predicting human behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 17 predicting human behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 17

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 10, 2021 By

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

 

Quick, little, Doctrine post for a Wednesday morning.

We have a question from a New Reader*,

“I can see how those personality types seem to fit the people I know. I’m impressed by how, testing the type, (against a ‘real’ person), using only a few of the characteristics of, what do you call it… you know, instead of personality types…. oh yeah! predominant worldviews. How, if I take a couple of the primary indicators and apply it to someone, the rest totally fits. Pretty impressive.

That said, besides knowing that if a person I know will only ride his bicycle with a bunch of his friends and their spandex riding suits all have more corporate logos than a Nascar Chevy, he will also be into gossiping like his life depended on it, what else does this thing do?

How do you guys, (or girls, I know there are some there, even if you always use the reflexive pronouns like ‘us’ and ‘we’), use this theory. You know, for useful stuff like, self-improvement, getting a date, getting hired, having fun?“

Glad you asked, New Reader!

Since we’re almost out of time, I’ll just link this most importune and insightful question to the others who know whereof they speak, Doctrinistically-speaking.

Denise, Mimi, Cynthia, Val, Patricia, Lizzi, Dyanne, zoe? Care to enlighten our guest’s question. Or, at least, make sure they don’t wander off and pull on any cinematically-green curtains.

 

 

*a hypothetical Reader. you know, like your friend at work, who, when you told him/her about the Wakefield Doctrine, they were, all, ‘Wow! Thats really interesting. What else does it say about me?” And, of course, you promise to email/text the url and, when you run into them again, you start to say, “So, did you read…” and skidding to a halt you see that there are others in the conversation and so you end with, “..in the newspapers today.”

You want to tell yourself that you did not see a look of hunger or, more oddly, a look of disappointment in their eyes, and you suddenly have a feeling of relief, and an uninvited memory of the time in high school, when you asked one of the most popular students at your school to go to the big game and, how you ran into them, in the parking lot, and they didn’t even seem to remember that they had to cancel at the last minute because of a illness or shampoo in the family, and you, realizing you were there, managed to act like you wanted to be…. you know, like that

The important thing is that, before you ask the person, (the one at the start of this footnote-longer-than-the-body-of-the-post), if they had a chance to go to www.wakefielddoctrine.com  you remember something that you read there…

Then you smile for two reasons: a) you know it didn’t make sense when you read it the first time and 2) you now know what those people at that Doctrine place meant when they wrote, ‘The Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.”

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

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…of secret viewers, ‘bots and the fear of hope”

February 3, 2021 By

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

Hope is a four-letter word.

Rejuvenate is a ten-letter word.

One is emblematic of the personal reality of the Outsider, the other, an appropriate term for the ambitions of the Wakefield Doctrine.

…neither, however, are enticing enough to build a post around. They’re more like the scraps of cardboard that seem to appear out of nowhere, a second before you give up hope of getting your car out of the snow-rut. After pressing the accelerator way past the point of effectiveness, (though the exercise is not without a certain feeling of power, as you listen to the wheel spinning in it’s half-circle of rock-hard ice, the sound is a potent combination of engine power and restraint, with just enough of a overtone of burning rubber, you know, to keep it real.)

So, the question we pose, still determined to make use of the two words-of-the-day, where does the emotion of hope* go, when the car does not? What transformation occurs to the marshaling of emotion and thought? We recognize that, in part, the energy, (or emotion), is converted into creativity. Cardboard? To move a vehicle weighing more than any other object in your house? Really?

Really.

But we’re concerned with the energy within, this apparently being take-a-clark-to-work day, at least in terms of writing the day’s post.

Anger…. there’s a common-enough example of the transformation of emotion that no longer has a context in the external world.

Hey, here’s an idea! What would the situation look like, if the driver was a clark, a scott or a roger?

