relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

T-Minus Apocalypse -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 26, 2025 By clarkscottroger 6 Comments

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

So, if we can agree that ‘Imitation is the sincerest form of Flattery’, (and surely the rogers will concur, albeit begrudgingly), then by extension ‘Repetition is the highest form of Self-Respect’!

Can we get a ‘boo-yah!’?

Still haven’t decided to post the traditional Wakefield Doctrine Thanksgiving post today or tomorrow.

Wait a second.

Yeah, we’ve decided.

Tomorrow.

Since you’ve invested this much time in our Wednesday post, (and we have psyched our ownselfs into some ‘how-easy-is-this?’ reprintage), what say we go and copy/paste (surely the motto of (the) early adolescence love relationship formation phase), something interesting and/or entertaining.

But in service of the moment (again!! adolescent ‘self-restraint’ lol)

From the beginning days. Actually it says, ‘August 21, 2009’ (permit us a ‘Damn! That was a while ago.)

FAQ(s) Wakefield Doctrine

I think sometimes I am (a scott) then other times I must be (a clark). Whats up with that?

You’re a clark.

Hey, wait you can’t be that sure on the basis of one question!

Yes I can. (I’m a clark)

The question you should be asking is, ‘why does it seems that sometimes we are one form, other times others’. And the answer is that we have the potential of all three, we just get in the habit of seeing the world one characteristic way, i.e. clark, scott or roger.

Is there any scientific basis for the Wakefield Doctrine?

No. (see the ‘About’ page.)

When I read this site, it seems like there is really only one person writing. Can that possibly be true? What happened to the collaborative thing.

Nothing.

I thought this was a FAQ pages, I don’t see all that many Questions.

…I’m waiting for a question… ‘what part of ‘Frequently asked questions’ are you brainiacs missing? There would be useful information if some of you scottian adhd cases or you middle-of-the-herd rogerian mouth-breathers would conquer your fear of anything that doesn’t already have a DYNAMO brand embossed label stuck to this blog letting you know that it was within your admittedly limited range of initiative and realise that you would not be struck down by Jethro were you to actually reach out and turn on your computer and asked a question.

Will there ever be new FAQ questions?

Yes, yes there will.

I heard that you have been doing this for nearly a year, what have you learned about the Wakefield Doctrine that you did not know when you started?

Which part of your statement are you calling a question? Rather than wait for you to move your lips as your try to re-phrase the question, I will answer this way. The Wakefield Doctrine appears to have an appeal beyond my immediate circle of friends, in fact, it appears to have sufficient appeal to out-weigh my meager writing skills. By presenting the Doctrine in a blog, the virtue and value of this thing is put to the test. And it seems to be passing that test.
What a well-thought out question.

What?

Never mind, you would not get it. Other aspects that you would not get is that the Doctrine is proving itself to actually be an effective tool in aid of an effort to change life habits. (Given the unlikelihood of your comprehending this answer I will continue), and say that anyone reading this with a true desire to ‘change their life’* should read this blog and do whatever they must do to get actively involved in it. This includes, but is not limited to: writing Comments.

*Is it true that if I have to ask the question, I will perforce be unable to understand the question?

Yes.

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

Tu Threesady -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 25, 2025 By clarkscottroger 3 Comments

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

What fun!

As we often do (and are ever so grateful for) we’re using Reader’s Comments to provide a theme (for a) Doctrine post.

First up, the Comments/Inspiration/Challenge (arising from) Monday’s post.

Secundus (no, not the Silent Philosopher!), the Comments in reaction/reflection/response/recidivism (lol) from three of our favorite Reader-Commentationers: in chronological order:

Denise (our edits for selfish authoritarian reasons):

Funny, this post speaks of learning to love our rogers and back then, I did embark on an active quest to “learn to love the rogers” in my life. More difficult with some than others, it behooves a clark to attempt this thing. Which is to say, observing/learning how rogers relate themselves to the world challenges us (as clarks) to step outside of ourselves and imagine a thing we’ve never felt, have not, certainly not innately, experienced. More specifically, with the Wakefield Doctrine as guide, as a clark I can understand the whys of a roger’s behavior. No easy task, but not impossible. Learning how things, events and such manifest for a roger takes a huge load off a clark. That is not to say it doesn’t necessarily excuse a roger’s behavior yet having the understanding of it goes a long way in allowing a clark to interpret more properly why a roger said or did what they did. Which then informs us how more appropriately to react, or not, to a roger.

