psychology of personality | the Wakefield Doctrine psychology of personality | the Wakefield Doctrine

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

RePrint?

sure, why the heck not?

(oh yeah!  before this shortcut: the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us based on our relationship (since, like right from the start life) with it there are three of (these) and the one you have based your social strategies and interactional styles of behavior upon is your personality type (aka predominant worldview) you only have time to learn/practice one and while the ‘other two’ ways to relate to the world remain as potential, one is all you gots, luckily, it’s the perfect personality type based on the personal reality you exist in (and have, since you was babies) clarks are Outsiders not to be confused with introverts, but to be fair, lets say during our young school years, we summered in Spectrum-ville, (lol); scotts are Predators full of life and determined to ride all the rides, they will nip at your hells and be at your side for the climatic showdown all guns a-blazing while laughing the scottian female will totally have a derringer and maybe a knife (or two) with wicked martial/marital skills (“We’re surrounded, one chance. Now go!! I got this!!!”) and rogers of Members of the Herd so certain you’d think (or chose) to believe what they say, but the thing is it’s not what they say, it’s what they know that’s important, ready to be reliable, often distracted/offended by the novel, they will surely be remembered by their works if not their thoughts.)

 

ok, we promised a RePrint

… no, you’re absolutely correct how the above all ee cummings manual of style (ish) is sufficient

the coolest thing about the Doctrine is that you already know what you need to know to take advantage of it’s curious organization of views of the world.

one thing: the Wakefield Doctrine, while possessed of the glorious ambition to allow us to see the world as the other person is experiencing it, is not for everyone.

the Wakefield Doctrine (and it’s perspective) is for you, not them.

 

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

It’s Complicated

You wouldn’t understand

You’re different, this doesn’t apply

Life is not so neat and organized

Sure, it’s clever but to be genuinely useful it’s fairly under-validated

Derivative, been done

People simply don’t fit into so limited a taxonomic scheme

Everyone will laugh

Life doesn’t fit into three categories

What were they again? (clarks, scotts and rogers)

And the basis of this paper-doll phylogeny? (one’s relationship with the world)

Stop it, now.

There’s no way you’re going to backwards-answer the above statements and bring it to a conclusion. (no, not if you maintain that attitude)

An additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. The Wakefield Doctrine is not the Answer. It is a question. As such, you are responsible for the product of its application to your life.

One thing: a) you can’t get it wrong 2) you can’t break it.

It’s not for everyone. Not everyone enjoys the constructive make-believe that is hidden (all too effectively for most) in the world.

*

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Speaking of the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules)… this pitcha is good for, like, 13 Grats

 

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Created 13 or so years ago by Founderess Lizzi R what sets this grat blog apart from the many, many, many others with the same theme is that it (the TToT, not the theme) encourages all to be as creative as the spirit moves us. Ya know? To that end, while we hope to get a list of ten things that you (the Reader/Participant) have found to inspire and instigate a state of Gratitude it’s total WWF-no-holds-barred list writing. The only requirement is ‘good intent’. Won’t spend a lot of time defining that; suffice to say, if you get it deliberately wrong you will have to answer to Kristi.

1)  Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) Front Meadow Status Update

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

6) Ola’s bridge

7) something, something

8) Hypo-Grat* So, like, everyone pulls out the chrono-reverse** refrigerator ever time they vacuum, am I right? The photo below shows a bottle of dog shampoo we bought for Una in the throes of ‘My god! What kind of humans are we… (backstory: Una was a chodsky pes and, as such had a double coat and, wicked long hair. She didn’t particularly enjoy being brushed. So we didn’t. We did take her to a groomer once, back in, like, 2016 or so. They did a great job. Went back the following year and Una made it abundantly clear that the first grooming she did for us. Naturally, I paid the cancellation fee and we beat a hasty retreat. While the photo for Grats 1 & 2 was not taken at the time, it is a good facsimile for the expression on her face when we left the groomers in our rearview mirror;) that fell behind said refrigerator. The grat is an appreciation of exercise and a brief time-travel to that day with Una.

 

9) grateful for the Hostinae (and Host, Andrew) Just this week, the codes that link this thing of ours suffered from an operator error. (ikr? like we made a mistake with the date span. knock us over with a feather). Be that as it may, Hostinae cai alerted TToT Host Central as to the error and it was rectified.

