relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 23 relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 23

Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 19, 2022 By

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

What say we do a quick reprint and see if’n we can’t come up with a new(ish) insight into the use and application of everybody’s favorite ‘personality theory’?

Got it! (ish)

What do the three worldviews fear the most in life.

Follow-up question: why is the word ‘fear’ not the best word in this context?

but first the reprint.

whoa whoa whoa!… Stop.

Best we contribute whatever novel insight into the use of the Wakefield Doctrine, before you enjoy today’s RePrint.

What the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine fear the most:

  1. clarks(Outsiders) scrutiny (yeah, big surprise there) to be subject to inquiry without consent
  2. scotts(Predators) non-rational unreliability. (yeah, like the old punchline, ‘that’s a pretty big word for an ‘action-is-everything’ personality type). (True backstory: Once in a discussion with Glenn(scott-with-secondary-clarklike-aspect) about the Doctrine, we suggested that, as clarks, there is nothing that is permanent to the world, that if today we awoke to a sky that was green with orange polka dots, we’d shrug and get on with the day. Glen’s response was, ‘That would be intolerable (to a scott), the natural world needs to be…natural and consistent, there have to be some standards.’
  3. rogers(Herd Members) disassociation. To be rejected, as an individual, from association with others, even, (and especially), if that chosen association is confined to the individual roger (Membership in a Herd is not dependent on a separate, independent acceptance by a member or members of said Herd. The individual roger needs only to accept the Herdosity of a group, a virtue of belonging and their own willingness to be associated. Don’t believe us? Go ask a roger.

The follow-up question: the short answer is, as so often, ‘the Everything Rule’. In this context means that how ‘fear’ manifests is subject to the nature/character of the reality in the individual’s predominant worldview.

Ok now on to the Reprint.

*

don’t worry, nothing nearly as strange/cool/frickin great as you think

June 3, 2010

Let me start by saying “whether due to cultural dislocation or totally subliminal deviancy, my personal opinion is that most of (Rockwell’s) paintings come across banal at best, creepy at worst”. (This is the cue for the rogerian art fans to start howling, in their bovine basso profundo voices, the chorus being…”but it shows what we once were”)

Sure, roger, take your wasn’t it wonderful past and your family history and your abused children and your paedofilic authority figures and tell us why you love them all so very much.  Sure roger, the predators were for the most part scotts, at least the obvious ones.  Sure the past was a great time…if you had power. But as the adage goes, “history is written by the victors” and this is so much truer for the cultural winners and losers as it was for the military/political adversaries.

So, what’s the deal with the photos today?  Well first I do want to thank our dead artist for the loanation of copies of his quote art unquote.  I really don’t know what set this off in today’s Post.  The ‘Lead’ photo was the most difficult, I kept coming back to it.  Looking through all the Rockwell I could find in the searching for a photo that would show all three of us (clarks, scotts and rogers), was not having much luck.  But the photo I am starting with has something so damn clarklike to it that I decided to use it. (The fact of the process was: “I do not know how I can incorporate this into the Post in any logical way, but I have to use it”) Hey, call it the vanity of the author.

Show of hands people, the Lead photo who does not see a clark? (hey clarks!! come out from under the bed! lol no one is going to say anything bad here, come on, join the “conversation” lol).  Let’s just rorschach this one and move on to the main photo.  This is the photo you see when you click on the read more link, the one on this page, knuckleheads.
Now we can get down to Doctrine business.  We have a photo that contains 2 scotts a roger and a clark. (and not too much abuse or predation, either!)

(Now I know you are all capable of making allowances for culturally anachronistic features) so, what do you see in the picture above?

Screw that…What do you see here?

 Yeah, another damn clark.

(I cannot tell you what the deal is with the clarks today.  Really, no games, not holding out for dramatic purpose, just don’t know.  Let’s just call it the horrifyingly familiar tint of fear that is the hallmark of clarks, it is jumping out at me in this, quote art unquote.)

