space to avoid the distraction of the woman’s hair said, ‘The one in your left hand is shiny, red and hard, kinda like that thing you were talking to this morning and that other one is soft and fuzzy…. I say we go with the soft and… hey!”

The woman smiled, dropped the peach to Garden floor and offered him the apple.

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

Six Sentence Noir -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 22, 2017 By clarkscottroger

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

Here we are again! Wednesday and we’re preparing to participate in zoe’s most excellent bloghop, the Six Sentence Story. (Damn, if I’d of perceived my schoolwork anywhere close to the way I’m currently chasing skills at this writing thing, who knows where I’d be today!) oh well, better late than never, ya know?

In any event, what we gots here is a bloghop that invites all to write (and post through the link thing at z’s blog) a story of six and only six sentences. And, this is the important part, (the) story must utilize the prompt word. Each week we are provided a new prompt word, the grain of sand, destined to become a pearl.

This week the word is ‘Well’.

(Note this week we will rejoin our as-yet unidentified detective as he meets his client in, ‘The Mystery of the Lost Starr’. If you want to follow along, here is Chapter 1) (oh, yeah… if you want some background music for your read, here’s some Miles)

Looking as out-of-place as a Persian cat at a dry cleaners, the woman gave my office a once-over that confirmed that she didn’t get down to this part of town all that much and pulled her raincoat tight around her body, making sure nothing accidentally touched her, while guaranteeing that my attention didn’t wander.

I thought about standing up, but since I had no plans to offer her my chair, I cleared the files off the top of my desk; without the yellow-lined pads and 8×11 photos from a recent case, a once-dark square of wood showed opposite the leather upholstered chair in front of my desk; I nodded, she glanced at the door, held her handbag in front of her like a medieval breastplate and sat down.

“I have a problem and I need your help,” now that the pool of light on my desk worked up the nerve to touch the sleeve that rested on the arm of the chair, I noticed she wore a blonde wig, as effective a disguise as a seven-year-old boy’s Zorro mask; the hair was cheap, the makeup professional and her watch cost more than my last divorce. She stared at me with the look of the man forced to sit in a doctor’s office and wait for the results of a paternity test, resigned but angry at the wrong person, on this rainy Thursday morning it looked like she thought that should be me.

“I’m a licensed PI, I have half a law degree, a black belt and when I’m not having lunch standing at the strip club down the street, I wonder if I’ve made the best career choices, that said, it’s 1:30 in the morning; so you might as well spill it, and since my per diem is determined by my clients FICO score, I’ll spot you 15 minutes, off the clock.”

“I want you to find my sister, Starr,” every neurolinguistic telltale started going off as soon as she said the word, ‘want’ and, by the time she finished, pronouncing ‘sister’ with the ‘S’ in jealousy, I decided I needed to get in the habit of locking my door after nine pm.