psychology of personality | the Wakefield Doctrine

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- (RePrint, as promised)

August 2, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

… as promised*.

Hey! While we have you ‘on the line’** don’t forget, tonight is Wednesday night which means the gates open for the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Ever ones gonna be there, you should stop in. Serially! While not the most skillful of prompt-post writers, we have been told by unnamed others that the Doctrine’s contributions have a certain, je ne sais quoi, no matter what the weekly prompt word might be. Be that as you may*** stop by and check it out. You can thank us later.

[We won’t take offense if anyone feels that the premise of the following is outdated and without value in the contemporary blogosphere. But, we always assumed there is a value to links-out to other bloggers. Maybe the algorithm that ‘more-links-the-better-for-the-linkee‘ has long since sailed. Until convinced otherwise, we’ll keep at it. So, keeping with our mention above of many talented writers at Denise’s Six Sentence Story ‘hop, lets see if this shortcut/combined link works: Sixarians from last week.

the Wakefield Doctrine just like Summers of old… a re-run! …Post from August 2011

August 5, 2014

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

Rizzoli and Isles ain’t got nothin on these two…

From August 2011…. You know what’s funny? This (reprint) references a failed collaborative writing project. Well, if you go to his blog now, and the Wakefield Doctrine does, in fact, recommend that you do, you will find an un-failed collaborative writing project! Denise (over at Girlie is co-writing a story with the Progenitor roger. And it’s getting pretty good! the roger, being the wildly creative, blog-risk taker that he is, is posting each chapter as they are written. So, when you go over there to read it, you might want to scroll down to Chapter 1 and ‘read your way back to the top’. Be sure to Comment (tell ’em ‘the Doctrine’ sent ya!).

As we all know, the Progenitor roger ( nom de plumage RCoyne ) started his little blog in the hopes of creating a Collaborative Writing Project. Attracting and combining (the efforts) of the full range of talents, that seem in so plentiful supply in cyberspace, it was RCoyne’s hope to produce a totally original literary work, (and) given the apparent variety of interests  found among people in the blogosphere, it  would have been one helluva a blog.
….It failed, of course.

This is not to disparage RCoyne’s idea nor his Intent. It is a reflection upon the fact that he is a roger….or more precisely, it is a reflection upon the inherent limitations of the aspects of being a roger. Do not misinterpret our feelings on the matter, we are making this statement without placing the onus entirely on roger (or his people). This statement is equally true of the other two personality types, the clarks and the scotts. Each of the three personality types, that comprise the Wakefield Doctrine, represent a worldview, a ‘reality’, if you will; each a perspective  that is unique and (one) that has great strengths and terrible weaknesses.
(Readers! Remember that the Doctrine maintains that all people are possessed of the qualities/the potentials of each of these three ‘types’ and while we become predominately one of the three, the other two aspects are always within us, waiting to be called upon by the dominant personality. At times of extreme duress or peril they are available to be called upon.)
We call this…the…. Mystery of the Wakefield Doctrine and the Proof of the 3 Personalities

What is the mystery of the rogerian personality type that prevented RCoyne’s blog from taking off?

What should have the roger done, in order to be successful with the Seccesscessionisticalationist Rag?

Why are we picking on the roger so much?

Lets start with what we do know, about rogers:

they believe that Life has rules and that if followed everything will be as it should be

rogers believe that reality is essentially quantifiable, that 2 + 2 equals 4 is true now and will always be true, even after the human race is extinct

the world is perfect to a roger, we use the word in the sense that implies completeness and order, as opposed to virtuous or good

rogers experience the world in general and people in particular with an organizational bias predicated on the herd mentality, ‘like gathers with like and excludes that which is not like’ (or some such nonsense)

for a roger, the ‘backstory’ is more attractive than the narrative, (an example from the progenitor roger: early in the days of this blog, one particular Post drew an exceptional number of Comments, we asked  roger what he thought about it and he indicated that he didn’t bother reading the Post, he only read the Comments)

rogers are responsible for civilization, for the development of civilized society, for all social development and refinements beginning with cavemen and moving forward to the Present

in expressing their perception of the world as a place of rules, rogers become: Doctors and Lawyers, Accountants and Engineers, Surveyors and Writers of Popular Fiction, Missionary Families and Dynastic Families, Pioneers (geographically), High Priests and Politicians, Homemakers and Trendsetters, Judges and Executioners

The rogerian component of the Proof of the 3 Personalities?  rogers are the only ones who can ‘ manage and maintain‘ the scottian element of the population. Without rogers, we would all be living under bushes, darting out to drink from nearby streams at dawn and duck, shoulders hunched in anticipation of the attack from the nearby  Umbrella Thorn Acacia tree. Damn! The thing about scotts, they are all drive, instinct, appetite. Someone, ( I think it was Claire ), was recently musing about the three-ness of the Wakefield Doctrine and that got me to thinking about Freud (have not got a clue) and his Id, Ego and Super Ego. Who out there does not see that our scottian element is so the Id. And while it is essential to life, appetite and impulsivity, left un-checked would be kinda short-term.

