relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

Reprint Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 31, 2022 By clarkscottroger

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

This just in…

Funny thing, though, went looking for a post written on the 31st of January and got as far as 2014 …without finding one. The following is from 2012. It’s a fairly comprehensive ‘Origins post.

(from January 30th 2012)

In a recent Video Friday Interview, when asked what changes or additions might improve the blog, Claire Peek suggested providing insight into the ‘why of the Wakefield Doctrine’. (As Claire put it “…A new Reader might find interesting how the Doctrine was born but especially why….” )

Far be it from us to shy away from a difficult task, in this case it is not so much a matter of the (historical) record of how the Wakefield Doctrine came to be, but rather the personal side of that creation/evolution/development. That is the challenge for today.

Easy part first! The ‘Eureka Moment of the Wakefield Doctrine ( nee the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ):

In the early 1980’s, Scott (the progenitor scott) worked at a music store in Pawtucket. He was the main salesman and also ran the repair department (of the store), this included not only repairing musical instruments and equipment that he sold, but any equipment that might be in need of repair, including various types of tape recorders and other similar equipment.

One day I happened to stop by the store to visit scott while he worked. While there, a customer came into the store, went to the ‘repair department where scott and I were talking and presented to scott what was known as a ‘duel cassette recorder’ (This device had the capacity to record two cassette cartridges at once and was most often used to copy the contents of one cassette to another cassette, what we would call today, making a back up. Among the controls on this ‘dubbing recorder’ were two of all the normal tape recorder controls: volume, treble and bass. Where it was different from a single cassette recorder was that it had a Master Volume control dial, which, as the name implies controlled the overall sound output of the device.) The recorder that the customer placed on the counter appeared to be new and had no signs of damage or abuse. (As the customer approached the counter, I stepped back and Scott looked up and said, ‘What can we do for you’? The customer said to Scott, “this thing is brand new, it worked for a couple of days, then it stopped working entirely, I can’t figure out what is wrong”.

Scott looked at the recorder briefly, without saying a word and then reached under the counter and brought out some (black) electrical tape, and tearing off a 2 inch piece of tape, taped over the Master Volume control (after returning the dial to it’s highest setting). After completing this, scott slid the device back over towards the customer and simply said, “ There, its all right now”

The customer asked to plug in the recorder, took a cassette from his pocket, tried the recorder, ran it through it’s paces; seeing that the broken tape recorder that he brought into the store now worked like new thanked scott and walked out of the store without another word. A totally satisfied customer.

From my perspective the world shifted. For reasons not clear to this day, I not only saw what scott had seen (the nature of the equipment problem) but I saw that his solution implied a reality, a ‘context’ that was clearly different from the one that I assumed to be the same as everyone experienced.

That is the factual side of the creation of the Wakefield Doctrine. The personal side?

I had plenty of friends. Or more to the fact, I had a close circle of friends that I seemed to have acquired rather deliberately. Sometimes, when I hear or read about people expressing anxiety about making new friends in a new school or a changed job, I will laugh to myself. I still find (in the fact of) my own comfort that this thing that real people seem to worry about, (i.e.making friends) is really so not difficult while at the same time/all the time, I feel so isolated from people in general. And the irony of this is not wasted on me! I accept now (as I did back then) that this is just another aspect to the weird world that I inhabit.
In any event, back to the ‘personal side of the creation of the Wakefield Doctrine, I knew back then that I had two things I could count on: having a small circle of friends who ‘got me’ and living with a pervasive, never-ending sense of lacking something… fitting in, being a part of, knowing what I was supposed to be doing in order to be like everyone else. Call it what you like, it is this certainty that ‘I am different from’ and because ‘I am missing something’ that defines who I am and once I figure out what (or where) that missing thing is, I will no longer be different from everyone else.
I suspected then, (as I now know for certain) that the thing I needed to understand was right in front of me, but not having a clue as to what it was like, the only thing to do was try to watch everything.
Watching is not exactly synonymous with living, ( lol a joke for the clarks reading this) and so I would settle for watching as I knew that the life that I thought I was in was not really the ‘real life’ that everyone else seemed to be enjoying.
Finally, the moment described above, the scene in the music store. That I would make the leap from what I observed to what I knew, what I concluded (about reality and people) was nothing less than a total frickin gift… if I had a stronger rogerian aspect, I imagine I would go on at length about inspired insight, or serendipity but I do not have that strong a rogerian aspect. If the truth is not obvious, I have a strong (barely restrained) secondary scottian aspect. But that is a whole ‘nother Post.
So as the Lady once said, ‘that’s how it began’.

