predicting human behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 76 predicting human behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 76

no, really …today is Saturday? the Wakefield Doctrine …when routines are disrupted I’m thankful I’m not a roger or a scott

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

Wasser_über_Deck_und_Luken_WNA

I am accepting on faith and because I received the ‘connect the TToT linky thing’ in my email from Lizzi, that today is, in fact, Saturday. Which means, the Ten Things of Thankful, of which I am one of 10 hosts.

If you’re joining us for the first time: our founderess, Lizzi, provides a clear, simple and easy to understand explanation of her vision for this bloghop, it’s down at the bottom of this here page here (below the TToT icon and above the photos of the linked-in Posts). You can scroll right to that section and learn what this bloghop is all about or,  …or!  you can read your way there.  (Just between you and me, some Readers are better off getting a good, reassuringly presented description of what you will find here…  as for the rest of you,  well you came to the blogosphere to get away from the everyday routine of the real world, non? well, I’m glad you could make it.)

The simple direction to participants is: tell us about some of things from the previous week that you are grateful for, ten things, if you would be so kind. If you’re the kind of Reader I really look for, right now you’re saying, “Look out!! clark… last week had one of the most powerful holidays of your culture milieu  and ,,,it is a celebration of gratitude!!!  Look out!!! If you try to be grateful for that, you’ll be pulled under like a riptide of thankfulness!!”

Since we certainly don’t want that to happen, lets… ( continue our little metaphor and swim parallel to the shore for a while, gratitude-istically speaking), and use the Wakefield Doctrine as a context for the first part of this week’s list, after all, as must be abundantly clear to any Reader here at this blog, ‘the Doctrine’ as it’s known to regular Readers, forms the backdrop, the raison d’être  for everything I do online so it makes sense that I at least start this week’s list with times grounded in my efforts to write a blog.

…this last week? am I grateful for the Wakefield Doctrine because:

  1. I have friends who I’ve met because I tend to go places (to try to promote the Doctrine) that I would not have likely gone were it otherwise. Joining an writers group on ‘the Facebook’ exhibit A, no frickin way I would have had the nerve to not only be a member (ha ha…secret joke) but to actively participate in the bloopy bloggers long to enough to meet some really exceptional people, i.e.  Cyndi and Christine and Dyanne and Jak,  Michelle and zoe and Lizzi to name a few. I just would not have been able to pull it off, if I did not have… what we used to call ‘a premise’ to allow me to overcome my fear
  2. of course, knowing Lizzi lead to being asked (!! yeah, I know!) to participate in the TToT as a co-host  like I would have stepped up and asked to be included… yeah, right  ‘def Grat’ there!
  3.  it allows me to recognize when a premise is not working and have the confidence in myself to simply stop…not get tangled up in a major re-write, just move on… a very self-consciousness-engendering event, but I am totally grateful that I can!

I have standards for playing with the rules of this hop and I have too much respect for my co-hostinae for me to behave in too frivolous a manner . Because, while I participate on a voluntary basis and it reads like I’m having fun with it (which I hope it does and I do), participating in this exercise is totally a serious thing for me. Not to get all heavy*, but for me personally, finding within 10 things that I feel I am able to claim to feel grateful for, is not easy. Not because I’m not grateful for them (well, maybe a little of that), but because, for me, expressing something as personal as my feelings in a public forum is a challenge. Now, in no way is this blog meant to be all touchy feely  get-in-touch-with-your-inner-blogger way, but some thing are easier for some people that other things.
(to continue…)

4) I am grateful for a chance to have a conversation, nearly in the real world, with zoe last evening. We did a video chat  with google hangout and we talked for quite a bit and I came away thinking… damn! some people are as cool in person as they are in the blogosphere

5) I am grateful for my work (the following is kind of a lie), even though this week had a difficult client interaction event, which is all part of the job, but it was highly stressful because it involved telling the client that things were no going down the optimal path and that is never a fun thing to do, but I did and, by doing so, provided the service I was hired to provide,  so I am grateful that I was in a position to do that

6) I am grateful I don’t work outdoors for a living anymore. My wife Phyllis bought one of those portable, canvas-over-a-framework garages (all assembly required!) for her new car, and we started the  process last weekend,   windchill about 15 degrees. We got about 1/4 of the thing assembled which was decent,  but needed to take breaks frequently because of numb hands. I was able to remind myself that in another circumstance I would be grateful for being able to work in conditions that caused my hands to lose all sensation.