Misky:

Well, now, this is just not on, this ‘saying, “I want that office… when are you leaving?” I see two possible avenues here: 1) invite him to sit at her desk, where she’s placed an inflated, extremely loud whopper cushion so that the entire office bursts out laughing hysterically at him … or 2) say something along the lines of “…coffee; white and 1 sugar … chop chop.”

Mimi:

I really like Misky’s second suggestion, but as noted, it might be best to try a different approach.

Thank you to the three above Students of the Wakefield Doctrine. We would say:

“Ego sum. Tu es.” (or) “Je suis. Tu es.” (or, even) “Yo soy. Tú eres.” (to avoid any accusations of chauvinistic parochialism): “O a’u O oe.”

All three are correct (or, to keep it as annoyingly subjective as possible), accurate.

The Wakefield Doctrine is a system of alternative perspectives on the world around us (and the people who make it up). Three and only three, to be precise. Three realities (albeit personal realities) but, then again, when you get right down to it, when is reality not personal? (No fair citing forests and unstable flora).

We could, with sufficient time, present the above scenario (in it’s original form as zoe was so kind as to offer for our consideration) and ‘translate’ the scene three distinct ways.

(Who in the back of the room shouted “Don’t ya mean ‘describe’ rather than ‘translate’??”) cue Jules Winfield: “Correctamundo!”

Now to hint at a discussion way, way beyond the scope of this post, we might suggest: The three comments are more about the author’s personal reality than the ostensible object of their observations.

ed. we’d considered offering a sample of three responses to each of the three comments, from the perspective of a clark, scott and roger. But, hey these guys are, in fact, on target and provide a very insightful…err …insights.

but, time-being-Tuesday, lets get all koan(ish) on this subject

The most difficult/antithetical/’no-fricken-I-could-live-in-this-world’ for each of the three:

clarks :: rogers
scotts :: clarks
rogers :: scotts

Ya know?

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 18, 2025 By clarkscottroger 4 Comments

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

Where were we?

oh yeah… the workplace battlefield!

Disclaimer: the following is for the entertainment of Readers and Students of the Wakefield Doctrine. And, in the way of this forum, a fun way to learn about how to use the Wakefield Doctrine as an additional perspective on the world around us. Even more of value, this approach lends itself to one’s efforts to improve our level of fluency in everyone’s favorite personality type system. Let Kenneth say it for us this band of bloggers:

The Wakefield Doctrine exhibits itself in the workplace, as in all other situations that involve the interaction of people.

No, wait! Lets, not be so cautious! If one has the acquired the knowledge of this thing of ours and possesses the courage to take it into one of the most common, persistent (and pernicious) of life circumstances, the rewards are very much awaiting.

We will forgo the remindage of ‘the Everything Rule’* as this exercise is kinda on the advanced side.

Running short on time. (Sorry, Misky. For us here, it’s not merely a division of the time available in the day, it is the mindset difference between (for us) creativity and practicality, aka the ‘real’ world vs everything else.)

Allow us to impose a certain order to help with our discussion going forward.

Some no frills, down ‘n dirty Doctrine insights into the workplace:

your manager is a roger. Do not ask them a question ‘in public’, i.e. in the presence of other workers/employees.
Laugh at the antics of the scott but do not, under any circumstances: maintain excessive eye contact and laugh with others do not abstain.
Careful with being friendly with the clark. (If you don’t know what that means, that’s why god invented Comments). Hint: that blue tends to rub off if you know what we mean

…will return tomorrow.

* New Readers? ‘the Everything Rule’ states: Everyone does everything, at one time or another. Not merely suggesting that no one, (of the three personality types), have exclusive domain over a category of behavior, insight, knowledge, strength or weakness relative to the other two. We’re saying that this is common sense and nothing silly. (lol) While the scott is inherently well-suited to the profession of police officer, clarks and rogers can also be found in the ranks of law enforcement. They will, however, manifest the performance of their duties in a manner that not only is immediately obvious (if’n you’re doing your reading) but will reflect the relationship the individual (clark, scott or roger) maintains with the world around them and the people who make it up.

And, of course, this applies to medicine, the legal profession, engineering, the clergy, teaching and street-walking, to name but a few.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: relationships, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 17, 2025 By clarkscottroger 4 Comments

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

AP-level post today.

