relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

Winter’s Dawn -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Seeing how we’ve acquired a number of New Readers since last we faced Winter’s Dawn, it is incumbent upon us to explain this view. While radical in terms of the conventional view of time, the year and its Season, we say, ‘Better get used to it.’

Having passed the Summer Solstice, each day grows shorter, at least here in the northern hemisphere. And it doesn’t take more than a sugar-rushed sixth grade debating class to see the weakness in the opposing team’s position: “But the calendar says ‘It’s the Start of Summer, not the End.’ Sure, and hard work and serious demeanor is always rewarded. (ed. ‘holy shit’. take a moment to peruse the search results to ‘Sayings about Puritan work ethic‘. … if you’re not back here by….now! you have our condolensces. We’ll leave a music vid for you at the bottom of the post. If you remember to return. It’s not your fault or failing. It’s the lack of a secondary clarklike aspect of a sufficient intensity.) “au revoir, binyons“.

You’re still reading?

Good.

The Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. Predicated on the notion that there are three distinct, (yet subtly interrelated), ways to relate to the world at large. We, all of us, develop at a very early age a personality type that is best suited to the world, (and reality), as we’re experiencing it. We, all of us, become:

  • clarks the Outsider bound to the original sin of believing that everyone they see knows something that a clark does not; this knowledge is exhibited by their apparent comfort and affiliation with other people, despite the depth of association. the effect on the Outsider is to engender an eternal curiosity, an endless drive to learn what others clearly know that makes them collectively ‘a part of’
  • scotts the Predator bound, as apprentice to the original Tempter; scotts live in the paradise of the here and now, the simple, and arguably, more natural life of predator-prey. an eternal happiness measured by the next heartbeat, the day to be seized, the past un-begrudged and a future unlimited. a perfect lifeform of a god less insecure
  • rogers the Herd Member bound, unknowingly but to their credit, to the role of insufficient Creator, recoiling from the responsibility of the true craftsman who follows the edict: ‘A true craftsman stands by their work and accepts any flaws are their responsibility’.

We, all of us, learn the best strategies for surviing and thriving in the world as we experience it. Our individual personality types are, by this view perfect. While all live in a world dictated by one (and only one) predominant worldview, we have the potential, if’n we’re lucky, to have a secondary or even tertiary aspect significant enough to allow us, from time to time, to see the world as ‘the other two’ are experiencing it. These momentary glances into the world-we-did-not-grow-up-in can be dramatic and often a transcendent moment; more often than not under conditions of extreme duress. but still…

The ambition of the alternative perspective offered by the Wakefield Doctrine is, at it’s heart, an opportunity to identify with ‘the other two’ personal realities. Doing so, with practice, avails us of better appreciating the world as the other person is experiencing it.

 

*

 

Share

Tuesady -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

So! You’ve done your reading. You now have a rudimentary sense of the identifying behaviors, social styles, fashion choices of the three predominant worldviews.

We enjoy the analogy (or parable or metaphonics…whichever, you know what we mean) of the Wakefield Doctrine as a language. This does not supplant the view of the Doctrine as an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. That is still the…official position advocated in these pages. The thing of it is, any perspective would have, attendant, a vocabulary (and. strictly speaking), a vernacular. And so you will see references to fluency in the Wakefield Doctrine. This reflects the ease and facility one may demonstrate when describing a person/situation. “She showed up at her interview at the bank with enough cosmetic metal and leather to trigger the metal detectors at the door. Her take away was, in part, ‘shoulda gone with the blue accents in hair to convey a calm demeanor’. She was such a clark.” Like that, except fluency permits a level of accuracy in observation of the situation and person vis á vis the Doctrine, in realtime.

As with any reputable language school, the best way to move up in comprehension, pronunciation and… (cough sound: <Misky>1) and grammar. Tomorrow we’ll beat deceased equine by suggesting common social settings to better practice the semi- lingua franca of the Wakefield Doctrine.

fun!

Where were we?

oh yeah, relying on our clarklike confidence to avoid either: a) backing our ownselfs into a corner or 2) looking silly.

Exactly! The three qualities beyond reproach in the three predominant worldviews (personality types) of the Doctrine:

  1. clarks (Outsider) soundness of intellectual capability. no, not how ‘smart’ or even intelligent. A fundamental faith in the sufficiency of intellect.
  2. scotts (Predators) total efficacy in judgement of (a) need for action
  3. rogers (Herd Members) rightness and virtue inextricably linked to one’s view of the world

 

Thanks and a shout out to Misky for gracing us with a very useful example (and illustration) of Doctrine-specific wordage.

1) what? who said that? no, there are no stupid questions* While the Doctrine famously maintains that ‘you can’t get it wrong’, we would be remiss in our duties to not help Students and Friends of the Doctrine avoid simple errors of vocabulary, grammar and syntax and the like. In this case, our scottian friend is leaving the zero derivation stick in the workshop when it comes to the substantive scott. or something. ex. By virtue of my self-admitted predominant worldview, I can say, “As a clark, well, I just did, didn’t I?” It is, however, considered improper use of Doctrine lexicon to say, “As a clarklike, I am the butt of…” no, not snickers and muffled laughter… wait, that is plausible. If, however, the speaker in this increasingly tenuous if not clumsy example were a scott, …well, less fun-making and more sidelong glances towards the exits on the part of those in our imaginary lecture hall.

* one of our favorite jokes from the early, carefree days of the blog, to wit: ‘There are no stupid questions. There are only your questions

 

 

*

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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. It’s a growing trend among write-actual-words-ophiles of all ages, around the fricken’ world. Due in no small part to (the) Hostinae and Hosts sharing their experiences with gratitude (old TToT saying: ‘A Grat, once Typed, can wicked-often be shared’)

1) Phyllis

In the Before Time, the first year of Una’s garden

 

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Doctrine Plant of the Week! Found in profusion in our side-meadow (this year), fresh and ready for the presses. Yes, we did have ambitions to host Oscar at a Winter’s Eve fête1 but alas, he is previously indisposed.

 

6) ever one’s favorite prehistoric plant

7) For reference (no! not a job reference, for academic reference (ok, maybe a job ref too (in which case, we’d be all: yo! Mimi, Dyanne*, Misky, Frank Hubeny**, Lisa, Kristi, Knitcat, Andrew, Denise and cai)))

8) something, something

9) the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules). In recent ‘backstage’ conversations with Hostinae cai, she has been offering suggestions and thoughts on how we might increase the currency of this bloghop among the more broad (and men lol***) demographic of the blogosphere. Always good to remember that ‘horizons’ are meant to be expanded, as the old saying holds, ‘The edge of the 8.5×11 yellow pad may be the end of a page, and a ruler in a pinch, it is not, however, the final sheet.’ In any event, we had an opportunity to cite, (to cai), the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules) which in it’s very Preface states: ‘…you can do anything you want when creating a TToT post provided two(2) conditions apply: a) there is [p]resent an unambiguous respect for the intent of the bloghop and 2) th[e] author cites the appropriate Rules for their Thankful (ibid ¶ 444 ‘BoSR/SBoR’ 2009-3233)

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

  1. First Day of Winter June 22. Sommer, we hardly knew ye

* well, yeah! ’cause though you don’t see her posting on weekends here as much as once did she, in Doctrine terms Dyanne (appears to be) of a predominant worldview best suited to have your back if’n you’re ever drawn down a dark alley (of course, it’s a better-than-even chance that it was her suggestion: ‘hey! lets see whats down there!’) So, yeah, put her down as a reference on your job app.

** Full Disclosure: totally gotta keep practicing the correct spelling of our newest Host’s name. While we don’t hold it as deficiency in our personality, we are loathe to have our Hosts and Hostinae think we don’t care enough to spell it write.( Matthew 7:12 ‘Therefore all things whatever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.’)

*** bar-rum…bump!

music vids

*

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Túsáde -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Lots of Commentationing (on yesterday’s and other Posts)

Who indeed!