Well, lets assume the driveway is long enough not to permit a view of how deep the snow is, at the far end, where the street is. For the New Reader:

  • clark(the Outsider) is the person who grows up in the world of men and women wearing a name card that, somehow, got smudged under the clear-plastic folder (with it’s why-is-this-a-good-design? half-a-safety pin on the back).
  • scott(the Predator) the man or woman who holds to the sub-sub-conscious belief that the world is a three-round sudden death playoff, always pulls the driver from the bag approaching the tee; their caddy needs to sprint to get to the green first.
  • roger(the Herd Member) has never met a person they don’t believe they know, (or know someone who does know), and interacts with others with the confidence of a four-year-old after mastering the placement of the first three objects heralding a life of education, the peg, the cylinder and cubical piece of wood.

So ladies and gentlemen, start your engines.

In no particular order:

  • the scott makes it out to the road and shouts to the neighbor that, as soon as the spring arrives, he’ll help put the fence, (did we mention the fact that our test driveway is between the fences that mark the two abutting properties?) Take a closer look at the photo… it does. Style point to our scottian driver for missing the school children, inadvisably clustered together, two doors down.
  • the clark proves our point about the (potential) power of emotional transformation, i.e. hope into creativity… we’re left to wonder where they got the cardboard or how much it will cost to replace the rear tires
  • the roger…. well! how do they do it?!! The driver got out of the car, (which had perfectly-right-angled openings in the snow that covered both the windshield and the rear window, the bottom of the windshield looked like the side of a street in Anchorage on a particularly snowy winter, the wipers themself were at ‘9 o’clock’ when turned off, not able to push the ice and snow further off the glass), looked around, muttered something about how the neighbors have not yet even shoveled their sidewalks and a crowd materializes. With little discussion, other than to agree the. weather service got it wrong again, the car was pushed out of the rut and up on to the road. Like an igloo with square windows and four wheels, the roger drove off without a second look.

 

* and surely it is an emotion, being as practical and rational and a jello sledgehammer

 

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 1, 2021 By

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

Let’s turn that hapless smile upside down and get serious for a moment.

clarks.

I had a dream. No, not that dream. That dream was created by and for rogers. An inspired effort to move the herd in a direction towards a more enlightened culture. Did not not bode so well for the dreamer. If there is one thing rogers, (and the collective herd), do not appreciate, it’s an outsider. And, as mere common sense will insist, to see the path ahead of the herd is to step away (or above or aside…you get the idea is to become, to a degree small or huge, an Outsider.

But today’s post, (one part ‘original’ and one part reprint), is not about rogers, it is about clarks.

But the beauty part of the Wakefield Doctrine is that you learn about ‘the other two’ when you study the one.

After all, the core premise is that we are all born with the potential of all three. One can be forgiven for dreaming that the qualities of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) and the Herd Members(rogers) might somehow be combined. No, not combined… developed individually in a manner that would allow an integration of the three, a balanced dynamic that enhances the strength of each and diminishes their respective weaknesses*.

 

*  very good question! The weaknesses inherent in the three predominant worldviews? Tying into what we said above about how we learn of all three when we study one? Instead of asking, “What is the weakness inherent in being a clark or a scott or a roger? Lets rephrase it.

What is the most difficult quality for a clark or a scott or a roger to embrace?

  1. for a clark: to feel like a roger
  2. to a scott: to think like a clark
  3. if a roger: to act like a scott

Think about the ‘why’ these three qualities are so difficult for the individual in question. Keep in mind, at the heart of the Doctrine is the ambition to understand and otherwise appreciate how we relate ourselves to the world around us. (Always, at this point, we will say: “Note that we did not say, ‘How we relate to the world around us’, we said, “How we relate ourselves to the world around us.” If the difference is not clear, ask in a comment.)

In a little break from our typical reprint post, we’re placing it down here, at the bottom. The reason is that, more often than not, setting out to do a reprint post takes the pressure off sufficiently to see a topic of sufficient interest to constitute a standalone post.

