relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

February 24, 2020 By clarkscottroger

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

I just (finally) found the youtube-posted song ‘In the Hall of the Mountain King’* and looked at the photo of the composer and, …hey, that guy a clark?”

Now, new Readers, they be thinking, ‘What?! I just waded through 1408 posts about the characteristics of the three worldviews and he’s saying he can tell by looking?!?!’

Well…. yeah, guess I am saying that.

sometimes, with some people, most often with multiple photos that are good enough to see the eyes, one can. and by ‘one can’ I don’t just mean me. I mean you. Hear me out.

… Show of hands…. clark?

lol

Admittedly it’s tough to pick a predominant worldview on the basis of a single photo and get it right. However, the principle that underlies the more studied approach to figuring whether a person is a clark(Outsider), a scott(Predator) or a roger(Herd Member) is, at it’s heart is based on the same question: How does this person (say, Edvard Grieg) relate himself to the world around him?

You need to know as much about the relationship of the individual to their worlds, as possible. In particular, how do they perceive it, how do they react to it and how do they feel about it. And a person’s eyes, well, how much more of an insight (into) how ones see the world than the focus of their eyes, the intensity of their gaze, the orientation of their field of view? Lets consider all three:

clarks (Outsider) by the most fundamental measure of their relationship with the world around them, clarks view it ‘from afar’. clarks live in a) their heads and 2) the future. And, while they recognize the wisdom of staying aware of their surroundings, it is just not their first priority. Plus, there’s that little matter of fear. If there’s a fingerprint to the nature of a clark’s expression while observing the world around them, it is fear. That little extra in the corner of the eye, the seeking of the escape route, the wary scanning for ambush, the hesitancy when things get too active. Our boy Edvard, he’s had more than one paper clip hit him in the back of the head.
scotts (Predator) … like you’ve ever seen a lioness, standing between her cubs and a throng of cell-phone wearing, rapid-pass flashing tourists, appear to be distracted. yeah, sure. scotts are, in this case, very easy to spot. It helps to have a video or, if you’re feeling all Marlin Perkins, in person. Look at their eyes. Are they ever not paying attention to the world around them? I didn’t think so. No predator does. And, here’s where the Doctrine really gets fun, if the person you believe is relating themselves to the world around them as does a Predator, why wouldn’t you expect them to look the part?!
rogers (Herd Members) the most difficult of the three, at least to spot from a photo, (or in person with the sound muted). A roger shows an active interest in their surroundings, however, unlike the Scott, their first concern is not detecting prey and larger predators. They are not viewing everything from afar, as does the clark, ready to bolt at the first sign of the threat of scrutiny. No, a roger is a member of the herd and what do members of herd spend their time looking at? Someone? Thats right! Other members of the herd! (A little more in-depth: they are not merely observing those who are members of their heard, they are calculating their own position, relative to a hypothetical and highly-desired center. Of their herd. They’ll be there or they’ll be square and anyone will tell you, there are no corners in a head.

So…. get out there and identify your friends and family, coworkers and fellow students! The more you practice, the better you get.

as a child, this song, used in a cheesy production of the Pied Piper of Hamlin, this song was the essence of scary. foreboding threats, not quite expressed. you know, the world to a clark.

lol

* way, way more difficult than it sounds, to find the correct version of the tune

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘because, at the end of the day, it has always been about the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers’

February 17, 2020 By clarkscottroger

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

Visitors to these pages, may of late, be tempted to think that this blog is about developing my writing chops. And, they would not be entirely wrong. When you think about the history of this blog, they are actually more correct than they know. This blog, from the first post back in June 2009, has been like one of those cardboard-cover, no-way-you-can-remove-a-single-page and don’t-even-think-about-rolling-up or folding-them-to-fit-anywhere-other-than-on-the-top-of-a-pile-of-textbooks.*

It’s no secret that once I started to meet people here in the blogosphere, I became aware of the fact that this is a world of the written word. (The inkblot-shaped island, Rhetoria, off the coast of the Noticia Archipelago, to be precise.) But I digress.

While I’ve always been painfully aware of my relative lack of skills in the written word, the drive provided by the Wakefield Doctrine overcame any temptation to get all Ed Sullivan’d when I’d read the posts and stories and such put forth by the people I hung out with here and on ‘the Facebook’.

The reason there are still new posts here is that, in a really interesting and odd relationship with an idea, I’ve been charged with the task of writing ‘the Perfect Wakefield Doctrine Post’.

Haven’t done it yet. Still trying. ‘Course, having spent this much time cranking out the wordage, it should come as no surprise that, in order to practice, (‘to practice is to improve‘), I’m found myself writing stories with topics that, to new Reader, might seem to have nothing to do with our little personality theory. (yeah, hah! as if).

(ok! Perfect Wakefield Doctrine blogpost Take: 787834.x)

The Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective on the world and the people who make it our personal reality. The Doctrine proposes that we are, all of us, born with the predisposition to experience our surroundings in one of three characteristic ways. These three are:

the reality of the Outsider(clarks)
the world of the Predator(scotts)
the life of the Herd Member(rogers)

At a very early age, (way young, like, one or two-years-of-age, probably just before the acquisition of language***), we settle into one of the three. We refer to this as one’s predominant worldview. The child does not, however, lose the capacity to experience the world as ‘the other two’. And, for many, there is a certain relative strength in the un-realized worldviews. Example: I am a clark (predominant worldview), with a (strong) secondary scottian aspect and a (weak) tertiary rogerian streak.

[Damn! Gots to stop in my effort to write the perfect Doctrine blogpost. The ‘real’ world is demanding my attention.]

but…but! Before I go, let me say a single thing about the Doctrine that serves to set it apart from all the other systems and schema for understanding how people deal with the world.

From the Wakefield Doctrine’s perspective, your approach to life the best way available. Your personality type is perfect. For you. Provided you’re willing to accept that ‘personality’ is for the purposes of our discussion, a shorthand for the strategies and styles of interacting with the world around us. For your world. The list of characteristics and identifiers for our three types are but descriptions. When you grew up and practiced the ways that helped you survive and thrive, what kind of reality were you contending with? Whether you were in the reality of the Outsider or the Predator or the Herd Member, we know how you approached the family, the friends, the neighborhood, the job, the world. With an understanding of the three worldviews, we know, (as you will know), more about the other person than should otherwise be possible.

The mission statement, (as a roger might say), of the Wakefield Doctrine is ‘to better appreciate how we relate ourselves to the world around us’.

The goal of learning the Doctrine is to develop the ‘other two ways’ to interact with the world in a dynamic balance.

…I do have to run. Be back.

*sure, put it between two text books, hell, if you’re in a hurry to stop in the middle of a crowed corridor, put two of ’em on top of each other and then in the middle of the pile of books.**

** hypo-birthday’d Readers? This was back in the day. One carried school books under a crooked arm, from class-to-class, on and off the bus.

*** from the Doctrine’s perspective, the common expression of ‘the babbling of an infant’ is more telling than most appreciate. Before settling into one of the three worldviews, in theory, the child is in all three. Their efforts to communicate is non-intelligible, not because they’re not making sense, its just they are speaking a language we’ve all forgotten. Call it Babelese. Makes a lot more sense, “How cute! Little clark is Babeling at us as if he could talk”

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: predicting human behavior, psychology of personality, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Pre-Nova Anno* -the Wakefield Doctrine-

December 30, 2019 By clarkscottroger

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

*just in case you forgot which blog you clicked on…

Surely this internet is every bit a Charles Atlas ad for clarks the world throughout (younger clarks? the photo at the top of the post should get you started.)

Hey! Just a minute, before you read any further. There are certain premiseses appurtenant in the most fundamental sense to the use of the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for enhancing one’s variety of perspectives and self-improving oneself, and they are:

the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral
the Wakefield Doctrine is age and culture neutral

Perhaps expanding on this will also serve as an outline of our little personality theory.

The reason we can say, ‘the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral’ is that each of the three ‘personality types’ are descriptions of the personal reality one is experiencing. This is not a list of qualities, traits and characteristics of any individual, like all those other mix ‘n match, which-personality-type-do-you-hope-the-score says-you-are. (thats right, I’m looking at you, Oscar Meyers Briggs and Stratton schedule. INFP this.)

The Wakefield Doctrine proposes that we, all of us, grow up (and most importantly), develop our abilities and strategies for survival in one of three characteristic worlds, aka personal realities. They are:

the reality of a clark (the Outsider)
the world of a scott (the Predator)
the life of the roger (the Herd Member)

In simplest of terms, it is the nature/character of the worlds we grow up in that determine the way we interact with the world and the people that make it up.

This means that, when we use the Wakefield Doctrine to better understand people, we first observe their behavior with an eye towards understanding how they (the other person) are relating themselves to the world around them. Using the three personality types as a lens, we determine which (of the three) their acts and attitudes, beliefs and intentions are ‘clearest’. (You know, how, when you’re at the eye doctor and they make you look through that round-periscope thing and then change one lens at a time “Is this clear? Now, is this clearer than that?”)

You watching and thinking, “On the basis of the way that person is interacting with (fill in the blank) is it more consistent with being an Outsider(clark) or a Herd Member(Roger)”. Continue your observationing. Now they’re talking to the person (fill in the blank), “Is that conversation sensible from a scott(Predator) or a clark(Outsider)?”

The Wakefield Doctrine is all about acquiring an appreciation of ‘how I relate myself to the world around me’*

Charles Atlas? I identify more with the guy in the drawing. But it is my relationship to world as an Outsider that is useful to know, not gender. We’re lifeforms first, then clarks, scotts and rogers.

And….and! there’s this thing here called ‘the Everything Rule’ which states: ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’. This serves to remind us that, sure a roger could get sand kicked in his or her face. Hell, a scott could get sand kicked in his or her face. How they relate themselves to this occurrence is very different.

Thanks and a shoutout to Denise over at girlie. She posted an old Doctrine post on the Facebook and it jump-started this here post here.

* as always, I will say, ‘We said, how I relate myself to the world around me’ we did not say, ‘How I relate to the world around me’

Big difference, yo.

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

The Original Thanksgiving post from… -the Wakefield Doctrine-

November 27, 2019 By clarkscottroger

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

As a nod to our (weak) rogerian tertiary aspect* today we are re-printing original the Wakefield Doctrine Thanksgiving post. Published on November 24, 2010 we present it in it’s entirety, un-cut, un-abridged** and uncensored, complete with original music and, as an added bonus, notes and commentary from reprints in the intervening years.

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

As everyone knows we are about to celebrate Thanksgiving here in Oceania. Once a single-day holiday, calendar-creep now has it starting on Wednesday and ending Sunday night (…”man, did you see the traffic on the interstate”?). We will make every effort to keep the Posts coming, even through such a distracting time of year. (This Post is as mixed and confused as the Holiday itself).
Second only to Christmas in it’s demands upon the members (of our) culture, Thanksgiving is shedding it’s historical camouflage and coming into it’s own in terms of proscribed ritual behavior. Of course, Thanksgiving has always laid claim to being a standalone, not-a-hand-me-down, genuine American holiday, unlike those twin imported festivals, Christmas and Easter. As children we are not only taught the story of ‘The First Thanksgiving’, we even had school-directed Thanksgiving lessons.¹ As a result, it is a holiday in which it is relatively simple to know how to act properly and as such, is clark-friendly.²I probably should resurrect/re-post something from the Doctrine archives that deal with the holidays, but hey! it’s Thanksgiving Week!! And we all know what that means!

…it means stress raised to levels otherwise experienced only on Wedding Days, (the day before) major Surgery, asking a girl out for the first time and/or giving birth; all delivered to every single member of your family unit in equal doses:

the cook-person (usually the female, but not always) “hey get out of the kitchen, you’re in the way”! / “hey where did everyone go, why do I have to be stuck in the kitchen”?

the children “why can’t we go outside, we hardly know those people”! / “I will try to get home at least for dinner, but I have a term paper that has to get laid”

the relatives (old) “why I remember when you were just this tall”! / “don’t you remember when we all went to the shore, you were this tall”

the relatives (young) “why can’t we stay home and have dinner” / “there’s nothing on TV, they don’t have any video games at grandma’s house”!

the invited friends “hey, you know what would be really exciting“? / “hey, your family are really nice people”!

the turkey/the carving/the presenting of the food, “it’s over-cooked I just know I over-cooked it”! / “no, it’s just fine! It’s just that the knife is still too dull”!

the desserts “hey, more than one desert at a single meal”! / “what the hell is a ‘Mince’ and why is it in a pie”?

We all know that “the holidays” are experienced differently by each of the three (clarks, scotts and rogers) and therefore the demands of the celebrations are very effective illustration of the nature of each. But if there was no Thanksgiving, a roger would have invented it! (Actually, they probably did). Think about it! A holiday celebration that is:

based on a factual historical event (sort of)

the protagonists (of the story) are religious refugees, persecuted and driven away together on boats

food, specific food and a not-to-be-deviated-from Menu

ritual menu and a full schedule of events

shopping in herds, as the climax of the celebration (Black Friday)

a moral taught to the young: we came here, those strangers who helped us were different, (…we had a feast and wiped out their culture)

I will be so bold as to suggest that there is no more rogerian a holiday than Thanksgiving! If there was a St Roger, his feast day would so be in the last week of November. (Saint Roger; Holy Mother Church’s only self-martyred Martyr. He died at the hands of the original Pilgrims and the Wampanoags; records in Vatican archives tell us that St Roger’s suggestions throughout the day were accepted with good nature by all in attendance, i.e. “..don’t you think the deer is a little over-cooked”…”pumpkin pie? who would make a pie out of those things?”…”why is that construction-paper Indian’s head all folded”… But, as the story has it, the assembled party reached their limits when he was heard to say, “what do you mean, ‘no turkey’? the best part of the holiday is a cold turkey and pemmican sandwich at around 9:00pm’. His martyrdom is the subject of an up-coming Ken Burns documentary, “St. Roger…when enough is not nearly enough“)

And since we are on the subject of rogers and holidays, is there any human activity that is more one sided, over-hyped, expectations-sure-to-fall short, ( not counting sex on the eve of a relationship breaking up), than parades? I don’t care if you are a trombone player in the middle of the herd or someone sitting in their living room watching it on TV…you are a roger. (…Someone tell me I’m lying.)

In any event, my own memories of (childhood) Thanksgivings are all about the walnuts. (Among the several once-a-year foods) a bowl of nuts was put in the living room for the guests but the cool thing was that the nutcracker and those pointy-picking-something-out devices were included. I did not, and still do not like walnuts, but the chance to use the implements was the high point of the day. (…well that little memory-leftover has nothing to do with any of the rest of this trainwreck of a Post, lol)

1) such as pageants and plays and a whole bunch of shit that we were forced to make out of construction paper (using those rounded scissors and that white-paste-stuff that you could never keep off your fingers) and then the fuckin head of the Indians you so carefully crafted would get folded over and the whole thing still had to go up on the border around the blackboard of the classroom.

2) you really should not need this explained to you…about clarks…and holidays.

*****

Commentary/Intros from previous T-Givings:

November 23, 2011:

‘J’accuse!* that turkey did not commit suicide!…the Wakefield Doctrine Holiday-style’

Thanksgiving Day¹ is the holiday that, if we did not already know that there exists a personality type referred to as a roger, someone else would have pointed it out to us.  Perhaps the task would have fallen to an Art Professor in a land grant college somewhere in the Midwest. We can imagine the epiphany …in the middle of the night (during his sabbatical devoted to the study of the works of Norman Rockwell)
” My god! Norman’s work is not just a robust and healthy celebration of paedophilia! He has been trying to tell us to transform our culture!  …for all good Americans to come forth and show their appreciation of patriotism, consumerism and child-abuse!!”

We have, from time to time, been accused of indiscriminate use of hyperbole in these pages, however, just consider the astounding level of pervasiveness of the ‘Holiday of Thanksgiving’. It is not enough to close the Post Office system and all other government agencies² , no it is not, this Holiday actually attempts to compel normal, rational, adult people to sit in front of the television and watch a Parade involving giant balloon representations of out-of-print newspaper cartoon characters! Who the hell watches the Macy’s Day Parade on purpose?!?  Throughout the entire morning of Thanksgiving, you simply cannot escape the pageantry and spectacle, broadcast live and has as the ’emcees’, News Anchors from the major networks morning news shows!  ( “Thats right, Matt! That’s Kenny Chesney and Taylor Swift on the Snoop Dog float… it says here that her eye makeup took 12 hours and 6 pounds of aluminum foil chips to create!!” ). Like a Hieronymus Bosch painting done in ‘live-action’, the whole country is exposed to hours and hours of Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade… more than 3 hours of parade music and floats (” … hey, Anne isn’t the next float from your hometown”? “That’s right Al! it’s my old Alma mater, the East Clydesdale High School Marching Band playing a medley, ‘Straight outta Compton’, ‘Fuck tha Police’ and ‘Gangsta Gangsta’ ).

Why do we say Thanksgiving is the most rogerian of all holidays? Simply because Thanksgiving is about the how, not the why. As a holiday and a cultural event, this particular holiday tells it’s participants exactly what to do; what to eat and how to cook it! Taught from childhood, every member of our culture knows precisely how (and) where they are expected to spend the Holiday! Thanksgiving is about family and if there is anything that rogers fake better than anyone, it is the joyful appreciation and celebration of the family.

November 26, 2013:

”the votes are in! Reader’s favorite T-Cell Day Post’ the Wakefield Doctrine ‘telling you what for, for 4 years… now trademarked ‘© !’

Thought I would get us in the mood for the upcoming consumptials with a re-print of a previous Thanksgiving Post. I will keep this intro brief as the Wakefield Doctrine has a disturbing tendency to take over, even when I’m feeling like not writing a new Post! (If the truth be told, especially when I do not want to write a new Post). Seeing how we’re all kinds of semi-mainstream these days, it might be right for me to apologize to the Norman Rockwell fans out there….nah sorry guys, the dude was twisted. In any event, here’s a Post from the year 2011. (the ‘c’? oh that! yeah, the trademark papers came through the other day…we all kinds ‘o rogerian now, what with the government backin our moves an such. keep your hands off the Doctrine, bitches…we gots ourselfs some major referential authority.)

lol (no, I don’t really think that Mila was at the First Thanksgiving, but I would loves to find me a photo of Alice in, like post-apocalyptic, Pilgrim duds…. damn!)

* the Wakefield Doctrine is founded on the proposition that we are, all of us, born with the capacity to experience the world in one of three ways: as an Outsider(clark), a Predator(scott) or a Herd Member(rogers). At an early, early age we take on one of the three perspectives and develop our personalities in the context of this, what we call the predominant worldview. We never lose the potential to experience the world as do ‘the other two’, however, in some they are in namesake only, in others these can have a significant and noticeable effect. They are referred to as secondary and tertiary aspects. Myself as an example: I’m a clark (predominant worldview) with a (strong) secondary scottian aspect and a (weak) rogerian tertiary.

** one of the really fun products of the Wakefield Doctrine was the isolating and identifying of a characteristic of the rogerian worldview called a rogerian expression. Here is the link that explains it. From above an example: the ‘unabridged edition?’ the rogerian expression would have it ‘the unabashed edition’

lol… yeah, I know!

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of Cynthian-istic insights and re-printed words, Tuesday! (how much trouble can we possibly get in?)

October 29, 2019 By clarkscottroger

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

Ever notice that I seem to be unable to do a reprint post as they are intended to be used, in a manner for maximum benefit?

Sure, a proper reprint is supposed to be minimally re-packaged and/or labeled, you know, “And now, an Encore performance of…” and then hit send. Done and done.

But nooo, every time I try to do a reprint (“Dude, you used to teach the principles and provide examples of the Wakefield Doctrine every….day! Whats up with that? Call Frank or text the word, “Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers”.)

Apparently we have, before I even get to the ‘cut ‘n paste’ portion of our post, two topics floating around in my head: 1) the comment (and implications of same) left by Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia and B) the secret insight blanketed in the words, all sleep-wrinkled and night-soft, in the leading two sentences.

To our friend, first!

In a comment to Sunday’s TToT, Cynthia wrote:

…haha. Clarks and their written statements…

ha ha, (or, as FOTD Clairepeek might say, ‘ja ja‘) indeed! There is, imo, something in these five, (or six, counting the onomatopoeia), that hints at so much more. You know, like, “Hey, you got a minute.” from a work superior, or “About those test results.” from an educational (or worse) medical superior or “We need to talk.” from an emotional superior.

Who out there, putting themselves in the scene, hear the thought, ‘Uh oh”

Now Point B is even more elusive but simpler. Only thing required to get the inference is to be a clark or to trust your secondary aspect. The most correct* but not overly constructive answer is “Because of fear!”

There you have it. An intro without coherence. But there is a point and there is a useful insight. Because, in the final analysis, the Wakefield Doctrine does not provide answers, it offers an (additional) perspective on our worlds and the people who make it up.

(Our reprint)

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

There is a post (or two) somewhere in the archives that look at the ‘Days of the Week’ from the perspective of the Wakefield Doctrine and seek to identify the days that are ‘good days’ for people of each of the three personality types. Some are megaphone-obvious, like Saturday and scotts or Mondays and rogers or Tuesday and …everyone! But, especially clarks.

Why is that? Why does the sub-title use the slightly arrhythmic phrase ‘truly user-friendly’? Unfortunately the word ‘mild’, is nearly harmless, there’s absolutely nothing in what it implies that anyone could take issue with, “…and temperatures will be mild today.” “Don’t worry, your child is exhibiting the normal signs of the flu which includes running a mild fever.” It does, at least on the surface, seem to be a complimentary assertion (of the character or quality of a person or a worldview).

So what’s wrong with ‘mild’? What would cause a blog writer to begin a post with an apologia?

I don’t know. Nothing I guess. Don’t give it a second thought. Sorry I brought it up.

(Interruption for a Wakefield Doctrine insight. You know how we have descriptions (metaphoric and otherwise) of the world as it is experienced by those of the three personality types?

scotts ranging across the savannah hungry and impatient, take a moment to play with young pack members or sleep in the shade with one eye half-open;

clarks standing in the shadows, moving carefully, watching and, like self-animated marionettes, encircle their arms, hugging empty space in practice embraces, seeing more detail in the actions and plans of the others, the shadow-light allowing a closer insight and

rogers moving through the day, across the world, in unison of spirit, competing with the other Members of the Herd, not for supremacy, rather for positioning and increased centrality to the others in their local part of life.

To further our insight into ‘the other two’ worldviews we strive to infer from the actions, reactions, distractions and attractions exhibited by the person we are trying to better understand. It would seem that I’m implying that there is something about the quality of ‘mildness’, as it exists in the reality of a clark, that they (the clarks) feel is nothing to be overly proud of. But I’m getting off track. Back to the post.)

So Tuesday is the Mildest Day of the Week. Sure. I get that. Monday is over, Friday is a lifetime away and Wednesday, (‘hump day’ to rogers, they love to have almost-clever labels in their world. Know someone who insists their car has a name? roger…. unless she’s a girl…and it’s her first car…. and even then, she won’t really mean it. rogers will. lol (Go ahead, put your ‘You don’t know what you’re talking about and besides…and this whole Doctrine things isn’t anything but…’ in a comment, please.)

Anyway.

I did want to get in one other concept that carries weight, especially in the worldview of clarks: expectations and pre-expectations.

As we know from ‘the Everything Rule’, these two conditions exist for all three personality types. However, when considered in the context of clarks, they provide excellent illustrations of the unifying principle of the Doctrine, which is: ‘we use the perspectives of the Wakefield Doctrine to allow us to better understand how we relate ourselves to the world around us.’

That’s all we have time for this morning. Be sure to write in your un-answered questions!