Above is a photo of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia. If you have done your reading you should be able to correctly guess her predominant worldview. AP Readers? Goal? Learn the Doctrine sufficiently to allow you to identify (on the basis of this single photo) her secondary aspect as well.

ok, in no discernible order* lets throw some comments on the blackboard and see what comes of it

Mr. Hubeny! Please stand and repeat your statement for the benefit of anyone who did not see the Post

I think I’m going to change my life and become a clark. If I’m already a clark, this should be easy. If not, well, there are always miracles.

Mimi, if you’d help the class grasp the concept

Not for nothing you wear gloves and be careful when working outdoors, the critters do pop up sudden like.

Misky, would you care to share the contents of that note with the rest of us?

My mother-in-law was scottian (she probably still is — up there in heaven somewhere) and I remember as clearly as a sunny day thinking “I’m going to wear red because it makes me happy, and everyone will think, “Oh, look at her; she’s happy.” And I knew she’d comment, which she did. She was most certainly scottian but there was a good dose of rogerian in her gene pool also.

It’s not that we didn’t get along — we did, exceptionally well at a distance.

Ms. Pie

always enjoyable… always laughter… learn some new insightful aspect of the threes that I can take to the grocery store with me while I’m shopping… processing processing processing

 

Well that certainly provides us with discussionable** topics for today!

Tell you what read and discuss (kinda open book) and we will return after lunch.

you guys know this stuff

and thanks to our four correspondants for helping form an instructive Wakefield Doctrine post

 

* at least not for two of the three predominant worldviews

** well, while not a ‘real’ word, this might provided us with a quick refresher on grammar and pronunciation and such***

***  what?? a bullet point list?

  • clark: one of the three predominant worldviews aka ‘the Outsider’ adj: clarklike (ex. “…is anyone gonna inform our clarklike narrator that correction is not criticism…at least not in the sense understood by Outsiders and Predators?”)
  • scott: the Predator and one of the first of the two ‘say what now?’ pronounciation of the adj and adv form: scott: ss cot; scottian: scoe-shun
  • rogers: the Herd Members and cultural wardens; rogerian is an adjective (scenario: long class wrapping up, even the professor is clearly ready to call it a day, yet says, “If there are no other questions, read chapters….” and, of course, someone raises their hand. visualize thought-balloon: “Oh man, that is so rogerian” (pronounced: roe-jeer-ree-an)

somebody just say, “More ‘Top!!”

more Top indeed.

*

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Hey being the First Day of Summer School here at the Doctrine, what say we start with a Q&A?

Here, from the early, no, really, early days of this blog* our FAQ page

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 seem 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.

oh…kay! This is probably where we should do a Person of Interest** timeline slider thing from 2009 to 2026. But let’s just get us… well, first off, what’ with the ‘tude? ;p

As both Reelika Pedak and Frank Hubeny alluded to in this week’s TToT conversations, the first/earliest posts one writes can be the most difficult. Given that the tone of the FAQ was a bit aggressive if not a touch strident, let’s chalk it up to Opening Night(ish) jitters and let it go at that.

No, not necessary to Update/Refresh or otherwise edit this Page. The Wakefield Doctrine is, as are many things of the mind, kinda alive. We can say without fear of contradiction that the early years were conflict free for us. In point of fact, despite being a clark, the mantra of ‘if that last post sucked, then write another and bury it’. See? No problem.’ One of the undeniable examples of the efficacy of this here personality system here lies with its effect on us. Hard to convey, but compared to the clark we were before committing to this medium, theys surely something going on.

Rambling now.

There is much to the early days of this blog that still strikes us as remarkable. Not so much the content, rather the attitude we had towards going public and, through each post (now in the mid-3k in numbers) reaching out to the virtual world to say:

“Hey! Wanna hear about a really cool and useful perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up?”

 

* hokey smoke! this was written July 21, 20….09!! as in, ‘Well, it’s been a month, where’s the Nobel Committee?!?”

** most excellent of ‘TV series’

hey, chance to head off a mind worm of a song from that Little ‘Ol Band From Texas

Share