(from 11/9/2011)

Mickey Rourke a clark?1
Prince a clark?
Kristen Stewart a clark?  ( well,  that was kinda easy….just go look at this video)

And what’s with the term ‘clarklike female’?  After all, the Doctrine is gender neutral and you do call (the others) scottian women and rogerian females… why the weird name for the…wait… nah, never mind.

( No! We are not reluctant to answer the question, that is, after all,  how we all learn… well, clarks and rogers in any event.)

The answer, with any luck, will prove to be both simple and obvious

  • a group or multiple scotts results in a pack
  • more than one roger gathering together?  clearly a herd!
  • 2 or 3 or more clark…… results in a… what was the question? (hey they were right here a minute ago!…was there always a floor lamp over there?…wait a minute…)

Hopefully that answers the question to everyone’s satisfaction.

scotts are very, very easy to identify…when you see them, chances are they are already watching you! And if you are up for it, take a good look at them, (preferably when their attention is on someone else)  there is no mistaking the gaze, the alertness, they are paying attention. (Go back to the Kristen Stewart video thing above, this time focus on Kelly instead of Kristen)

rogers are not too difficult to spot, given that there are more of them than the other two types ( in any given situation)…besides you cannot help but to run into the roger wherever you happen to be…it is not enough for a roger to gather in a herd…they must find people who are not of the herd in order to get maximum enjoyment from the rogerian experience… now these ‘others’ will be of 2.5 other categories  clarks and scotts  male and female2 and depending on (which) the roger will cause their herd to either interfere with the clarks ( like the old  joke we all loved when we first learned to drive…you know, “Hey want a ride?” just as they reach for the door handle, jump the car ahead… lol now that I remember that it is pretty funny) anyway thats sort of what a roger and their herd will try to do to a clark…now if it happens to be a scott entering the room  then…er…  think more…. well better you go here and seee for yourself! Lunch is served!

clarks are interesting…they have a natural affinity for the company of scotts  and a weakness for the charm of rogers…as to spotting a clark, well that’s another matter, if the clark does not wish to be noticed, then you are plain out of luck! You won’t.. but then again with patience you will see the proof (of the statement about clarks) that they do not want to be the center of attention but will not tolerate being ignored. clarklike females are second only to scotts as being easy to spot… with clarklike non-females** (lol)  it is a little more work, but all you have to do is listen to the conversation going on in the gathering… “we cannot directly know anything is real, but then again it doesn’t matter, because all this is imaginary in the first place…”   ( that sort of thing, along with the sound of scottian laughter and footfalls of the fleeing rogers )

 

1) you need to go back to the  Post (something about Warning Labels…never mind  just click here)  click on  the ‘Leave your hat On’ video and watch Mickey’s performance in it, hint: watch the demeanor, not literally what he seems to be doing ( Molly! ) can you get the sense of how he seems to be relating to the world?

2) admittedly kind of an inside joke, best go ask DS#1  or (if you have the nerve) Ms AKH

*

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 30, 2021 By

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

This is the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. It is an exercise in gratitude. The object is to write a list of the people, places, things and events that have elicited a feeling of gratitude. These can be from the week that has passed since the last TToT. Or it can be something that happened to you in the third grade of elementary school. The power, (of this practice), lies in writing it down. Funny stuff happens when you set out to type your thoughts down on ‘paper’.

Dyanne? err yeah, she’s the host here. No, I don’t think it’s necessary that you bother her, she knows that we sometimes wander around, thematically-speaking. As a matter of fact, just the other day she was overheard saying, “That Wakefield Doctrine? Yes, they do tend to go on the occasional stream-of-consciousness bender at times, but no, they’re not dangerous. Probably. Just because your friend said that it was fun to jump off the railroad trestle into the river, doesn’t mean you have to do the same. Keep your eyes on your own post and nothing bad will happen. Probably.”