…if clarks are to be the topic of today’s Post, let’s have at it.
Maybe it has been the Rockwell art overload, but I keep getting drawn back to the idea of what a culture does to encourage children to stay on whatever path they have ended up on i.e. being a clark/scott/roger.
(If we had Wakefield Doctrine study guides, this would be highlit in yellow with a EXAM QUESTION mark next to it)

…as the Doctrine tells us, we all start life with the qualities of all three (clarks, scotts and rogers) and for reasons beyond the scope of this explanation we become mostly one of the three. This usually occurs at an early age, say  3 to 5 years old and we settle into experiencing the reality of the one we picked. (except for clarks).

So what is the deal with clarks and their strangeness?  Well it’s real damn simple, clarks are the outsiders, the blue monkeys, the strange ones.  In a school yard they will be the last to be picked for team sports and in the gymnasium they be the last to be asked to dance.  I can hear our rogerian Readers now (I’m talking to you, MJM) I can hear them saying in a voice that is meant to be caring and helpful but is, in fact, strident and insisting, “If only you would dress a little nicer, why do you have to wear that, you really are an attractive, nice person but you put people off…why do you keep doing that to yourself”?

(Today’s Post  has now officially careened right the fuck out of control.  I will no long be responsible for syntax, logic, reasonable conclusion or making sense to anyone other than our clarklike readers…)

So clarks are the outsiders but they are also the creative ones.  While rogers may build (being engineers and all) clarks create the ideas that they will bring to the world.  And while scotts are the leaders, they always,  (Did I say ALWAYS? ) (you know I did mean to say Always) scotts have clarks standing out of sight, off to stage left, telling them things about their audience/followers/mob that the scott will then pronounce and shape into power.

(What time is it?!!)

“You’re such a lovely audience, we’d like to take you home with us”

Hell, let’s have that for our music vid

This a Post that made no sense at all? Ask a clark to explain it to you, there is one nearby…you just haven’t had the time to bother with them…go ahead ask them, they will explain this all to you, but you roger will get annoyed when it becomes obvious that it does not center on you  and you, scott will get bored ’cause it doesn’t have loud explosions in it.

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , ,

Tuesady -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 2, 2022 By

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

Remember ‘re-runs’? (To whichever Reader is thinking, “Run! It’s and ontological booby trap!!” (or words duct-taping concepts to that effect) we say, “Welcome! We’re glad you stopped in!”)

Where were we? Oh yeah, re-runs. Those Readers not afflicted with the tragedy of hypo-ageism, will recall a time when television (Latin for: Three Channels) had a regular season of, I believe, twenty-six weeks and then, during the Summer (Latin for: Why on earth would a person be indoors, it’s light until, like eight! And, ‘stop-being-silly-you-can’t-sit-in-front-of-the-TV-outdoors!‘) They would play the same shows again.

This post is totally not like that!

lol (ok, it might be a little ‘like that’, except with parenthesiseses)

Hey! Nick! What’s the Greek word for parenthesiseses?? Without the backwards’R’s and flipped over ‘W’s, that is. lol

This is a very early post. we enjoyed reading it this morning. It felt like looking over our own shoulder during a dream when, you know, nothing scary or exciting happens, you’re just, like, doing everyday stuff, and, maybe, you, (the dream you, not the Reader you), begin to sense you’re in a dream and then you wake-up, mildly disappointed). Reading this morning was like that.

(Insider/backstage insight: the first thing that struck us was the use of first person pronoun, the second, just a touch of anterograde amnesia. This second effect is rare but definitely cool. clarks reading will identify with the pleasure of an un-filtered or qualified compliment. Even if it has an experiential half-life of two seconds.)

Anyway it was fun.

Quick Doctrine tip (to offset the Reprint Guilt): You can zero in on the predominant worldview of a person by the nature and quality of the pronouns they deploy during normal conversations as they interact with the world around them. No! Really!

time for another Post already?! oh man, no f*ckin way can I keep this up

October 6, 2009

OK. I have it together now. No need to get excited. Just sit here, clear the mind, the content is in there. Just relax.