7) hey!  twofer!!… I was grateful for the fact that I don’t work outdoors but I also am totally grateful that somehow I’ve managed to cultivate and maintain a certain perspective, one that allows me to compare what I might be hating (at a given moment) with the fact of the possibility that things could be otherwise…as in,  I would be wishing for the chance to work in the freezing temperature with hands that go numb in about 15 minutes… it’s a perspective thing… I’m really grateful for that

8) oh!  almost forgot… I got my trademark certificate (for the phrase/words ‘Wakefield Doctrine’)  and, while some of my friends collect cars and others are into boats and golf and fishing and such, and despite feeling a bit silly on occasion at the idea of spending the time and the money to get this thing (nicely framed on my wall) I am glad that I did…(  Me:  “for $500  what is a trademark certificate for the Wakefield Doctrine?” Alex Trebek: “Please! Contestants! Provide your List Items in the form of an expression of gratitude”)

9) While I cannot say that I am grateful to Pilgrims or any Settlers, I can say that I am grateful for a comfortable Thursday this week.

10) so, new Reader? (who was willing to read  your way down here?) I am grateful for your company (…nothing weird, we all do this thing when we write…imagining a person right here who we tell ‘the story’ to, our description of our reality providing a total stranger with the gift of a view of a world… we do all do that,  don’t we?)

 

 

Ten Things of Thankful

 

 Your hosts



* an old term used by young people a long time ago…’heavy’  sort of a serious appellation for something possessing remarkable attributes

Share

(BONUS Post-ette included today!!) the Wakefield Doctrine “1st Annual Black Friday Video Chat…Tonight! at 7*”

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

The-Barnes-Foundation-FirstFriday3.1-680uw

Hey!  Tomorrow  Friday   Tonight as in later in the same day as you are reading this here correction in….from  (unless, of course, you forget and don’t read this Post until tomorrow, the forget about it) ….November 29th  ( 29-Nov-13 to our International Friends) at  7:00 pm*  First Annual Black Friday Video and X-rated Movie Festival!!

BONUS new material!***

Speaking of contributions from Downsprings,  had an interesting and challenging discussion with Phyllis the other morning regarding rogers. For some distantly related reason Phyllis said that ‘rogers are mean’. Out of the context in which this sentence was made, this statement, ‘rogers are mean’ demanded consideration. For if a statement is true about one form, what does it tell us about the other two forms? So from that Phyllis’ single statement we jumped to the following:

rogers are mean, scotts are cruel and clarks are heartless

So, lets consider these statements.
We start with the premise, i.e. when one (of us) chooses to be unkind to another, what is the characteristic of the behavior relative to our type. (Or may I could just say, why are clarks heartless and scotts cruel and rogersmean, instead of say, clarks are cruel and rogers are heartless etc)  ( Update:  The current preferred way of expressing this:  how do each of the three ‘manifest’ the state of ‘to negatively affect another’ This is a result of the understanding that ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’. )

‘Rogers are mean’ because when they want to negatively affect someone, they do it within the context of the herd. They will gossip and talk among each other about the target (of this negativity). They will never go up to the target(person) and say ‘you are a slut’. Instead they will say to each other, ’isn’t she such a slut’? It will be the group opinion that will constitute the negative effect. In other words, if an outsider comes on the scene and and needs information reagrding this person, the herd will make a point of offering an opinion. ( as in:  “hey, clark! because I’m your friend and no one will say this, I think I owe it to tell you that everyone thinks you’re a slut. Not that I agree with them, but I am your friend” )  Updated 11.29.13
(Now class, why is that so rogerian?)
(God, I so love to lecture)

The answer is, of course, because the effort to affect a non-herd member is always done among and within the herd. No single member (of the herd) could or would approach the ’target person’ directly and certainly would not say anything to their face.

All right, then how about scotts? Why cruel instead of heartless or mean?
Because it is the nature of predators, to act alone. Granted scotts will gather in packs when the occasion rises, but for the most part they hunt alone. And when a scott is being ‘negative’ it is expressed in a manner that can only be called cruelty. Part of this is the result of the fact that scotts will act directly but impersonally. They enjoy the efforts of the prey to resist, hey that squirming and trying to get away is the damn relish. But its nothing personal, the scott is hungry and the prey is food. So in the case of scotts, this cruelty is the ‘way of nature’ cruelty.

Clarks? Heartless? No! Say it ain’t so!! If any Reader needs it explained, then you need to read the content in these Pages a bit more.

So leave a Comment let everyone know if you are intending to join us tomorrow… you may regret your rash decision, but hey, that’s what the Wakefield Doctrine blog is for!!

(I’ll be back in the course of the day today, will have more details and and insights and outrageous assertions as, I trust you have all come to expect from everyone’s new favorite Doctrine, the Wakefield Doctrine continues it’s coverage of this first of ‘the Big Three Holidays)

(back) So what do you have to look forward to from the Wakefield Doctrine this Joyous Winter Season?   more scott and more roger!  you do recall that the Doctrine holds that we all have (the potential) inherent in all three worldviews, don’t you?  and you remember what we said about using the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for self-development, right?  (i.e. ‘simple as can be, harder than anything you have ever tried to do’…that) Well that’s what we are going to be spending your valuable blog-reading time over the next 6 weeks or so. Plan accordingly.

 

(back)  I know that I write every year about parades… (rogerian essential) but my god!! where the hell is Child Protection services?  those poor children… 3 hours walking the streets of New York City , in 30 degree windy temperature all for 5 seconds ‘in frame’ in front of Macy’s so the folks back in Indiana can say ‘look!! it’s Tracy!!! what the hell’s the matter with her face?’
On a personal note: the over-hormoned 23 year old inside of me died a little late this morning as I sat in stunned disbelief as Joan Jett stood, singing, on a frickin float…. not a cigarette or ‘record machine’ in sight…waving at the crowds with a blank look on her still very attractive face…

(back) (…again!)  that ‘cover photo? the one with the Delegates from Slovenia?  that goes back to the early days of this blog. we had a thing about Slovenians!!  (a good thing, nothing bad…just a fun kinda affectation.) will tell you more in a little bit

 

* For the time-zone impaired:

  • Jak!! yo!!! that means  6:00 pm  Twin City time
  • Stephanie?  I believe you will have to stay up kind of late… this being like 2:00 am (!) in your time…. well, there’s always the Sunday Video Brunch (which is 3:30 pm local  i.e. your local )
  • Molly?  yeah… I know we’ll need to co-odrdinate on the google circle thing, but these Video chats are kinda fun… for you  it would be 5:00 pm  stop in while fixing dinner…if your phone can handle google hangouts
  • Michelle?  wakey wakey!!   8:00 yo
  • Lizzi?  it’s a Friday night! you get to stay up late ( sorry if we appear to be assuming that you would have nothing more…. exotic…exciting?  better to do on a Friday night!  12 Midnight!
  • Melanie  a late night rendavouz with what I trust is the oddest group of people you know
  • Christine… you know that we totally would love to have you join us…but it will be either 6 or 7 pm your time, so I suspect that you’ll be in the middle of dishes and homework and such… but if you do get a chance…on your phone  come hangout with us!
  • Kristi   oh Kristi!  come out and plaaay
  • Richard oh Richard….  lol  you know it would be fun

**  ‘cept for Zoe… she has a very rare, ‘Join in late Card’  a privilege enjoyed by few, so step carefully when you join the brunch!  lol

 

*** well, ‘new’ in the sense that if you were born anytime after, say… I don’t know  2011?? then this is totally new and original!! hey, it’s a great insight from a DownSpring so ya better appreciate it …you know how hard it is to get a roger to say anything that amounts to more than ‘I told you so…’??!  I didn’t think so…. so read and comment, already.