New Readers? ~~Here go and read this post, then this one and finally this one. Be prepared for a Quiz tomorrow.~~

Damn! Throw out the Lesson Planner. Found a Post that sets up our discussion too damn good.

Today’s post: Workplace Conflict. (What is it good for…absolutely nothin’ say it again. hunh, good god.)

Warning. Very involved, quite rich content, this ‘Workplace Conflict’ scenario. May very well run to two, even three posts.

We do not insist that all workplace(s) are a battlefield. That in this environment, (not battlefield), there is a social dynamic quite separate and distinct from the activity, function or rational for a place where any number of people are engaged, (and paid to so engage), in a common purpose. Making widgets, shaping public policy, educating the young, administering to the old, judging behavior and satisfying the most crude impulses of Man. They can all be viewed as constituting a workplace. We are, of course, exempting the self-employed; independent contractors, entertainers, autocrats and most organized religious enterprises. (No, wait. We’re not exempting religious enterprises). ;p

We’re simply talking about where it is you are compelled/seduced into/converted and otherwise coerced to spending time with other people in a common, (if not shared), purpose.

(Damn! Just remembered; clarks don’t take suggestions all that well. The admonition at the top of this post, about going elsewhere to read a different post? Total catnip. ok, we can accept the inevitable. New Readers!! There is something call ‘the Everything Rule’ which states that, in the study, use and application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘Everyone does everything, at one time or another‘. Also, no, you can’t change your predominant worldview at will and this exercise in understanding the world around us and the people who make it up requires an innate drive (and enjoyment of) the use and misuse of one’s imagination. The Doctrine is a perspective. It is not the Answer. But it is a fun Question.)

OK here’s a RePrint post that sets us up perfectly(ish)

Read, take notes and come back tomorrow with questions. We’ll endeavor to comment on the old post with any helpful updates/definitions and modern applications to the Doctrine lexicon evident in that (older) post.

“Did you have to treat me oh so bad, all I do is hang my head and moan…tell me why” the Wakefield Doctrine and the workplace

February 9, 2012

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

So I was talking to a clark the other day, and the topic of rogers in the workplace came up. ( Regular Readers can jump down to the music video, as you know what is coming next. But when you are are through listening to the Beatles? be sure to come back here and leave a Comment ). In any event, the situation we discussed was a fairly common one, i.e. the problems encountered when there is a rogerian manager in an office with clarks doing the support/administrative/clerical work. Nothing unusual there, rogers are people persons and clarks love to administrate¹ The trouble was, (in the situation we were discussing) was that the rogerian manager was being replaced by another rogerian manager. ( Did I mention that there were a lot of rogers in the workplace in question, other than these managers? there were…) The clark I was talking to was excited and optimistic about the new manager coming into the office, mostly because (the clark) was being constantly harassed by the rogers that worked in the office.

Doctrine Note: In the workplace, rogers are most likely to be found as mid-level managers, they are the people who are there everyday to ensure the smooth-functioning of the organization whatever it might be. They, (the rogers), take their orders from someone else, usually a person not located in the immediate environment. rogers are found in these types of positions because they are the most socially adept of the three ( clarks, scotts and rogers ) and (they) have an innate gift of communication. rogers are naturals to an organized workplace, the more bureaucratic the better…they thrive in a setting in which there are rules and procedures and processes. And, if you did your research, you would find that the person who invented ‘the Memo’ was totally a roger! I will even go so far as to say that an organized workplace, of virtually any size greater than three people, simply has to have a roger to run the system. We said run the system, we did not say to make the system or workplace run efficiently or productively.

While the rogers are at the heart of most organized workplaces, the scotts are usually ‘in the field’ or ‘on the road’ or somewhere that they don’t feel penned in…scotts as a rule are often great leaders and (are always) terrible managers, so you might find the CEO or President or Founder to be a scott, but never the Vice President-in-Charge-of-Ensuring-that-a-lot-pointless-rules-are-implemented-and-ignored. That is where rogers shine. …and the clarks? they are there, doing the actual work. clarks are the enablers and the facilitators and the people who will remind the rogers about the next visit from their scottian boss. Which brings us to the topic of this Post…the problems that clarks invariably encounter when working for and otherwise answering to a roger..so lets get back to the Post.