My compliments to any of you out there who have maintained an active blog for more than 3 months. Jesus, this coming up with Posts all the time is not as easy as it looks. And this from the perspective of  ‘as long as there is a new Post once a week’  blogholder. But no one is holding a gun to my head… (‘hey theres an idea for a Post!)

SOMEONE IS HOLDING A GUN TO MY….

Sorry, forget it. Sure one of the 103,000,000 blog authors in the world today has already done the definitive, ‘Someone is holding a gun to my head’ treatment. Maybe there are some studies that I can cut and paste and fill up some of this white space and then I can call it a day and get back to my real life!

Alright, seriously now. I do mean my compliment to those of you who have the ability and talent (acquired or learned) to write something new and different and sometimes even interesting, Post after Post after Post/blog after blog after blog. Not bad. But since I am not ready to give up on this little blog of mine, I had better t t try to get it together and come up with a Post that will keep the crowdlette coming back for more.

Being that this is the Wakefield Doctrine (aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) I would do well to keep to the subject that I know best. (See? Right there! I don’t know much about grammar and good writing and all, but that last sentence had at least two tenses, and easily three pulperfects in it. Man, this is worse than the first time I recorded myself playing guitar along with Jimi Hendrix. Suffice it to say, if you were there you would not have had too much trouble telling us apart.)

This writing and grammar thing is really starting to annoy me. It is bad enough that I regret now that I did not take a typing class when I was in high school. (At my current age, in my high school years Typing Class was for people taking a Business curriculum, which meant you were going to be a secretary which meant you were a girl. That simple, end of cultural subtext). But with this damn blogging thing, I am being forced to confront the fact that I do not have mad writing skills.  I should have paid attention in my English classes. (Look, it was the 60s when I was in high school, how cool is that?) But the inescapable fact remains that the skill set I would value the most this October morning is not how to play the opening riff of ‘Sunshine of Your Love’. Its funny about how people, at least in the current (american) culture, we seem to have an expectation to be able to do certain things well, just because we think we can do them at all. By this I mean singing and writing. Most of us know that we can sing our favorite song in the car, on the way to work, therefore I think we all equate that with being a singer. Writing, the same. I can, with the help of spellcheck and a lot of proof reading, write a report at work, so how hard can it be to be a writer?

(I have resisted the impulse to hit Preview to see if I’m down far enough on this page to call it a day.) But anyway, you are here because you want to know all about the Wakefield Doctrine. Right?

The Wakefield Doctrine will cause you to see the world in a slightly different manner. Nothing earth-shaking, no flashes of light; ‘oh my god I understand now’ will not be on your lips. What will happen if you read most of this blog and the associated pages will be that you might find yourself saying, ‘that person is such a roger‘, or you might find yourself thinking, ‘here comes so-an-so what a scott he is’ or you could think, ‘shit, I’ll bet I’m one of those clarks the Doctrine is talking about.’

If this happens to you, I have succeeded. If it does not then I have failed. If you have a question about the Doctrine, leave a Comment or email or whatever the hell people do around here. I will get back to you as soon as I finish my Adult Education class, “You too Can Write Like The Prose’, that I am taking at my little local high school

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Monday-Reprint Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 1, 2022 By

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

The earliest August 1st post, from 2010

(We’d do a brief review of Doctrine highlights that were discussed in the course of the weekend, but you’ve already read them. …wait, one from Saturday, to a clark in the very early stages of contagion: “Be careful if you decide to tell your rogerian friend/spouse/co-worker about this thing of ours. Under no circumstance tell them when there are more than the two of you in the room. Further, even if you’re alone with the roger in question, do not exhibit too much un-alloyed enthusiasm. Under no circumstance open with, “There’s this personality thing, it incredibly cool and insightful and true about everyone!”)