 

 

Share

post-party Post the Wakefield Doctrine “…during this week of St rogers Day, I am the most offending soul alive”

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

Bugis-Street-Shopping-District-38610

the Wakefield Doctrine is a way to better understand ourselves and the people in our lives. the Wakefield Doctrine offers a perspective, a way of knowing why people do the things that they do, say the things that they say, act the way that they act. with the Wakefield Doctrine, you need never find yourself saying, “why on earth would she go and say a thing like that/how could he do that? I really thought I knew her/I knew him better than that!” the Wakefield Doctrine offers that we all group up and develop our personality in one of three characteristic worldviews and that it is the character of these worldviews, which are essentially our personal realities, that determine how we relate ourselves to the world around us. By knowing the characteristics of these three worldviews, (the world of the Outsider/clarks, the reality of the Predator/scotts and the life of the Herd/rogers), we are able to correctly infer the world as the other person is experiencing it. to know the other person at this level, as well as knowing ourselves at this level, we are better able to identify with them and therefore not only know why they act the way that they do, but you will know what they will do in the future. with the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool, you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

so there was this bloghop this weekend. everyone was there. good time, such as can be experienced virtualistically, of course. but, another week is upon us and while I can’t promise that we will say all e.e. on yer asses, I can promise that we will be doing the Traditional rogerian Thanksgiving Day Post ( redundant to the point of…. being… unnecessary?) In any event, that will be on Wednesday. don’t miss it!

Damn, our relentlessly formal relationship is back, already! What the hell, but you know clarks, we mean well. (Actually, let me let you in on some insider shit. We clarks don’t do the polite and self-effacing and oh-how-formal-you-are! thing because we want to be nice. Well, actually, we do… but we’re not doing it out of consideration for you, we’re doing it out of consideration of ourselves! We ‘keep our distance’ because it is how we relate ourselves to the world, you know, like that block quote up above says. Well, if you’re still reading this, you’re bright enough to have understood that without needing me to tell you that. But what you might not realize is that most of a clark’s behavior is driven by fear.  (Now, before you rogers get all, hands-rubbing-together-glint-in-eye and you scotts get all, ‘aww-hey-I-got-your-back’),  I said our behavior is shaped by fear, I did not say that we (clarks) are afraid. In point of fact, clarks are the most un-afraid people I know. There is a difference between behavior shaped by fear and a personality type in which fear is a central motivation. But we will need to come back to that topic later today. oh! and before you get all concerned for the poor clarks in your life? clarks are the most competent-in-duress life form that you will ever encounter. In a situation where all of the bad breaks and tragedy, from sick and dying relatives to runaway spouses and vanishing employment, descend on a person, compared to clarks, both scotts and rogers look like that little girl lost in the shopping mall, crying for her parents. ( I mean that in a loving, respectful way to you scotts and rogers out there, ya know).

So, that should get you started this Monday. More to follow, babies, more to follow.  But the real world, this week’s work week (albeit truncated in our US culture) is demanding our presence.  We will address this issue of ‘clarks and fear’ later in the week. Speaking of ‘later in the week’, I was thinking about maybe a Black Friday Video Break later this here week here.  (For any exo-cultural Readers, Black Friday (in the US) is sorta like Christmas and Easter and maybe the Fourth of July in honor and appreciation of the commercial element in our culture. Whatever. I was thinking something either during the day or even later that evening. More to follow.

Share

“shit, I shoulda stayed at the Bus Station” the Wakefield Doctrine (sorry the first part of this Title belongs to a different Post entirely)

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

what-if-tyler-durden-wrote-the-supposed-rules-of-menswear-02

Break Time!!  Yeah, we know what you’re thinking,* “hey  enough of the heavy introspection, already!  we came here for a break from our daily routines, ya know? The Wakefield Doctrine advertises itself as being a personality theory that’s unique, useful and fun.  Lets see some of that fun!”

Well, we all know that if it’s fun you’re after (and you’re not concerned with the price), there’s only one worldview to go to… the scottian worldview. scotts!!!  (‘Say it baritone and you can hear the police sirens wailing, say it contralto and you’ll surely be praying‘).

We all have a scottian friend. There’s currently a TV commercial for Las Vegas and is premised on that guy, the one we all knew growing up who always had to push it. To go a bit faster, to take a bit more of a risk than is absolutely necessary. juvenile detention facilities structure their business models on the young scottian males’ natural proclivity for anticipating consequences.

And….and! lets not forget that the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral! ( ya gotta admit, in most cultures, the male is permitted a greater latitude in (their) choices of expression of drives and instincts and such, the scottian personality type is that of the predator and so they pretty high on the aggressiveness and impulsivity of action. if you are female, in most cultures, they will frown upon you going around arm wrestling, punching your subordinates on the shoulder and saying ‘fuck!’ a lot. fortunately for you (the scottian female) there are ….alternative forms of expression).

if you’re a clark you have always had a scottian friend, if you’re a roger you have never been able to avoid having a scottian friend and if you are a scott you’ve known of other scotts in your life.  you know them because as a scott:

  • they must establish ‘ranking’ in any and every social environment… you will spot the scott because they will alway first ‘work the room’, going from person to person, small group to small group and push everyone on the shoulder (literally and/or figuratively), by doing this they will establish their place in rank
  • they will command attention (or better, for the sake of the rogers) they will simply assume dominance
  • in conversational style:  a clark will listen to you talk, a roger will let you talk…a scott will make you talk
  • females will be identified as ‘tomboys’ early in life (‘from ages 5 to breasts’); with puberty, scottian females come into their own… (short form: most cultures do not permit the female members expressing aggressiveness physically)
  • you will have a clarklike friend, who you will consider a friend because they  do not act like prey nor do they act like as another scott
  • they will be total pushovers for a person who appreciates their mind ( in males it is best to admire their creativity… in females anything not involving their bodies will work  lol)
  • in social conflicts, as in dog training, to feel fear is to admit defeat
  • they are mercurial in temperament and loyal to friends and ferocious as adversaries

But they’re fun! It is easy to say, ‘hey of course we like scotts! they’re active and like to do things and are entertaining. whats not to like?’  True. But, this being the Wakefield Doctrine, we owe to ourselves to look a little deeper.

scotts are impulsive …and this appeals to us, albeit on an unconscious level, they live in the here and now!  (you remember the tale of the fiddle playing grasshopper?? tell me that, before you got to the ‘oh-so-correct-and-this-is-how-you-should-live-your-live sledge hammer ending…. tell me that you didn’t think of the grasshopper as the ‘good guy’! to varying degrees, we all would like to believe that, all we need do is throw off the cares and responsibility and life could be so much more….  and that’s true.

scotts are certain…  and this is why they are ‘natural leaders’… (the Doctrine saying is) ‘scotts are frequently wrong, never uncertain’.  people all too often equate certainty with wisdom

scotts represent what any of us would demonstrate as a ‘personality type’ if we found ourselves in the reality of the predator at a very early age and had to develop coping skills and strategies

scotts are attractive and aggravating, they are natural showmen/show-women, they see the audience as would a hungry lion a pack of gazelles  …

in the history of Man:  scotts are the conquerors, the explorers,  they are Alexander the Great (but not Julius Caesar) they are Genghis Khan (but not Charlemagne)  they are George Patton (but not Dwight Eisenhower)  scotts are cops but not firefighters….scotts are surgeons but not physicians … scotts are prima ballerinas but not Rockettes  …scotts are leaders but not Rulers

If you have made it this far…this is the link to the page on scotts

Hey want to see a scott in action?  watch this here video…everything you need to know about how to recognize a scott (there’s Robert DeNiro as the clark and some other guy as the roger).

 

 

* well duh!  this is the Wakefield Doctrine!

Share

“Enough of the theory!” the Wakefield Doctrine “…the real world, tell how it does us any good in the real world, holmes”

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

Hunter-Trader-Trapper 1937-06

Alert Reader Denise writes:

“…Doctrine! It has provided me with much insight into rogers. In a nutshell: they will always be the ones to say no. They will do nothing to disturb the boundaries, the lines that frame their world. clarks need to take notice of this. The sooner the better. I leave it in your hands, Clark, to explain to new readership the why. Maybe you need to write the answer in the form of a post.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And since we are talking about rogers**

Our Friend Zoe says to us in a Comment, she says:

“… my new roger is settling in to his new environment a bit too well… coveting my office…I loan my office out readily without reservation, but he made it very clear by saying ” I want that office… when are you leaving?” and has left telltale signs of his usage… I may have a rogerian twist and be a clark at heart… but never piss off my scott.

Sorry. The ‘damage’ is done.

Not to ‘baby-coat’1 our assessment, but you are witnessing a roger challenging your membership in the herd. How is that possible, you ask? The frickin guy got there 20 minutes ago and he thinks that he can include himself in the group? ( you say with not a little emotion). What gives him the right to try that?  If you are in possession of any of these thoughts, I hate to tell ya, but you have just painted yourself a lovely shade of blue2. It is totally ‘too late’.

Not ‘too late’ to make things right, restore the proper balance, achieve an understanding among the players in this little drama…. just ‘too late’ to avoid a ‘conflict’ with the roger in your environment.

If he had perceived you as another roger or a scott he would have:

  • presented his credentials, not to meet your approval but to allow him  to ‘tune himself to the herd’ (you know how the sound of cattle and herds of cows are often presented as a single  ‘MOO’  ?  well, I think our Progenitor roger will attest to the fact that what is heard as a single MOO  is, in fact, comprised as a harmony among the members… your roger probably started with presenting some of his history to everyone he came into contact with…to hear the pitch of his new herd)
  • presented his ‘soft-underbelly’ if he thought you were a scott (at least, a predominant scottian female)… but this observation is moot, because in that particular tango, the woman leads… (at least initially and to the extent that the average person is able to see

So… now you have yourself a roger feeling like he can enhance his standing in the herd by making you appear more and more the Outsider. Remember, a dominance move by a roger, in contrast to that of a scott is never made ‘alone’.  While he may appear to be addressing the matter of use of the office space to you directly, most of his efforts are actually directed to the others in your environment. rogers always work in the context of the group, the herd. It is this ‘contexting’ that rogers will base their strategy on, that and, be on the lookout for (him) invoking referential authority. ( Hey, I know you love your space..I respect that, but we were talking about how, with the practice growing we all need to work together more…”)

All kidding aside. you now have a problem that, interestingly enough, can be seen as a manifestation of the trap that would appear to an inherent aspect of the desire for self-improving oneself. You rightly know that you can ‘over-come’ this person’s attempt to reduce the quality of your personal work environment. But at what price? The Doctrine states that we all retain access to those two worldviews that are not our predominant worldview. In your case, (we hear you say), ‘ a clark with secondary rogerian and tertiary scottian aspects’. but…. but!  here is where the conflict begins to manifest.  (If) you are a clark, then your personal reality is that of the Outsider…which makes perfect sense given your situation. You can access your scottian aspect and inter-act with this roger as would a scott, and as we have already said, if this were a scott-on-roger thing, none of the the above would be happening.  So, you can dominate the roger rather decidedly. But then what?  Will you trade your predominant (clarklike) worldview for a victory in a single circumstance? Or… is there a way to reach an understanding with this person?   unfortunately, the Wakefield Doctrine says ‘no’.

Well, sorta. We’re playing with the words now.  clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel.  So, if you want to reach an understanding, you are out of luck. That is not to say that there is nothing you can do, but it should not be thought of as an understanding.

Lets return to a strategy we have previously offered:  ‘love your roger‘  This is still the preferred strategy, but it will require a bit more….finessing.  Yes, you should ‘love your roger‘,  but that does not mean (as is all too often the case with clarks), you must allow him to do as he wishes. But, to love your roger requires that you relate to him on an emotional basis… more than that!  you must regard him on an emotional basis. We’re using italics here to convey the idea that, if you are able to know him completely on an emotional basis you will be relating to him as a member of the herd. That’s right!  trade that lovely azure coat for a comforting wrap of brown and white spots!

(will continue later today…. )

Wait a minute!! If you haven’t seen it yet,  watch the scott and roger…. everything is right there. (the roger looking to left and right for the herd that is his context, his invoking referential authority, his offering of emotional currency…his love).

 

1) a rogerian expression of sorts… a fascinating characteristic use of language found only in rogers…here,  go to the page on rogers  down towards the bottom

2) a reference to the description of a clark in the context of a group, or perhaps it would be more realistic to say, ‘a clark in contrast to a group’ in any event, the term ‘blue monkey’ is a remnant of grad school days when we learned of (or came to believe that we learned of) an experiment in which one young monkey was painted (more likely dyed) blue and returned to his troop, you can imagine the result. In the Wakefield Doctrine we use the blue monkey image several ways, as a symbol of the innate outsider-ness that clarks exhibit when in a social setting, and it is also used to refer to (a) clarks self-sabotaging by make an extra effort to ‘contrast their differences.

 

 

 

Share