Let us end today’s Post with a little example that came up in a recent letter to Molly, in which we were discussing the difficulty encountered in distinguishing between a (very) robust roger and a scott. Both are active, and charming and totally gregarious. But if we watch these two walk into a social gathering ( a party, a picnic, a business conference) what we will see is:

the scott will make a noise (figurative or literal) immediately upon entering the space…this is meant as a first effort to flush-out any other scotts
the roger will stand in a prominant place at the entrance and wait for a sign of recognition from the various herds making up the crowd
the scott will go to the first person they can get to and start to tell a joke about the fact that they (the scott) are present
the roger will go immediately go to the first person they recognise (provided the person is another roger, if however, the first person they recognize is a clark, the roger will wait)
the scott will go from person to person and tell a joke or introduce themselves to each individual (if there are too many people, in which case the scott will treat each herd as a person)
the roger will either join a herd or gather clarks to start a herd….and wait for a scott.

Bottom line: the scott sees the social environment as a hunting ground, therefore everyone is either prey or predator. If the scott encounters other scotts then ranking must be established, either dominant or submissive, as long as they know where they stand.
The roger, on the other hand, sees the social environment as an expression of themselves. All that the roger encounters is either of the herd or not of the herd. Those that are ‘not of the herd’ are as important and valuable to the roger as the outsiders. Rogers cherish outsiders, they are the dross that accentuate the beauty of what the roger builds in his little herd.

Hey@!

* You remember, yesterday’s post!

** if you have to ask, ask your parents.

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “The RePrints must go on! …again, or is that implied by the ‘Re’?”

July 31, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

Today we have one of the earliest of the Last-Days-of-Summer* posts.

Busy weekend, this past couple of days. As you’d know if you read our TToT yesterday, we attended a concert. Lyle Lovett and his Large Band. Most excellent event. But that bit of diversion (last concert being in, like 2006) threatens to throw off our recent post-writing rhythm.

So, this post. (To any new Readers** the answer is: ‘Nope! Don’t have a problem going back and reading early posts.***)

how early? First-full-year writing, yo. (for the record? Seeing the illustration I used… brought a smile, twenty-~~two~~ three(!!) years later.

We know why you are reluctant to Comment

August 31, 2010

Welacome to the aWakefielda Docttrina (dis is da tearey of die clark and da scotts and dem rogers der). This is the place you can really get something really useful from the internet experience. Really. My Doctrine, she gonna make you so a happy that you, you’re gonna wanna say, where she been all my life, eh? Its twue, its weally twue.*

When you “get” this “Doctrine” you “will” finally understandwhy “everyone” acts like they “do”. What confused you about, these so-called “family members” and spouses (nyahh sp ow seses), all them who have been tormenting you while you try to understand what they want and give that to them. BUT! do they like WHAT you do for them? HUH? DO they? wait! wait! I can answer that question!! Call on me! Me! The answer to your question is:
“No, no they do not” (Thank you, thank you I studied so hard for this moment. I want to thank the Progenitor scott and the Progenitor roger and all the DownSprings, thank you! thank you! thank you!)

Welll… (as a leading scott would be heard to say, just before totally firing some poor college student who was only working at the timeshare resort for the summer, in the hopes of making some money for school). Little did they realise what they were getting themselves into… In fact, have I ever mentioned that I survived and even flourished in the totally insane, twisted-personality realm of timeshare sales? And that that was only because of my understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)? Well, I did! Remind me sometime to tell y’all about it. It’s about half interesting.)

Anyway, I think I getting back to writing about what the current thinking at the Wakefield Doctrine is, vis ‘a vis getting Readers to Comment and participate and generally get us all famous and shit. Quick background, we know people are visiting and reading the Doctrine and we know that some people come back and read on a fairly regular basis. We also know that (other than Progenitors and DownSprings) there has not been a lot of participation from these putative Readers. So, what gives?
One opinion, offered by Friend of the Doctrine Mel, is that Commenting on a blog like this is kinda intimidating. Intimidating!?! What the hell is that supposed to mean??!! Wft we ask real, real nice for people to write a Comment, we even offer to give them a frickin, free, frickin hat (for their damn frickin heads)! How intimidating is that? Hey!! I asked you a goddamn question! How-Intimidating-Is-That??!!!