(Follow-up to previous secret advice. You’ve succeeded in describing the Doctrine to your friend. Being a clark you’re already extrapolating the principles and seeing things in a whole new, totally fun way. Of course you suspect your friend of being a roger. If you get too ‘ain’t this fun?’ expect to have them return and say, “Sorry, I studied that blog and read all the principles and I get it. It’s pretty interesting. The only problem is that it doesn’t work. I’m either a fourth type, combination of the three and something else or I’m one of the three sometimes and the other two other times.“)

(Smile to your rogerian friend and know that there are clarks out there who you might carefully encounter and eventually, with luck, aim in the direction of this thing. They’ll take it from there. And, for being an Outsider, that will be kinda make all this well worth the effort .)

Reprint 2010

you would think this would get easier, but nooo

August 1, 2010
‘ello.
Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).
If you are new to our site, the “About” is probably the best place to start.  If you are still reading after that, you possess the qualities that mean you will no doubt enjoy the Posts.  There is no “order” to the Posts other than chronological and mood swings, but you would get that pretty much right away.  The Archives pull-down is a useful way to get a sense of what we are trying to do here.
And don’t ignore the “Pages” in the Table of Contents!  These are parts of the blog that have not received much attention from us in a while, were originaly intended to be the ‘reference resource’ for the whole thing, but all the effort seems to have gone into these Posts.  Whatever.  The information, in the form of definition and examples of the three types of personality, is all to be found in the Pages.  Includes pictures of clarks, scotts and rogers.The Wakefield Doctrine is a unique, fun and productive way to look at the behavior of others, with this “Doctrine” or “theory” you will finally understand why the people in your life behave the way that they do. (This pre-supposes that you do not know why they behave the way that they do and, further, pre-pre-supposes that you feel the need to understand why they behave the way that they do.) All of the stuff in the parentheses here, if applicable, makes you a clark.  If you neither care about understanding or just skimmed over this whole section, then you are a rogeror a scott “respectively”.Otherwise, the people who come here to read, appear to like the videos (music and otherwise) and also enjoy reading about the lives of the students at Millard Fillmore High.  You will also see reference to those we call, Friends of the Doctrine, blog writers extraordinaires.
Finally, there will be Comments, following interesting Posts that offer insight into the Doctrine as well as offering helpful perspectives on the whole thing.
Sometimes.(We also try to do a Lesson of the Day which is an illustration or application of the Doctrine that helps the Reader see the clarks, scotts and rogers in their own lives.)Well then, that should bring you up to speed.  The rest you will catch on to long before you get bored and leave.
Hat!  Damn!  Almost forgot to tell you about the hats (for your damn head).  We have Wakefield Doctrine hats (see the Fashion Center ) they are wonderful and (sometimes) we just give them away.  Most of the DownSprings have hats (for their damn heads) as do most Friends of the Doctrine.  I recommend you write a Comment and ask for one.  We probably would mail one to you for almost no cost.*

So read, listen and watch the videos and write us a Comment.  Most likely we will print the Comment.

This being Sunday (in our location, not necessarily our Marshall Island friends…) Let’s close with some Sunday music…as regular Readers know, we huge fans of modern gospel in general and Fred Hammond in particular…

Oh, yeah!  Lesson of the Day…damn near forgot…not so much a lesson as a Test. (alright a Quiz)… (if you insist, a quizlet…but a tough question)…

You just watched Fred…is Fred a clark, scott or roger?  Tell us and  you must support your answer…(you could guess and 1/3 of the time you would be right…sort of ….) but you must give your reason, support your answer…this is ‘open book’, so go look at a bunch of Fred vids…the answer is there.

The reward for a correct answer? A hat (for your damn head) of course!  But seeing that this is such a tough question, this little contestlet is open to Progenitors and DownSprings…

 

* there is a cost…did you really think it would be totally free? jeez what are you, a frickin clark?…anyway the “cost” of the “free” hats (for your “damn” heads) is that when you receive said hat you must take a photo of the hat in front of an identifiable landmark; proof of the hat being in whatever part of the world it was mailed to…(for the clarks)…a head underneath said hat is totally optional. We really only care about where in the world the hat is…the supporting “human”, not so much.