OK!! Time to close the Post, unfortunately on sad note…as I know that most of you already know, Robert Hegyes passed away late last week. So we will close with the theme song to his, chef-d’œuvre

You looking for the Bonus Inset? Right this way, yo. This is a clip from a Post written last July, very good explanation of the clark, scott roger thing! We figured, hey this layout really needs shaking up, so lets do an overlay Title/new Content*

The Wakefield Doctrine has 3 personality type categories: clarks, scotts and rogers. You are mostly one (of these 3) but you still have the other 2 in background.
…and when we say personality types? what we mean is, “What kind of world do you walk out to every morning”? Because this Doctrine is not about your likes and dislikes, favorite colors or foods, interests, hobbies, avocation or inspiration. It is about the nature of your reality.

Yes, you read that right. Reality. Each of the three types of personality in the Wakefield Doctrine experience a different reality. Nothing weird or earth-shakingly different. No crystals or herbs or inner vibrations required either. Just this:

clarks exist (in the world) as the perennial outsider. They are normal in every other respect, it’s just that they know that they don’t belong, they are not like other people. But, at the same time clarks are the quiet, creative, funny (except you have to really pay attention or you’ll miss their jokes), self-deprecating, hardworking people that are there all around you all this time;

scotts are so in your life (and you will get this description only if you are not a scott) but they are the natural leaders, natural salespeople, natural entertainers… you getting the theme here with this personality type? natural. scotts are the people who live life by the moment without restraint, consideration, forethought, it’s a wonder they live as long as they do

rogers (you know who you are, and right now you are denying it) rogers are the everyday, friendly, easy to talk to people that populate every workplace and classroom and corner bar. rogers will be the person you turn to when you have a secret and rogers will be the one you turn to when you want to learn the latest gossip, they are the engineers, the lawyers, the doctors and heart and soul of every PTA and neighborhood watch program in the world.

The Doctrine is different from all the other mainstream and respectable personality and self-improvement systems out there because we insist that it is not just you, it is the world itself that accounts for your life, it’s trials and tribulations, good times, bad times (we know you’ve had your share).
What sets us apart and the reason you should spend time here, is that the Wakefield Doctrine offers everyone a set of tools that is specifically meant for not only your personality type, but (these tools) are meant to work and be useful in the world that you are living in today!

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

Friday postette -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 21, 2022 By clarkscottroger

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

Was the alternate choice of photos for yesterday’s Six Sentence Story.

Before we ‘head out into the world’ today. (lol… as sure an indicator of the speaker/writer being a clark as would be (their) answer to the question: Two plus Two equals?)…a quick word about our little personality theory. It’s as useful (and fun) as you chose it to be today. Sorta like that first date you were set up on by your best friends. It’s all in how you feel about it. Ya know?

Take the descriptions of the three predominant worldview and try and see the world as the other person is experiencing it today. When you do that, you will know, for the moment/in that particular situation, more about the other person than they know about themselfs. And…and! when practiced sufficiently well/often, you will enhance how you relate yourself to the world around you.

(Not a bad thing to do, when you think about it.)

(from January 21, 2011)

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

Lets talk.