So, maybe there is some possibility that people might feel that they are expected to answer in a way that might be judged. But we do not mean that. When I say, “there are no stupid questions, there are just your questions”, I mean that in a kind and supportive way. We have all been where you are, and we truly invite a reasoned and constructive response to our Posts, do you think you can manage to muster** a little initiative and write something? If we were all rogers here, we would come right out and ask you to Comment in a way that would sound like you would be the one missing out, if you did not Comment. But then, we are not all rogers here. Are we?

While that might be the reason (for the lack of participation) I have recently come to the conclusion that we have simply failed in conveying the basic concept of the Wakefield Doctrine to you Readers. When I think about how we got to this point (of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) I realise that most of the time has been spent ‘in person’ with people and saying things like, ‘look at that person, watch how they react, they are such clarks or scotts or rogers’. Even more basic than that, the beginning of spreading the word involved people who knew the Progenitors directly, so it was so easy to say, ‘you know how roger always does that’, or ‘now watch how mad scott gets when I…’ It was very easy to convey the elements of this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, the (future) Wakefield Doctrine.

It is just that, after the immediate circle of friends learned this thing of ours, they were telling people they knew about clarks, scotts and rogers. It became apparent (or at least seemed apparent) that people liked it and were inclined to share it with others and the Doctrine was simply enough to spread that way. And so the Wakefield Doctrine blog came into existence. But the gap, the ‘one wayedness’ of writing a blog is a difficult hurdle to overcome. Combined with what we might charitably call rudimentary writing skills, we need to find a way to communicate the fun, the positive benefits, the value of the Wakefield Doctrine in such a way, that after reading this, people will say, “Yeah I know what those people mean!”

As you see, we have the Raison-ettes writing and contributing in the hopes of providing as much of the sense of the Doctrine as is possible. Maybe the only answer is to take it on the road. Rent halls in large cities and train people directly to carry the message of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers out to the world.
Sort of like Fight Club.***

* Stolen from Blazing Saddles, one of the top three funniest movies of all time
** A ‘muster’ is an assembling of military troops for inspection. This expression, dating from 1575, first referred to passing such a review successfully (Wiktionary)
*** But without the fighting****
**** And without being Brad Pitt*****
*****Hell, without being Edward Norton

*aka ‘so, did the weather person mention the chance of snow?

** New to this blog or, even better, new to writing a blog

*** which is more surprising, given that we’re clarks. Heck, clarks abhor scrutiny to the point that, for us, the idea of holding up early efforts in developing any skill is…well, abhorrent. But the Doctrine is, again, demonstrating it’s remarkable benefits, at least here, in the most personal of terms. We can read those posts and smile, seeing a certain writing style showing here and there. (Overlay your own metamorphosis …errr. metaphor HERE). lol

The effect of the principles of this here personality theory here is amply demonstrated. At least to me. And I’m not just the curator of the Wakefield Doctrine, I’m an adherent!

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 23, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

This is our (weekly) contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

Banned in more than seven countries (and two kingdoms), Bloghop #1 on UNESCO’s inaugural ‘Ten Most Subversive Weblogs’ (in early 1999) and a favorite haunt of Andy Warhol. Needless to say, the TToT has been the darling of Free Thinkers, followers of Madame Blatavsky and fans of Shirley Jackson. The latter, taking as oblique encouragement of their own little blogs, the immortal phrase, ‘Whatever walked there, walked along’.

But, as Leslie Neilson would point out, ‘That’s not important right now…’

What is (important) is the exercise in cultivating an additional perspective. A perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up that is sensitive to those people, places, things and events (both real and imagined). By doing so, we accomplish two things: 1) enhance our capacity to see the world as others are experiencing it and b) realizing the positive energy at the expense of the negative (ref: our resident positive-from-seemingly-negative maven, Mimi.)

Out list for this here week, here:

1) Una (Sunday Napation)

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Lawn-to-Be: last week

6) Lawn-to-Be: this week

7) the Unicorn Challenge fun-in-two-hundred-words

8) something, something

9) the RAILING REPAIR! (this is a stupendous undertaking by virtue of the CAP locked title.) Before photo:

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 16, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

Founded thirteen years ago, in 2003, in a thatched cottage on the banks of the River Worcestershire in County Glam on the outskirts of the Devonian Forest, the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop has been a positive force in the blogosphere. Whether people are aware of it or not. Simply taking the time to reflect on the previous seven, (or seventy or One thousand Six Hundred and seven), days automatically imparts an additional perspective on our lifes. And, if there is a secret-of-the-universe ready-made for a one minute commercial to interrupt your favorite youtube channel’s newest posts, it would be perspective. That’s all the Wakefield Doctrine its-own-self is, an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up.