So lets jump into this week’s Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

1) Una (and three or four layers of reality*)

2) Phyllis (who has displayed the wisdom and maturity, after seeing the early rushes from this post), to say, ‘That sounds good. You have a picture of Una? Perfect.?’

3) the Wakefield Doctrine (all kinds of sine qua non evident this week).

4) work project/Wakefield Doctrine demonstration, the 20 Minute Real Estate Briefing. We continue.

5) serial stories ‘the Whitechapel Interlude‘ and ‘the Case of the Missing Fig Leaf‘

6) the Six Sentence Story a good place to go to read flash fiction and a great place to go and post your own storyettes

7) early morning insights. (I will, to make it irrefutable that this is a Grat Item), include the game of solitaire as a necessary part of this, Grat Item, which, as we’ve just noted is an insight. Unfortunately the case with most insights into the nature of reality is that the half life of relevancy is only slightly longer than the memory of a night’s dreams. But, as with most matters pertaining to the subjective world, simply remembering that, for a second, you knew something incredible can be enough. You know, like looking down at the smeared-blue-ink stamped on the back of your hand in the early morning hours of Sunday and the thought that forces you into consciousness is a single phrase, ‘Wow, that’s how its supposed to be?.’ The insight today? The challenge in living the life that you believe you want lies not in bringing it into existence. The challenge is in accepting that it is already there in your world, all you have to do is develop the will to realize it.

8) The Book of Secret Rules, (aka the Secret Book of Rules) which is, arguably, the feature in this bloghop that allows us the most fun. Simply put: let’s say you have an idea that might seem a little weird, maybe its a novel approach to your presentation, all you need do is cite the Secret Rule (S.R.) and write a brief description, (of the rule), and reference a chapter and/or verse. Extra points if you use those squared-off parentheseses or, even better, do that thing with [o]ne letter of a word, that you see sometimes. Do that, and you’re free to go to town. Example: hypograts. It is permissible to cite a hypograt in a TToT** which is, a bad or unpleasant person, place, thing or event that happens but you’re pretty sure there’s a redeeming quality. (BoSR/SBoR Tip: if there is no positive to it, calling it a hypograt will cover you. When in doubt, check in with Mimi. She is our resident authority on the transformational power of good intent.)

9) THIS SPACE AVAILABLE Anyone got a Grat that you want try out on the big screen?

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music

*

*

 

*

 

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

 

* Full Disclosure: took the photo and wrote the comment about reality yesterday… at least a week before I wrote the bulk of this post. Prescient? Sure! (Sounds better than ‘repetitive’. lol)

** ‘permissible’ is a funny thing. Technically, there aren’t actually any hard-and-fast rules that govern participation here. In her wisdom, Lizzi, just before she stepped back into the mists surrounding Gondor, said to the Hostinae gathered around her, “Each week, link up with a post of Ten Things of Thankful. If you have a problem with that and want to write three things or fifteen, then do so, what do I look like, a school marm? Write, read and comment, is all I ask of you… that and, keep an eye on that Wakefield Doctrine blog, no telling what that anorak might get into.”

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “Come on! It’s Monday, we’re counting on this Doctrine to make it less…”

January 25, 2021 By

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

Well, lets get right to it!

‘…’

When in doubt, or the Muse has decided to sleep in*, it is never a bad thing to describe the Wakefield Doctrine. The ‘what it is’ and ‘how to use it’ kind of post. After all, we are still pursuing that, ‘now-I-can-stop-this-daily-post-thing’, the Perfect Doctrine post.

Lets see what I’ve said on the subject already.

ok, had to go back to 2013 to find one… though I suspect it was my search method, rather than that which I was looking for.

…whoa!! what the…!?!?!

Did you just get a whiff of topic?

Quick. Clear our minds.

‘My search method is at fault as opposed to the availability of what I was looking for…’

Ladies and gentlement, I believe we have a Doctrine (and General Realitivity Insight).