The Wakefield Doctrine is a ‘theory of personality’ the same way that your grandmother or mother (or wife or husband) is a chef. What they can do is produce food that you and your family look forward to eating and of course, everyone enjoys and benefits from their efforts both as food and (as) a social occasion. Not only that, your husband or wife or boyfriend or grandmother uses most of the same tools and ingredients and equipment that Le Cordon Bleu chef will use. Both will work with food in a kitchen environment that is essentially the same and (all) produce meals that are good and good for you, the only difference:

your grandmother will never be on television, your mom will never write a book that will be found in bookstores, your wife or your husband will never have a meal named after them (on the menu of a restaurant).

Who is the better cook?

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine.

Do not think that we are apologizing for our grandmothers or our lack of empirical date (supporting this here theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, here). We are not. But just because the techniques and tricks and recipes of your “family chef” have certain limitations, does not preclude us from being determined to try and rise above the confines of the ‘novelty blog’ category with the Wakefield Doctrine. Point in fact, it is the goal of all involved with this blogsite to take what we have learned about human personality and behavior and, with no small amount of chutzpah, put it in front of as many people as possible. Our very immodest intent is quite simply to get people to see the world through the lens of our little Doctrine.

There is no “WHY?” question here. (The only possible answer would be, “Why not?”) To take that approach would have the fault of being un-necessarily modest. Our intent is, with all of the means available to us, presenting/promoting/publicising/pushing the Wakefield Doctrine in order to have some effect on the world, if only 30 or 40 people worth. Maybe more than that, (perhaps 300 or 400) people will read about this thing and find the same usefulness that we do and these people will benefit from having come to this blog and learned about our ‘theory or personality’.
But hey, everyone starts out as someone’s son/husband/brother/grandson/girlfriend/yeah,they used to live right down the street before they turned into a celebrity or an authority or a mover or a shaker (the Hollywood variety not the Pennsylvania type).
Take Martha Stewart (…”please”) she was someones mother at a point in time prior to becoming a valued NYSE listed commodity…might have been your mother, but probably not. She was Alexis’s mother

Be that as it may. Lets take a quick look at our “cookbook” so that our more credential-dependent Readers can continue to enjoy this blog and still get something useful from your visit today.

clarks: quiet but always manage to get noticed, introspective but aggressive, creative and intellectual yet capable of blindingly stupid stubbornness when they believe they have an understanding of the situation;
scotts: free-spirited extroverts who feed on the discomfort of others, natural leaders who inspire confidence and will spring into action regardless of how ill-conceived the action or ill-prepared for the unexpected they might be;
rogers: precise and exact and they would have invented OCD (if it had not already existed), sociable, likable and prone to extreme prejudice, with the right tools they will build the infrastructure of the civilized world just so they will have people to pass judgement on

Thats a pretty basic set of ‘recipes’ or down-home culinary technique, isn’t it?
Don’t you think your grandmom had fun teaching your mother to cook on cold winter evenings? The food at your house? doesn’t it taste as good as the food you could learn to prepare by spending 5 years in a culinary school? No? You think the chef, by virtue of all their formal training is better off? Well, here is a little look at their world

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 4, 2022 By clarkscottroger

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

Started to feel a little guilty about not writing a totally-new post.

Almost immediately, the thought, like a scott in a junior high school cafeteria*, followed, “Come on, if’n we were in a class and the professor said, “Today we begin our study of ‘Romeo and Juliet’ so get out your Lindys** and write:

Two households, both alike in dignity, / In fair Verona, where we lay our scene, / From ancient grudge break to new mutiny, / Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.”

(Oh No! He dih’int!***)

To assuage my guilt a little, allow us to take up an insight contained in Phyllis’s comment to yesterday’s post:

I think one of the best parts of being a Roger is the ability for time to have no meaning: “..As it was in the beginning, is now and ever will be, world without end amen.”

This insight into the reality of the Herd Member is quite provocative, as the Doctrine reminds us that each of the three predominant worldviews constitutes fundamentally different realities. Heck, we’ll go a step further and say: The fabric of reality is woven from different thread for clarks, scotts and rogers. Perhaps simplest to say: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel. The reality(s) of the mind, the world of the body and the life of the heart.