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 23, 2022 By

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

“…the Triffids awake.”

 

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s (weakly) contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Once a week, since the dawning of the Age of Self-Reflective (current iteration of the Era of the Virtual World), we’ve been posting a list of then things, places and people that we could, at some later point in time, blame for inciting a state of gratitude*. This process is, fortunately, hypo-chronological, so, for instance, we can cite, in conjunction with Grat 8; Grat Number 6 (we also mentioned the acceptability of non-orderly ordinals, did we not?). We certainly hope so. Anyway, on with the list.

1) Phyllis (ever one should have an open-air home office)

2) Una (cool is as cool does)

3) the Wakefield Doctrine when was the last time, (not counting the previous 234), we said, ‘sine qua non‘?  ok 235

4) the Six Sentence Story the place for flash fictionae

5) serial stories: ‘the Whitechapel Interlude‘, ‘the Case of the Missing Fig Leaf‘ and ‘Tales from the Six Sentence Café & Bistro‘

6) road-trips from back in the day that demonstrated/illustrated/pontificated on the manifestation of secondary aspects relative to one’s predominant worldview. This example: our own predominant clark(Outsider) worldview as affected by a strong, secondary scottian(Predator) aspect. (Very clarklike tourism: on our way home from Salt Lake City (Hey! Joe!) we stopped by in Denver, rented a car, drove to Estes Park. Tried to participate in a guided tour of the hotel, bailed after thirty minutes of a three two hour tour… went to the parking lot took the vid-selfie, got back in car, drove to airport. Made it home by the rules.)

 

7) Something, something

8) Friend of the Doctrine Kristi might be looking to get the old band back together. (The old band being the bloghop ‘Finish the Sentence Friday’) …stay tuned.

9) work is varied, challenging and available. A mature individual might say, “What more could you want from life?” (In our defense, we might add, as a coda, “Well, there is that.”)

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

 

* from the French, au gratin; verb: to insist that even though one hates cheese, one should at least try it, one might be surprised…

music vids

*

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Mostly-Monday Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 5, 2022 By

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

Quick post.

Damn! That comic strip used to get us so mad as a burgeoning adolescent, or would that more properly be, a ‘bludgeoning semi-adult’? No, we stand by our reaction, even allowing for our less-than-developed personality.

Wait a minute! Did we just say ‘less-than-developed’? lol We did!

Sorry, it’s funny ’cause it’s so not true. You know the expression, ‘…has an old soul’? That comes from people observing young clarks without the benefit of a certain personality system. (ok, one hint: it rhymes with ‘the Wakefield Doctrine’)

Why would someone make that adjudication?* The Doctrine is simple when it comes to how personality develops. It, (the Doctrine, not the personality), insists that personality develops as the person(ette) encounters the world and develops strategies and coping mechanisms. ‘Cept with the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, we maintain that it is the character of the individual’s relationship with the world that holds the key to how they figure the best way to live. There are three possibilities: as an Outsider, as a Predator and as a Member of the Herd.

rogers fit right in, they manifest as the norm for the group, scotts are miniaturized ‘uncles and aunts our parents don’t talk about all that much, except for during exceptional arguments centered on family or from cousins who visit only in the summer (and leave precipitously and earlier than anyone thought)’. clarks: … you wanna know the biggest fear, the fundamental ‘don’t-let-that-happen’, the ultimate scary story/fairy tale?

scrutiny1

No clark seeks out, enjoys or willingly submits to scrutiny. (While scotts welcome the challenge, because, you know, that ranking of the pack thing they do and, besides they loves themselves a good fight and rogers, hell it’s like hearing they’re a shoe-in for Homecoming Queen/King? Whatever)

gone too far… any questions, that’s why god invented a Comments box. More, another day, about old souls… wait, chances are if you’re still reading, you’re a clark or, at very least (and nothing to be ashamed of) a scott or a roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect. And you’ll know what we mean.