(Remind us to revisit this topic tomorrow. Getting late. Luckily, have the reprint still on the clipboard.)

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

images-17

It has long been my ambition to write the Perfect Wakefield Doctrine post. (One might argue about that adenoidial descriptor, it has always been my ambition, since the very first post, hell, before the very first post). In any event, I’ll give it a shot today, Monday.

The definition of perfection? A post that a total stranger, (to this blog or, for that matter, a person who has not come into contact with anyone who knows of this personalty theory), can read…once and apply it to their own life right then and there. They will look around and they will see the clarks and scotts and rogers.

 

As a personality theory, the Wakefield Doctrine is more the key a song is played in than it is the song. It is not a definition of a set of established behaviors, tendencies, drives and tropisms, rather it is a way of looking at (the) behaviors, tendencies, drives and tropisms that everyone you encounter today will exhibit. Including yourself. Unlike most of the personality theories that we all come into contact with, the Wakefield Doctrine is not concerned with establishing where, in a pre-established matrix of behavior, you fit best. The Wakefield Doctrine is not concerned with behavior. The Wakefield Doctrine is concerned with ‘how you relate yourself to the world around you’.

Quick set of assumptions and predicates: reality (the world around us) is, to a small, but certain extent, personal; we are, all of us, born with the capacity to experience the world around us in one of three characteristic ways: as an Outsider (clarks), as a Predator (scotts) or as a Herd Member (rogers); finally, although we all, (all of us), settle on, settle into one of the three worldviews, we never lose the capability to experience the world ‘as do the other two’.

Even though the Wakefield Doctrine is concern with relationships, it helps to have labels and definitions (provided that we do not ignore Korsybski’s famous statement, ‘the map is not the territory‘.

Hold on. Enough with the Wikipedia citations and the excessive use of semi-colons!

I think I’ll settle for a quiz that’s as close to a personality assessment as you’re going to encounter here at the Wakefield Doctrine):

  • When you woke up this morning, did you feel good/scared/confident that today would be a good day in ‘the world out there’? If that sounds at all reasonable, go stand over there… no, there are others already in that section of the gym, you’ll see them when you get there.
  • When you woke up this morning, did you get up? ok… amuse yourself while I deal with the last group of personality types. Sure, anywhere will be fine.
  • When you woke up this morning, (well, lets rephrase that to ‘when you transitioned from quiet concern to active concern), did you feel that although you might describe yourself as confident, you will swear in a court of law that the world makes sense if you just work hard enough at understanding it. If you don’t find that description of the start of the average day totally un-reasonable, don’t go anywhere… stay here in the middle of the crowd of participants

There you have it! The three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine!

How do you know which you are?

Up at the top of the post, I wrote ‘how you relate yourself to the world around you’. That is how you know. Even at the Doctrine, where words are viewed as either those colored semi-candy things that you sprinkle on desert or, the yellow and black Cliff Notes that serve as badges of ‘success at any cost’ in school, sometimes we mean exactly what we say. When we say, ‘how you relate yourself to the world around you’, we do not mean, ‘how you relate to the world around you’. It is about you and your relationship to the world that the Doctrine is concerned. So read some posts, read some pages that describe the characteristics of the three worldviews. The perspective ( as an Outsider or as a Predator or as a Herd Member) through which the world is least blurry, that’s your predominant worldview, your ‘personality type’.

Congratulations! You’re a clark (or) a scott (or) a roger.

Lots more to tell you* stop by anytime!

*self-grading of attempt at the perfect Post: C+ … ok a B- (seeing how you’re a clark and clarks are nothing if they’re not willing to do most things to help the other person feel better).

 

* There’s an ‘interesting’ idea for a story, ‘Are the dreams of a Muse painfully common and boring?’ Maybe I should write that down for the next installment in ‘the Whitechapel Interlude’

 

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