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

 

* Hypo-grat: one of the distinctive features afforded participants by the rules (SR 1.5 chapter 9 subverse 8) of our little bloghop… most of us not living in Vincent Peale-ville, ya know? So bad things happen to nearly everyone. Find and include the grat aspect and you’re good to go. (Some restriction may apply. When in doughnut, consult the TToT resident maven, Mimi)

** when ordinary, every day objects, devices, things and/or ambition becomes heavier with each passing year

music

*

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Wedndesdae -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘a quick Review and a (slightly more comprehensive) Preview

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

The Review (this week’s ‘Doctrine post’):

  • went to the archives for posts analyzin’ and dramatizin’ the three predominant worldviews
  • early descriptions were rich in visuals
  • detailed insights of the worlds of clarks, scotts and rogers
  • joyfully-hyperbolic
  • …and not just descriptions (or even insights) but real world examples: bicyclists on a Sunday morning roadway, spandex splattered with primary-color corporate logos wearing tear-drop-shaped helmets to avoid air drag and little, chromium mirrors projecting from in front of their faces (like a jeweler’s loupe except in reverse…the better to see the looks of admiration on the faces of drivers forced into the on-coming lane by the herd of rogers
  • …or scottian women who…well, basically show up (the dynamics are safely in the hands of evolution and Y Chromium imperatives / scottian men. like Excitement RNA diving into crowds of rogers and/or women, the echoes of their efficacy remodeling cultures, workplaces and friendships
  • or clarklike women and clarks wandering the world, like surprise off-springs of a mis-remembered coupling of Tantalus and Cassandra… they know what’s happening to everyone else.

The Preview (of this week’s Six Sentence Story):

 

A splendid time is guaranteed for all...

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Quick! Readers!!! Call it.

Heads: RePrint

Tails: New content.

on three

Thanks out to Misky. She called heads and we flipped our specially-minted Schrödinger twenty-five cent piece and…

So, yesterday (and the day before, in spirit if not in fact) a discussion sprang into life as a result of Misky’s Comment:

…which leads me to wonder about metaphorical ‘appetite’ like an appetite for learning, or adventure, risk, life, speed, etc. and whether those appetites fall under a scottian umbrella. I’m mostly thinking to myself here because I’m leaning toward ‘yes, yes they do.’

To which we replied:

the fun of using behavioral metaphors (as in the Wakefield Doctrine) is that it is predicated on a person having ‘an ear’ (not musical sound but for rhetoric and rhetorical deviceseses) of course the scottian predominant worldview (relating to the world as would a Predator) includes the unrestrained appetite… especially when in contrast with the price humankind pays in terms of the conveniences of modern culture… (rhymes with rogerian)

does that mean that scotts have to have the unsubtle appetite of a lion on the savannah with a pack to provide for?

yes. yes it does!
lol

the fun and value of metaphors is (imo): life and reality being but a serial story… metaphor is developed to allow insight beyond a culture’s current vocabulary (or would that be glossary? whatevs) so metaphor is both language, writing pad, pencil and big-assed eraser (the good kind, the blond, squarish slightly crumbly type that all grade school kids wanted and rarely had)…

ya know?

So, now that we’ve had a Reader step up and break the ice on Self-Conscious Pond, would anyone else care to offer an insight/opinion/guess/conjecture or ‘what-it-this’?

If this helps: the Wakefield Doctrine insists on two things:

  • there are three predominant worldviews (aka personality types) they (all three) are a function of the character of the relationship a person maintains with the world around them starting at the youngest of ages. We all grow up and develop our style/strategy for interacting with the world as we experience it. As a result, those of us who learn and enjoy this little theory can rest assured we have the perfect personality.
  • the Everything Rule maintains that everyone does everything, at one time or another. which is to say, the three personality types (of the Wakefield Doctrine) are in fact in the same reality. anything one might think applies to one, applies to the other two. it is simply manifested differently, according to the relationship the person we are talking about maintains with the world
  • only one predominant worldviews to a person (secondary and tertiary aspects having an passing effect is valid)

so to our Friend of the Doctrine’s Comment, consider how ‘appetite’ manifests in the three

  • clarks (the Outsider) discreet sips/prodigious needs
  • scotts (the Predator) more fun when it gets on everyone
  • rogers (the Herd Member) I beg your pardon, one simply must consider not only the arrangement and setting but the very Menu, there is, after all, a Right Way

Weigh in as you would

 

 

 

Share