Meanwhile, here is our perspective on the people, places and/or things we are currently aware of being grateful for:

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) alternate bloghops, i.e. the Unicorn Challenge (hosted by ceayr and jenne) (and the Doctrine’s contribution this week: ‘The Rain like Rust Drowns the World‘)

6) Last phase of the grass project (straw around the cottage)

7) the Wakefield Doctrine (redux)… we’ve all watched the movie clips we’ve posted over the years that illustrate one (or more) of the three predominant worldviews of the Doctrine: ‘I’m gonna get you Stewart‘ (a scott and a roger), ‘You’re not on my job‘ (a clark (DeNiro), a scott (Caruso) and a roger (Towles). Well, Friend of the Doctrine Nick has provided us with another resource in this aspect of learning the Wakefield Doctrine over at his new stomping grounds, the Rhythm Section with his most excellent piece on Moby.

8) something, something

9) new WAF¹

10) Secret Rule 1.3 [“…’cause if we didn’t have secret rules, then that kinda makes the whole Garden of Eden, ‘please, one thing only, just don’t (snicker, snicker) eat this Apple (chortling angels off stage-right.”]

1) waf: Weird-Assed-Flower

music vids

<!– ends InLinkz code —

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

Et-Tuesday? -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 11, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

Damn! Forgot to post the RePrint yesterday.

Here ya go*

* of course, today being a different present from yesterday. e.g. pre-present, we’ll simply have to find another reference point to search randomly.

That’s it!

Referential Authority.

One of the coolest moments in modern Doctrine development. Starting in 2009, it was an exciting time of discovery and exhibition. Like a room full of LPs in unlabeled cardboard boxes, or those 1950’s illustration of nuclear fission, where the non-Superman, clark kent-looking guy tosses a ping pong ball into a room that, while otherwise devoid of furnishings, has, like a zillion mouse traps covering the floor. ‘Look, kids! Isn’t nuclear fission cool’?

Anyway.

(Insider Insight: the posts here at the Wakefield Doctrine pretty much write themselves. But the early years were, like, ‘Damn! You know, you’re right! Those are good examplae of clarklike, scottian or rogerian behavior”.)

I was a wonderful time of discovery as well as teaching and examplifying**

But, being on the second half of the morning writing time, let’s make a long parable, short.

We decided to write posts that describe a semi-real life situation, (a restaurant) and offer the Reader of a choice of three ‘endings’. These alternate conclusions would infer behavior on the basis of a ‘character’s’ predominant worldview. In one of the first of this series, we had a girl go to the restaurant for a job interview. At noon. During the lunchtime rush. The storyette opens as she is acknowledged by the owner/interviewer and by the waitress. That she needs to wait, as they are clearly backed-up, is established.

Despite the rush subsiding, the lone waitress is clearly falling behind and a growing percentage of tables remain un-cleared. The ‘hook’ for the story is to present three ‘endings’. The three would, of course, represent action according to personality type.

One of the endings: the girl, seeing the waitress being overwhelmed, gets up and begins to clear tables.

Welll!

Two words: the rogers went nuts! The Readers, at least those who were Herd Members reacted with such vehemence, ‘She can’t do that!! She doesn’t work there. What the hell!!’ was the response with unanimity.

They meant it.

And, we’re, like, “Wait a minute… you’re serious. The interviewee demonstrating her willingness to work, not to mention be helpful, this is bad?”

And they’re, to a roger, “But she doesn’t work there yet, does she?!?!”

And, a purely serendiptious bathtub suddenly lights up: Referential Authority.

rogers, in experiencing the world as being quantifiable and knowable (or, at very least, learnable), require people to obey the Rules. And, since there is no official Book, there must be a control. A way of preventing, (or, at least hindering) the masses from taking the Rules of behavior into their own hands. ‘That’s not how it’s done here.’ ‘This is the Standard Operating Procedure. We all call it the bible’. (Said every HR manager to every new hire).

We had discovered an artifact of the world of the Herd Members. From beyond the range of extrapolation from primary characteristics. But then, we’ve been fortunate here at the Wakefield Doctrine. Insights are made available. All we have to do is practice seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it (all the time).

Benefit? Our fictional applicant did not have to beat-up on herself in (natural***) response to being berated by the over-worked waitress.

cool

** not a ‘real’ word

*** one guess which of the three predominant worldviews she was.