We’ll close this Original Content¹ with an assertion that emotion is hypo-chronologic.

Damn! There is a good reason for reprints!

All in favor of a post from 2014, elevate them appendageses….

Hey… the comments to this post were awfully interesting, so this link should take you back to the original, and the comment thread.

(sure, there’s a connection… but it’s really kinda…totally obscure, even for the Doctrine)

Today will we repeat what is implied throughout the Wakefield Doctrine: there are three worldviews that we are all heir to, that we all find ourselves growing up and developing in from a rather young age: the world of the Outsider (clarks), the reality of the Predator (scotts) and the life of the Herd Member (rogers). Each of these three have qualities that good and admirable and each of these three have weaknesses and indulgences that are not so good and admirable. None of the three is better than the other two. Observant Readers will detect a (slightly) overlapping symmetry to the three worldviews, that when balanced would result in an healthy and life-optimising person. (yes, that is a made up word). But that’s not important now, what is important is that we make sure all our new Readers understand that, rogers are not the ‘god-I-hope-I-don’t-turn-out-to-be-one-of-them’ personality types of this here Doctrine, here.

So to review:

rogers (adv rogerian; pronunciation: ‘roe -jeer -riann’)

The ‘initial metaphor’ for a roger is that of any animal that naturally associates with it’s own kind in a ‘herd’. The primary characteristic derived from this metaphor is one of ‘belonging’, being a group member, similar in all important aspects to the others in the group (herd). ( In contrast to the clark personality type, a roger, especially when in the context of the herd, is never, ever an Outsider.)

The predominant characteristic that is attributed to the rogerian personality type is that rogers experience the world as an ordered place, the nature of the world, (to a roger), is that it is quantifiable, definable and predictable. To a roger the world is, basically good and it is a place of Rules…provided, of course, the rules and guides and laws are recognized, expressed and followed.
This perception is paired with a drive (within the personality type) to impose order, through rules and laws on the world.

While clarks ‘gather by themselves’ and scotts organize ‘as a pack’, the characteristic grouping of rogers is the herd.

rogers are the friendly ones, of the three personality types, the person you will mostly likely recall having a long, pleasant, you-know=I=can’t-really-waht-we-talked-about, conversation with

rogers are the warp ( or maybe the woof! lol) to whatever social fabric you might care to consider, be it civic, religious, scientific or other cultural expression

rogers require rules and traditions, they are, in fact, the only ‘reason’ that human civilization has any continuity whatsoever

rogers are behind the creation and perpetuation of, virtually all human institutions, religious, civic, political

rogers do not create, they maintain, they assemble, they are the machine operators

rogers are the engineers, accountants and physicians

rogers are the judges, the firefighters and high school teachers (except for gym teachers)

(from: the Page on rogers)

And so, there you have it, rogers in all their hail-fellow/gal-well-met, bonhomme, ladies and gentleman! may I present: the people person, Mr Precision, the pain in the ass, the woman who’s dinner table looks like a page from a gourmet magazine (and is equally tasty and enjoyable), the man who carves ships and manages to put them in a damn bottle (without anyone even hinting at a necessity to do so), the Mom who makes sure that her Child and those other children all wear the latest in Elementary School Fashion (provided the elementary school is in Calgary and the year is 1957), the father who promises to teach his son to work on cars but forbids him (the son, not himself…he has other things he forbids himself, much to the dismay of the Mrs.), to even touch the tools that are totally clean and (some) hanging on the pegboard over the spotless workbench, matching perfectly to the silhouette outline, the girl elected Chairperson of the Yearbook Committee two years in a row!, the linebacker, the catcher, the girl who will become an engineer because it is such a stable and reliable line of work, the friend you had that was your best friend up until a scott enters the scene and then, depending upon gender (of the scott, not the friend) you would end up: beat up and ignored or ignored and beat up! rogers represent the majority of the population and we would not have the user-friendly and increasingly impersonal conveniences of life without them.

lets try this:

Court Room: the Judge is a roger, the Clerk is a clark, the Bailiff is a scott (the Prosecuting Attorney is a roger and the Defense Attorney is a: clark if mostly unsuccessful or a scott is often successful(when not being barred from the courtroom)

Operating Room: the Surgeon is a scott, the Nurse is a clark and the Anesthesiologist is a roger

Construction Site: GC (general contractor) is a scott, the finish carpenter is a roger and the guy who does the cleanup is a clark

Local gas station/repair: the Owner is a scott, the mechanic is a roger and the kid who keeps trying, unsuccessfully to get a job there is a clark

the Best Date ever, before the age of 23, she is a scott and you are not, the Worst Date ever she is a roger, and you are not

the King and Queen of the Prom: (Junior Year: she is a roger and he is a sc0tt Senior Year: she is a scott and he is a scott)

….hey! I’m doing all the work here… you want more examples? write a damn Comment and request or better yet, give us one that we don’t have yet

That’s enough for today.

You know Musicians right? the ones that are exceptionally skilled at their (respective) instruments… that’s right! rogers!

* in a line at lunch, the one who, in the process of cutting to the head of the line, elicits laughter from most of the kids he bypasses and, even, the women with the hairnets on the other side of the counter, thats your scott. no malice, just in a hurry

** the pen of choice of nuns everywhere… but, of course, we’re referencing high school, so better make that a Bic

*** well, actually we did kinda compare ourselfs to Mr ‘speare…lol

1) lol… yes, I do have a tertiary rogerian aspect

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, three personality types

Reprint Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

December 27, 2021 By clarkscottroger

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

(well, because absolutely nothing says decadent excess better than a Faberge egg)

This is a Reprint Monday post utilizing a Tuesday post from 2016.

We trust no one will have an issue from this, close-but-not-quite, symmetry. (There’s an old saying, “If you think something is related to something else and are surprised, you just haven’t been paying attention.“)

Anyway. This post does require some familiarity with our little personality theory. However, as we’re stated countless times before, ‘Anyone coming back here a second time and reading the entire post is either a clark or a scott (or roger) with a significant secondary clarklike aspect’. Rather than the obvious, ‘What do you mean, secondary aspect?’ Let’s spend a minute considering reality.

For the Wakefield Doctrine, all reality is, at it’s heart and (on) the most intimate level, personal. Not ‘personal reality’ in the sense that one can claim fantastical abilities and magical powers, rather it is ‘personal reality’ in the ‘What the heck is that supposed to mean?!’

… (damn, always a way bigger topic to explain than it is to know), the point is: each predominant worldview, be they the reality of the Outsider(clarks) or the world of the Predator(scotts) or the life of the Herd Member(rogers) is as real as… real as burnt toast. Not a list of interests or inclinations, drives and impulses, tropisms or talents… the world(s) as described for each predominant worldview is as real as real. Than you very much. Furthermore, what makes us clarks, scotts or rogers, is not these qualities, inherited or imprinted but, what makes us clarks, scotts or rogers is growing up in one of the three worlds (personal realities). Because, this growing up always entails developing effective (give or take) social strategies and ways to interact with the world around us and the people who make it up.

A scott acts the way they do because such behavior is most likely to allow them to survive and thrive in the eat-or-be-eaten world of the Predator. And so it is with clarks and rogers. We are all sporting the personality type best suited to the reality in which we grew up and developed our style.

The take-away here? With an understanding of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine we are able to know more about the other person than they know about themselves. More to the point: we are able to see the world as the other person is experiencing it. And, by doing so, better know ourselfs.

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

(new readers? note the throat tendons)

With all gratitude to Lewis Carroll and his timeless question, ‘why is a raven like a writing desk?’ I would pose the semi-rhetorical question: What does a scottian woman sound like when she tries to speak rogerian?

“Now has never been a better time to…!”

See?! See what I have to contend with? A reality full of Doctrine remnants, relics, and large-sorta-like-in-the-movie-‘Alien’-these-scary-organomechanical structures?

I’m at work today, trying to earn a living. In the process doing the thing that I do, stumbled upon agent website and written across the front, the above (example is abridged) statement, accompanied of course with a very good photo of the afore-referenced scottian female.

If you’re here (and still reading), I’ll assume you’re familiar with one of primary (and, frankly, endearing) characteristic traits* of those who live in the worldview of the Herd, the rogerian expression. It’s a form/style/idiosyncrasy of language totally specific to our herd-based brethren. Hell, I’ll go further and say that hearing a genuine rogerian expression makes it a leadpipe cinch that you’re dealing with a roger.

But a rogerian expression is more than simply a curious (and amusing) quirk in one’s choice of words. It is not an error (grammatical, rhetorical, any other -cal), it is a deliberate use of the ‘wrong’ words. It is also quite the aggressive act, because even, (and especially face-to-face), the roger employing the expression will exhibit not the slightest sign of self-consciousness or un-certainty. If anything, they will be ‘on high alert’. We students of the Doctrine are trained to watch the roger in a situation where a rogerian expression is being deployed, because we know how everyone else will react. rogers will appear not to notice anything out of the ordinary and the clarks and scotts will be laughing in delighted surprise. Don’t believe me? Here, in the block quotes, are a few of the rogerian expressions that we’ve recorded.

…looking at his paycheck, a roger was heard to say: ‘oh man! Look at how much they deducted for aggravated security’

…talking about a new DVD release for a movie: ‘no, I’m going to wait until they release the un-abashed edition’

…about to talk to a client: ‘I know I have to give them the bad news with the good news, I just won’t baby-coat it’

(and the most recent recorded rogerian expression)…

…writing in a blog about how egotistical certain real estate agents tend to be an unknown roger wrote: ‘ I have to say that, as a professional class, most agents are much too self-absorbent…”

But this post is not about rogers and rogerian expressions, it’s about scotts and their misuse of language. A scott will misuse language incidentally, on his or her way somewhere else.* The key difference may seem subtle, as in both cases the malapropism represents an act of aggression. The rogerian expression is a way to exert force within the herd; the goal being to establish dominance over other herd members. Unlike the scott, rogerian dominance is a re-orienting of the focus of the members of the herd, as opposed to the starkly and very intimate one-on-one domination by a scott.

So what does this say about our scottian woman? You best bet is to smile and say, ‘there is no better time than this to do whatever it is you want me to.’

* see?!! it gets under ya skin, I tells ya!

** if you said, ‘yeah 20 feet through the air, on their way for a permanent landing the neck of their unfortunate prey’…. gold star, yo.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, psychology of personality, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine

Black Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- primal reprint

November 26, 2021 By clarkscottroger

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

Welll!! You gotta read this here reprint here.

It’s from, like the first year of the blog. November 24, 2009, to be precise. And it’s basically an interview post. With a (self-identified) scott and a roger.

Check it out

…(That was a refreshing little naplet, blogorically speaking. But now, back to the work at hand…)

Welcome! Especially to our new friends in Australia, and Israel and of course, our friends in Slovenia!

Today we have kind of a special treat. Two of our Downsprings¹ are helping us out by participating in a little… T&A? err, PTA?, I got it! Q&A!

We have had people tell us, after a recent Post(…breaktime…), that they felt they got a better understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine when it was discussed in a context that was ‘applicable’ to everyday life. (Yeah, like in everyday life people decide to sneak up on a certain class of person and do something indefinable to them and then report back a score). Sure thats an everyday application in, maybe say, Zanaxville.

Anyway, we have a set of questions about the Doctrine that was presented to Joanne and Glenn (our Downsprings) and their answers are recorded in the following interview.

A little background first.
Glenn is probably the leading scott in terms of possessing both knowledge and (a practical) understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine. As a matter of fact, he helped instigate the process whereby the Doctrine was taken out of the realm of oral tradition and brought into the ‘real world’ of this blog. You will have to make allowances for him, after all he is a scott.
Joanne comes to us from the interested observer category, she has been witness to over 25 years of discussion and development of the Doctrine. Enhancing her position as a Downspring, Joanne offers as much a normal persons interpretation and application of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers as we have in the group. She is a roger, but with a skepticism of the whole thing that helps us stay in touch with the thinking of the everyday person-on-the-street, in terms of applying the Wakefield Doctrine.
(They are both behaving quite well and are deserving of our respect and admiration.)

(To the interview):

Which of the three are you?
[Glenn]     Scott
[Joanne]    I am predominantly, a Roger.

What is the ‘best’ single positive trait or quality do you have as such?
[Glenn]      I’m wicked funny
[Joanne]    I am sensitive to other’s feelings.

The most negative single characteristic or quality?
[Glenn]     I can be reckless—verbally and behaviorally
[Joanne]     I pay too much attention to detail, although, sometimes that is a positive trait.

Which trait or personality quality do you have that you feel is most mis-understood by people of the other two forms. (For example: clarks don’t get this about me; or rogers don’t get this about me.)
[Glenn]     Clarks don’t understand that I act mostly out of a desire to have fun—not out of a desire to hurt anyone. Rogers don’t understand anything. They eat the grass and wait to be killed. They LOVE to feel like victims, so they perceive everything a scott does as “cruel”—and then they have a feelings festival—hurt, angry, sad, –the equivalent of a roger orgasm. Fuck them.
[Joanne]    The attention to detail is always misunderstood by the Scott that I am around often. Just try observing me and the Scott trying to put something together. We were putting a shed together one time, and I was standing in the corner frantically reading the directions while the Scott was banging nails. I kept telling her to stop..and finally convinced her to read the directions first. I seem to be less sure about discerning clarks from the other two. I’m not sure which people I know are clarks, so I can’t comment on how they misunderstand me.

If someone were to ask, ‘what is the surest way to spot one of your kind in a crowded shopping mall?’ what would you tell them?
[Glenn]     Anyone talking to more than one person—and holding their attention.
[Joanne]    I’m not sure about that one.

You are at the funeral of a friend and are asked to say a very few words, complete the following:

My friend was a clark and I felt…
[Glenn]     that he mostly enjoyed my company—and was more loyal than your best dog ever.
[Joanne]    ummm…let me think about that for a while.

My friend was a scott and I felt…
[Glenn]     an attachment to him based on competition—which evolved into respect as the years went by.
[Joanne]    I will miss my friend for her ability to just wing it in life

My friend was a roger and I felt…
[Glenn]     guilty that I didn’t indulge his incessant need for emotional validation and support. I feel bad. He thinks I found him to be a pain in the ass. He’s right.
[Joanne]    I will miss my friend for … so many, many, reasons. There were so many wonderful things about her..thoughtfulness, empathy, sensitivity….etc.

Finally, tell us what you think the practical value, if any, of the Wakefield Doctrine is.
[Glenn]     When rogers piss me off, I remember that they are rogers and cannot help it. They are doing the only thing they can do.
[Joanne]    It’s entertaining and I think if we know which type someone is, it may help us to understand their behavior and possibly not take some of their behavior personally.

(Now say good night to the Sloveniaannnns)
[Glenn]    How do you say “fuck you” in Slovenian?
[Joanne]    Good Night, Slov

Wellie, wellie, well. Was that not nice? There is much here that can be discussed and elaborated upon. But the primary goal was to help the Reader ‘hear’ the Doctrine actually applied to a situation that all of us might experience. I am sure there will be questions.

There is a space below (this Post) for your Comments. Do not, I repeat, do not be shy or bashful. We would love to hear your thoughts or questions. If you have any ideas for an extension of the (above) series of questions to our Downsprings, by all means ask.

1) Downspring is a term to designate a member of the group of people made aware of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers by one of the Progenitors. In the context of this blog, there are three Progenitors and four Downsprings (Glenn, Joanne, Denise and Phyllis) all seven people have full access to the blog and creation of the contents.