The problem (that we were discussing) was that our clark was being constantly told that she was making mistakes, and despite all efforts to correct the matter or even when there were no errors, the roger would find fault. As students of the Doctrine will be thinking at this point is, of course, ‘the only mistake that the clark made was to believe that the fault lay with her’. Further compounding the problem was that being a clark, our friend would spend most of the time after criticism trying to understand what she did wrong. This, of course made the likelihood of a genuine mistake almost inevitable.
From the Doctrine perspective, the primary advice was that, as a roger, the manager was simply lashing out²…being a bully. And that the ‘strategy’ that most rogers like to employ is to get everyone that they are supposed to be managing to be constantly ‘off balance’. As a result of being off balance and trying to understand why they seem unable to meet the expectation of their boss, most people, especially clarks will make more errors, which allows additional criticism etc. The more the people the roger is managing make mistakes, the better the roger is made to look good in contrast.³ Or so is the worldview of the rogerian manager.

So my advice was: take some time to find the strength in knowing that she did, in fact know how to do her job. Then keep in mind that any interaction with a roger has the possibility of an attack (on her competency) and finally, when an interaction was unavoidable to remember the old adage, ‘the person who asks the questions, controls the conversation’.

Readers!! You back yet? Lets open the floor for Comments and Discussion.

1) because it lets us tell people what to do and it lets us organize things the way we want, without having to be directly and personally involved.

2) lashing out – a term to denote the tendency of a roger, while seemingly engaged in a pleasant interaction (with a clark) to suddenly get nasty. almost always caught off-guard, clarks will tend to be thrown off-balance…which is, of course, the intention of the roger

3) the rogerian principle is that if everyone under a rogerian manager is fucking up, then it does not matter what the roger is expected to do in his own job, he is constantly busy pointing out how much everyone is screwing up…most of rogerian managers’ time is spent pointing out the shortcomings of the people he/she is supposed to be managing

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 16, 2025 By clarkscottroger 7 Comments

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weekly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

A little late this week. So, when in doubt, give Hostinae (and Host) a shoutout. No, wait, lets make this an entire Grat, as in #7. In the meantime, we’ll just mention that this bloghop is a hundred ninety years old, is the highest circulation grat blogs in Slovenia, six years running. And it’s fun and good exercise to write each week.

For the Wakefield Doctrine, our TToT list be:

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) technology: specifically the phone with it’s camera (still and video) serially how could we have predicted this, back when growing up, even reading science fiction, not a clue

6) less than 2 months (45 days) until Summer!

7) Our hostinae: Dyanne (one of two remaining original hosts… think, Dorothy but with more ‘tude ); Kristi (the other original, as in ‘picked by our Founderess… earliest advocate of the photo-enhanced TToT), Lisa (of Prolific Pulse Press fame and a hostinae… hard-working much?), Denise (speaking of hard-working hosts, besides contributing to this ‘hop she is sole-host of the Six Sentence Story… damn!) Misky (now we’re getting to the new generation, and talk about taking the photographism of early TToT and adding illustrations and simple, elegant layout to this thing of ours… booyah), then… then there’s cai (we’re running a number of metaphoric descriptions through our mind… but, basically cai ‘walked up’ to the TToT and said, ‘Cool bloghop, mind if I sit in?’ think: analyst in proper victorian study with a color-collision smock and being totally in touch with the heart of the 21st C blogosphere), KnitCat (we bumped into her soon after meeting cai and it was, …think Mrs. Rogers virtual neighborhood… kind and comfortable place to hangout) and… our newest Host Andrew (you wanna a ‘this is why we’re grateful for… ? he just shows up, participates and…and! in one (of his TToT) he independently ‘discovers’ Secret Rule 1.3!! not for nothin’ but that is cool)

… and Mimi ( what can we say? talk about yer ‘walk the walk’ damn!)

8) something, something

9) health (generically speaking… nothing blatant like, ‘had a physical passed all the tests!’ Not for nothin, but what used to be a major health-naintenance event (granted, if only to stop the chorus of, ‘You should have a yearly check up, everyone has a yearly checkup.’ Jeez what a let down… it’s like open-book, pass/fail thing nowadays. And…and on top of that, it’s a Open Book exam! ‘We’ll email you the labs results. We’re on the honor system. No looking at your neighbor’s test results’. lol

10) Secret Rule 1.3 (from the Book of Secret Rules, aka the Secret Book of Rules)

music vids