From July 2010

Monday.
Get the hell up.
You know of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) and you will recognise at least one roger or one scott in your world today.
You will not approach this individual or otherwise make them aware of your knowledge that they are just like we talk about here.
You will do your best to maintain your composure, unless you are reading this with a friend and/or friends, in which case, listen to the clark among you.
When you spot your first roger, it will most likely be in an ‘organised environment’, ie.e school or work or any other place that you are compelled to follow certain guidelines as to your own activity.
Make a note of your first sighting (being extra careful if you are spotting a scott, do not, under any circumstance allow the scott to see you taking notes.)
If you are a roger (yeah, right!) do not allow other herd members to observe you doing anything that is out of the ordinary.
Clarks…you will have no trouble…unless you start to think that this Wakefield Doctrine will win the love of the herd or the backing of the scott.
When you have spotted the first, the rest will be easy.
Expect to make mistakes initially deciding if a person is a scott or (an aggressive) roger.
Don’t be concerned, it happens to the best of us at the beginning.
You will notice, rather quickly, that rogers are using the personal pronoun way, way, way more than the scott…
You will (then) notice that the scott has the attention span of a 3 month old puppy on amphetamines

Everyone ready?  Good.  We know you can do this thing.  If you have any questions or concerns you can always write a Comment (yeah, fer sure lol)

We here at the Doctrine will be standing by, both Progenitors and DownSprings to help where we can, but knowing about the Wakefield Doctrine (and seeing the world accordingly) thing is a lot like…riding a bike?…nah a bike is inanimate and while fun will not turn on you if you stray from the herd…or totally prey on you until something more attractive comes along, …like learning to play an instrument?…no way! playing an instrument has a set technique and therefore is totally predictable so that if you hit certain keys on a keyboard you will always get a certain sound/tone….like sex?….maybe…it sort of has the always the same almost always enjoyable and worthwhile, except when it is not and then the results are to be regretted for a life time…yeah sort of like that.
But all of us here, at Doctrine central, admire you as you got out into the world today, armed with a knowledge and a  power that is shared by 10s and 10s of people here and there around the globe.  Now you know how Noah must of felt…you gotta get out in the world and do something that you will be glad you did, but you better not let the neighbors get too close a look at your backyard…or something like that.

New Readers?  No rush, no hurry.  The above is directed towards Readers who have been here a while, for now you should just enjoy the videos, spend some time in the Pages (Table of Contents) or browse through some old Posts (Archive Read ’em and Sleep)…you will get the hang of this Doctrine thing pretty quick we betcha.

Hey a big shoutout yo to Renasainces Rauneasce Renoven  Ronin…one of the first Friends of the Doctrine.  He stopped by and said hey last night (see Post, “don’t you people ever go to bed”).  He will hopefully be sporting some fine Doctrine apparel and we hope to see a photo of his hat (for his damn head) in front of a landmark from his part of the country.  Ronin has taken it to the next level (for many blog writers) and has written a book.  ‘Hats off”(our damn heads) go to his site and read a spell.  That being: The Life and Times of a Renaissance Ronin  kutgw, dude.

So, busy week coming up.  New issue of the Good…the Bad…Decide Right Now!!  The topic will be Animal Shows so get watchin and start votin…not yet

So, get out there and spot them clarks, scotts and rogers.  RUUn Readers!….Ruun!!

*

* ok. a near-miss at coming up with a rogerian expression… not bad, though, right?

  1. Scrutiny (French: scrutin; Late Latin: scrutinium; from scrutari, meaning “those who search through piles of rubbish in the hope of finding something of value” and originally from the Latin “scruta,” meaning “broken things, rags, or rubbish.”) is a careful examination or inquiry (often implying the search for a likely mistake or failure). In Roman times, the “scrutari” of cities and towns were those who laboriously searched for valuables amidst the waste and cast-offs of others. The modern English “scrutiny” is derived from this root, indicating a careful examination or inquiry (often implying the search for a hidden mistake, misstatement, or incongruity). (From our friends at Wikipedia)

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »