relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 6 relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 6

Re☡Print -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 21, 2024 By

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

(Reader: the clever post title mod above? A Bourbaki symbol.)

(New Reader: A lot, ‘specially when we’re grasping for a cogent theme)

damn!*

So, real quick”

A common question (and a lead-pipe cinch of an indicator of the interlocutor’s predominant worldview when phrased a certain way1) is:

What’s the best way to determine which of the three personality types I am?

Start by throwing out the, ‘no fricken’ way’ of the three predominant worldviews. There will be one. Of the remaining two, get all optometristic on comparing them. Remember, the basis of the Doctrine is that we experience the world as that of three characteristic relationships; the Outsider (clarks), the Predator (scotts) and the Herd Member (rogers). So go ahead and  imagine how they see the world. Like the dueling lens in an eye test. ‘Here is one. Now, the second lens. Is the first clearer than the second. (Move to another part of your day) Ok which is clearer, this…or this?

New Readers, when we say ‘clearer’ we mean: reasonable/sensible/consistent/’of course’/ whaddya trying to do here?!!  (Bonus: the Doctrine is, first and foremost, an additional perspective on reality. One more than one. By the mere act of trying this experiment, you’re a step ahead of a depressingly-large percentage of the population, i.e. those who insist there is ‘only one reality’.

Ok enough for a Tuesday morning.

Ask. We don’t mind.

 

* well, regular Readers won’t be surprised. (New Readers? No, not a criticism. In the world of the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine, the badge: ‘New Reader’ is not only worn with pride, but is afforded the highest of respect by one of the three personality types (Outsider/Predator/Herd Member)

  1. if you are inclined to respond to the question (implied or directed to you by someone conversant with the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine) with: “Geez, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but I’m somehow a combination of the three. Not just one.” Then, as Jeff Foxworthy might say, ‘You might be a roger‘. But! Not to worry.

 

 

*

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 13, 2024 By

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

ah! Mr. Tiny! To give us a hand to start the week.

Hold on….

there we go

“What?”

“Totally, phoned-in”?!!?

lol yeah, kinda

Promise to stop back in, got an inspection first this a.m., right after that we’ll come back try to … oh, wait,

This week we’ll totally be talking about the Six Sentence Café & Bistro. Mostly a description of the joint. Primarily ’cause we’re inviting you (or, if you’re currently reading over someone’s shoulder, the person at the keyboard) to stop in and visit a spell. We’ll introduce you around, show you the place… then, whatever you want to do! We are talking about virtual reality, yo.

 

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 20, 2020
Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

Know how cool the Wakefield Doctrine is?

…besides knowing more about the other person than you have any right to, given that you saw them for the first time as they joined the raffle ticket spaced line at the supermarket.

It, the Doctrine, not the line at the supermarket, also allows you to better know your-own-self.

How? (You ask, rather rhetorically, seeing how you’re ‘out there’ while I’m still here typing. Hell, I haven’t even hit Publish yet. Damn! This is metaphysical gold!)

New Readers: If you’re here for the first time, we’re serious with the single word question. While it normally requires more than one data point* to figure out a person’s predominant worldview, aka personality type: clark(Outsider); scott(Predator) or roger(Herd Member), the process is simple.

Learn the nature of the (three personality types) relationship to the world around them along with their overt characteristics. Then, when you’re standing in the line, eliminate the one that, ‘There’s no fricken way they’re a ….” That leave two worldviews. Now observe as much as you can, without getting creepy or arrested, and one will make more sense than the other. Another analogy:

The three worldviews are distinct ways a person sees, (actually, the right word is ‘experience’), the world around them. Think of them, (the worldviews), as lenses at the optometrist and see which one produces the clearest, truest image. You know, “Look at the image. Is this one [click] clearer than [click] this one? Now, how about [click] this one?” Thats how we determine the worldview of the people around us and get a secret box-seat to their lifes and times and such.

Back to our special quality.

The cool thing is how the Doctrine, even as it allows us to better understand the world and the people who make it up, is a tool for self-improving ourselfs. And the key to this lies in the stated ambition/goal of learning and applying the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘How do I relate myself to the world around me.’

As always, this: I said ‘How do I relate myself…’ I did not say, ‘How do I relate to the world around me.’

Know the difference and the pilot light flashes green and you in business.

(Useful, btw, in any situation, not just figuring out another’s predominant worldview. If you find yourself in a conflict with someone, something, some event in the ‘real’ world, ask the question: How am I relating myself to the world around me.**)

 

* ‘ceptin, maybe a scott, specifically ‘the eyes of a scott‘ One of the more fun and amazing things about this here Doctrine here.

** don’t forget to use the correct wording! a short cut will only reinforce the problem.

 

 

*

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

TToT-the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 12, 2024 By

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

This is our contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

It is not raining at this particular moment (11:22) but an unlisted Grat for this post is that we know our Readers will not hold it against us if we skip the editing and get outside and doing something lawnistically-speaking.

thanks

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop  Six-Pick of the Week: ‘Sands of Time‘  by Eliza Seymour

5) the Unicorn Challenge  ‘corn in the morn pick, [funny thing about this pick*] : ‘Western Sunset‘ by Tom

6) * sure, we liked the story but, the thing about good writing (from the perspective of the Writer and the Reader) is sometimes our fiction contains elements that stand out that we, the writer may not have ‘tried for’. Taking liberites here, I haven’t asked Tom directly but reading the Comments makes me feel this story has one surprise elements

7) co-writing a serial story with Tom… “Of Heroes and the MisUnderstood”

8) somoething, something**

9) ** spellczech. (ha ha)

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music vids

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 7, 2024 By

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

We’re needing a whole passel of words today, seeing how we’re in the last chapter(s) of our Serial Six, ‘…Of Heroes and the MisUnderstood’. With this in mind, we’ll ask your indulgence as we empty one metaphorical cardboard box into another.

Hey! There’s something the shiny, bright ain’t-good-enough-if-it’s-not-new 21st C kids are missing out on. Sure, if they have anything as archaic as a pile of hardcopy stuff.

Anyway, we’ll just say a quick prayer to St. Charles* and find us some homey-but-still-kinda-picaresque-around-the-edges old RePrint to get us started on this Tuesday.

(OK Full Disclosure: Back in the early days of this blog when we didn’t-know-that-we-didn’t-have-a-writing-style (aka the Grail of all beginner fiction writers, a ‘Voice’) we did a lot of the strings of words (connected-by-dashes-which-served-the-function-of-creating-the-sense-of-a-narrative-aside) ya know?) (here’s some extra parentheticals… we’ve never been all that good at making sure we close them…use ’em as you see fit) (thanks) )). ((

lol Fun days they was.

Anyway Check out the serial story “…Of Heroes and the MisUnderstood” that Tom and I are finishing up in the next week or so**

Here ya go. RePrint (dusty-from-the-attic)

“You see, you start out with a little bit of oil. Then you fry some garlic.” the Wakefield Doctrine (…a personality theory for all sorts of people and situations)

December 9, 2013

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

...yeah, no! just listen!

“Hey, come over here, kid, learn something. You never know, you might have to understand the behavior of 20 people someday.”

No, I don’t think it odd that I am starting today’s Post with a quote from a famous movie. (If you know, without googling, what movie these lines are from, I will send you an official Wakefield Doctrine docTee!*) Most of the Posts that we write start with some totally random item from the world, however this is entirely appropriate, given the nature of the Wakefield Doctrine as a personality theory.

You know that the Doctrine is not really a personality theory, right? We have not (yet) delved into the matter of how we come to settle on one (of the three worldviews) as our predominant worldview. We don’t know why some of us have significant secondary and tertiary aspects and some are simply clarks… or scotts or rogers. We don’t even know what influences in the family structure are important! Birth order is kind of intriguing, but the worldview of the parents have little bearing on who goes to which worldview and, while evidence exists that is highly suggestive of a component of childhood trauma (of any type) as ’cause’ of one worldview being selected over the other, there is nothing anywhere near definitive. So what do we know?

Well, for starters we know that:

  • we all find our predominant worldview and we adapt to the nature of that world.  as Outsiders, clarks become creative, learn to camouflage ourselves among the ‘normal’ children and set out to leave no information un-examined…in the hopes of learning to become ‘part of’; finding themselves in the world of the Predator, scottsdo what comes naturally, run and play and search out their environment, they are the first to go into the abandoned building, first to kiss a boy and are comfortable in the principle’s office because they cannot walk away from a fight and finally, …the majority of children (between the ages of 1 and 4) look around and know that they belong, they are Herd members. not an easy gig by any stretch of the imagination. just as with any member of a team or a family or a congregation, they discover that there are Rules and not only must they be followed, they must be shown to others and that, for the rogers, the good of the many must be imposed on the few
  • while we all are predominately one (of the three personality types), we all have the potential of the other two. for reasons not yet fully understood,  some clarks seem to come out of their shells at times, not at the behest of others, not because they want to, usually because there is a need to; scotts will often express a significant secondary aspect by demonstrating compassion to their prey, much to the confusion (of their prey) and chagrin to themselves, but they will ultimately over-come this by dispatching their victim or marrying them or setting out to right the injustices around them and rogers…poor rogers! a significant secondary aspect (of either sort) means nothing but dissatisfaction and dismay. they are in a world that should be ‘ordered and defined’, a world in which every one knows their place and worse, far worse, is that rogers (with a significant secondary aspect) have the misfortune to be able to see the sides of the box that is their perfect world
  • if you learn the principles of the Doctrine and the characteristics of the three worldviews and (if you) correctly infer the worldview of the other person, you will be in a position to know more about them than they know about themselves
  • if you practice inferring the worldview of the people around you, you will not only know why they behave the way that they do, but you will know what they will do, how they will respond to a situation or event that has not yet happened
  • if you have the desire, the Wakefield Doctrine offers a tool for changing that part, that aspect, those habits that you have always wanted to change but have either had no luck doing so or, far worse, you have succeeded at changing only to discover that you have somehow slid back to where you managed to move yourself away from
  • the Doctrine is fun…there are other people like you here, the cool thing is that you don’t have to risk guessing wrong who will ‘get you’

That’s enough for a Monday morning. Just remember this, the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.  Unlike most of the personality quizzes and tests and free samples you see in magazines and on the internet, the Doctrine is not a mirror-shaped club. No matter how certain you are that the other person would benefit from this, it just doesn’t work that way.

..still a lot of fun, tho

 

For music, here’s Joe Cocker’s version of ‘The Letter’  (written by and a hit for the Boxtops)

* Dickens, of course, the Patron Saint of serial story-writing

** if the name Six Sentence Café and Bistro makes you sit up and say, “Oh yeah? What’s going on down there now?” Stay tuned.

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 6, 2024 By

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

Where to begin?

When you think about it, using RePrints to jumpstart a post is, kinda, just like time travel, ya know?

After all, we are, (on some level), what we write. And who can deny that what we write, (fiction, non-fiction, theories of personality types), are us, made loud.

New Readers! There is a thing in the Doctrine referred to as ‘the Everything Rule’. If you’re just getting the hang of this here Doctrine thing here, don’t be concerned if the part of you that felt, for a moment, like this applied to you is now saying, ‘This is all bullshit. I want to speak to the manager. It’s not right that they go on and on like this…” (lol)

While this post began, as many do, speaking generically, i.e. to all three personality types, clearly we are addressing the clarks in the Readiance. The Everything Rule, (which states, ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’) is there to remind us that, while the three personality types exist in characteristically-distinct personal realities, none has exclusive domain over any part or element of everyday life. How a thing, (a job, a love interest, an avocation, an idea, a nightmare or the best way to express an idea), exists for clarks, scotts and rogers without limitation. How it manifests is determined by the nature and character of that person’s worldview. Being a carpenter (manifests) differently to an Outsider compared to a Predator. Being a fan of a popular musician looks like one thing when we’re observing a roger versus a scott. A cop who is a scott will exhibit traits that are arguably more aligned with successful exceution of their professional duties than say, that of a clark who has become a police officer.

It’s all about how one relates themselves to the world around them and the people who make it up. The world is ‘the same’ for everyone. How we experience it can be viewed through three difference lenses, i,e, that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) or the Herd Member(rogers).

We haven’t used ‘the Wakefield Doctrine Promise’ in a long time! (Here ya go): Learn the character (and characteristics) of these three relationships/predominant worldviews and you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

Tuesday too the Wakefield Doctrine (nope! we were not joking about the destiny of the content*)

May 6, 2014

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

Destiny_-_John_William_Waterhouse

(So …we all good with the realness of your personal reality? …the reality of the other person’s worldview?) We’re spending a lot of time on this because, when we get to the part about using the Doctrine in influencing/helping/understanding/impressing/scoring-big-time with another person, it will be your acceptance of the very real difference (between) what the world is for you and what it is for the other person, that will carry the day.

Speaking of trying to change/improve/enhance/fuckin-stop-making-the-same-mistake-over-and-over-again!, lets take a look at a new concept we’re trying out:

Personal Limiting Condition (PLC), a term for the mechanism inherent in all of our lives, that contrives to limit change. (By change we mean anything that we feel we could or should do differently, anything that we believe will, a) improve our lives or 2) decrease our unhappiness (with our lot in life).  Lets say you, (a clark for the purposes of keeping this discussion somewhat credible) decide, ‘I need to get into shape’ (or) ‘I need to apply myself more and do better at my job’.  Fine. (Being a clark), we will think a lot about how we should attempt to do this thing, whatkind of schedule, necessary equipment and will devote a significant amount of time imagining how great it will be to finally…. whatever you anticipate the ‘new you’ look(ing)/act(ing)/feel(ing) like.

The first day of the jogging program/be serious and ‘on the ball’ at work, goes great! It didn’t hurt too much/it wasn’t too embarrassing. The second day of the jogging/’someone on the move’ at place of employment: hey a little sore, but better shape than you thought (hope it doesn’t take too long)/people seem to be looking at you funny, but the boss seems impressed… Day Three: this is boring/I’m so far behind everyone else…I’ll show them, I’ve got to give 143%/ fine!! I got my regular day’s work done (not that many errors) and the boss seems to be busy with other things…I am so far behind in life, big rewards require big risks!! … until: you run as fast as you know you should be able to run (and something gets fucked up) or  you suddenly have the best idea ever for a book (or starting a band) or maybe sending out resumes, cause your cousins sister-in-law is in the HR Department of a big corporation and everyone knows you should be in…

These last, they are the Personal Limiting Conditions.

The power of PLCs is that they are quite real. You don’t have to give up jogging to not be able to get into shape, you can get hurt. You don’t have to quit your job because you know that you’re in a dead-end mode, you have so many other potential possibilities (yeah, zoe, I know lol).
These are real events. We all encounter them. Doesn’t mean that we are not capable of avoiding them. What it does mean is that, as clarks, we should recognize that this kind of thing happens to scotts and rogers (and other clarks), therefore it does not constitute proof of the unchange-ability of your life.

That’s it for now. for the new(er) Readers… and Jak, here:

(from May of last year, a portion of a Post (in part) Titled, ‘want to know the most dangerous, corrosive word used by a clark?)

It’s an innocent enough word. More than innocent, this word is often considered to be one of positive meaning and intent, a hopeful word, an optimistic word. But as a loan shark is to your local bank, the price of the loan is always higher than the value secured.

The word is ‘maybe’.
In the hands (or on the tongues) of clarks, the word is meant well. “It is a good job, maybe I’ll get it“. Perhaps because, when clarks look at the world we see people and institutions, groups and family members who, while certainly not intending us harm, (they all) clearly know something that we don’t know. “Maybe I don’t want to be a doctor, maybe I really want to find my own way”. The words we use when describing the world we find ourselves in, are  picked with the hope of blending in, looking to be a member or, one of the guys/one of the girls. “I think I should ask her out, maybe I’ll wait until a better time” “How many times do we have to discuss this, maybe next time you’ll listen to me”

Not really sure what it was that struck me about the use of the word ‘maybe’, it just seems that it has a certain resonance when employed by clarks. It is a word that lets us ‘commit without committing’, a word designed to insulate us from disappointment. clarks fear disappointment almost as much as we fear fear. More in a way. Fear can be run from. Disappointment is a sentence of reduced possibility. And if clarks are anything, we are people who believe that having possibilities is the difference between a possibly happy life and a life where we still have options. In a sense, as long as we have the possibility (of something) there is hope.  Maybe.

 

*

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