relationships | the Wakefield Doctrine

TToh!100!! -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 16, 2015 By clarkscottroger

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

…and welcome to the Inaugural Edition of the ‘Ten Things of Thankful’ blog hop.

The idea-child (to organize a blog hop with ‘Ten Things of Thankful’ as the central theme), of ‘the Considerer’. Her idea of a Saturday blog hop offers to demonstrate an aspect of the internet that is truly remarkable. To have a community created by the thoughts and ideas (shared by) people from all over the planet… coming into existence for a day…spreading outwards through the blogosphere, passed along, modified enhanced then to fading from view…only to return again, different yet the same. How cool is that?

and…and!! there are 9 co-hosts! (the afore-mentioned Considerer), and

A Fly on our (Chicken Coop) Wall
A Woman’s Place
Bringing the Sunshine
Finding Ninee
Icansaymama
Shoved to Them
Steps into Parenthood
the Wakefield Doctrine
Each week…

That’s about it for me, for this Post. While familiar of with use and value of compiling a gratitude list, creating a list is an interestingly arduous task! Not that I am ungrateful, ( non-grateful?? anti-grateful?? hypo-grateful??? lol), for the things in my life, I have not engaged in a formal exercise before this…I will, without a doubt, be sharing my thoughts and impressions as the weeks progress.
And I am also a big advocate of bloghops… especially for those of us who spend a lot of time writing a blog. The hop (like this one right here) is an opportunity to ‘get out… meet new people, read blogs that you might not otherwise come into contact with… so add your blog to the place below that says sign up here… it’ll be fun.

List of 10 things about/within/comprising my life today 06/08/2013 that I feel grateful for:

coming to know interesting people such as Considerer, simply because there is no way I would have met her, were it not for her blog
having the time available to write this post
seeing examples of Posts as written by the other co-hosts
having a family (wife and dog*)
having known the perfect dog…Ola
living in a climate that is only bi-annually of intolerable climate (lol)
the 3 or 4 years spent on fishing boats
the friends that I have
the enemies that I do not have (at least not in large numbers)
the invitation from Considerer to co-host this here bloghop here
Now the hard part! There’s supposed to appear some code for a button and an invitation to join us… all I need to do is get it right…. hold on….

Number 1:

Number 2-9

the Book of Secret Rules (aka Secret Book of Rules)…
9 co-hostinae,
Work that allows/requires driving through fairly interesting geographies and explore old, odd and (sometimes) semi-dangerous houses
Phyllis and home….
living near enough the ocean to go there whenever the mood strikes me/requires/tempts
Seven Guard Virgins (yeah, all of the them…even if there is a certain favorite)
SBoR/BoSR Rule 1.3
…. hey! you want to hear about Christine when I first met Lizzi? (yeah, that story again!) In any event… I was Commenting at Considerings the odd way that I do when I recognize a clark and immediately write like I’ve known the person my whole life (which, if you understand the Wakefield Doctrine, you’ll realize that I sorta did)….anyway, not long after I started hanging out at considerings, I received the following Comment, like, totally out of left field from some kind of farming site! the name did not ring a bell, but I recognized a scottian friend being protective, instantly:

Submitted on 2013/05/24 at 11:41 pm

I have been seeing your comments on Considerer’s posts, and was a bit curious as to what the clark/roger/scotts you mention means. Now that I’m here, I thought I had it figured out. I think. I do believe I’m a scott. But then I read this post, and got confused all over again. I’ll keep trying. :)

( lol…. I liked her immediately, of course)

Number 10: Lizzi for this here bloghop here. Yes, there are 9 co-hostinae (and a number of hostinae emerita …as can be seen in the first TToT post above), however, as my Latin friends (¿Alguien por favor decirle a Clark que si bien estamos de América Latina, no hablamos América … Aye Carumba! mi amigo !!) would say, ‘sine qua non, binyons‘.

Sure, now it’s easy enough to participate in a grat bloghop like this now, however, allow me to share my memory of reading ‘considerings’ when it first showed up in the ‘sphere. I first met Lizzi at the FTSF bloghop, she wrote….er interesting FTSF posts and, naturally, I liked her. I saw a fellow clark, of course. It seems like, maybe a few weeks after I started reading considerings, Lizzi started doing a gratitude exercise (can’t recall at who’s suggestion). A series of daily Posts, listing the things for which she was grateful. Ha! Lizzi didn’t make up the idea for the TToT herself!!

What she did do herself that is fairly mind-boggling, is, she stuck with it. By herself.
(For newer Readers: hard as it might be to believe, but at the time I’m referencing, ‘considerings’ got maybe 2…3 comments per Post.)
And, as some of us who were there may recall, things were not going that well in her life at that time, yet Lizzi stuck with her commitment. That’s why this bloghop is as successful as it is. The internet is chock full ‘o people who will write 1000 words telling you what you should in order to improve your life. Our host/founderette, as the old saying goes, ‘walks the walk’.

Your hosts

A Fly on our (Chicken Coop) Wall, Amycake and the Dude, Considerings, Finding Ninee, Getting Literal, I Want Backsies, The Meaning of Me, Thankful Me, Uncharted, The Wakefield Doctrine

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group

An InLinkz Link-up

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- “…and we’ll talk in present tenses”*

May 14, 2015 By clarkscottroger

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

(*from ‘Chelsea Morning’, Joni Mitchell)

surely, of the workdays of the week, Thursday mornings are, somehow and in some way, the most tolerate of flashbacks (musical and otherwise).

Of course, you’re right. Of the three, you would think that it would be the rogers who would be most prone to getting transported back in time by those amazingly comprehensive memories, elicited by chancing on a song that was a part of the time past. But no, if you were to find yourself a roger right this moment* and said, “hey, listen to this song! remember? back in college… dormitory… smell of sandalwood incense?….magic markers …bath towels drying on the back of the door?” there is a good chance that their response would be along the lines of, “yeah, sure. You hated that song back then…we used to make fun of the kids who listened to that music. remember?”

It would seem to be clarks who are more likely to embrace…no, make that: deliberately encourage and enhance the effect of a music-memory, with it’s astonishingly powerful emotional affect. Odd. Or is it? rogers may appear to live in the past. …on closer examination, rogers definitely hold ‘tradition’ as a transcendent value, a reference for finding their own way to live life ‘the Right Way’. But, they don’t believe in it, at least not in as personal terms as would a clark.
What !?!
Wait. That can’t be right! It does strike me as decidedly odd that we seem to be arguing that clarks are more personal than rogers! But, fortunately, the Wakefield Doctrine can deal with such seeming paradoxeses I’m talking about ‘the Everything Rule’. To use this rule, we need only ask, “How does a song-keyed memory flashback manifest in the worldview of Herd Members? How does it manifest in the reality of the Outsider?”

for a clark, the full-sense memory that is risen by, as today, my stumbling across today’s song, is a connection to a place…a reality that is real. Well, as real as anything else in the day of an average clark.

for a roger, the full-sense memory is validation it (manifests) as a reminder, a proof that the past is only a segment of the stream of events (in the life of the roger in question, and therefore all rogers), that represent the essential rightness of life

…ok off to work

* better not, rogers are not known for their relaxed embrace of challenging conversations at early morning hours

jeez… if anyone out there is saying, ‘this Joni Mitchell, is she a clark?’ lol…try this: (no, really, the thing here is her introduction to the song. Remember what we say about determining worldview, ‘how does the person seem to be relating themselves to the world around them’…)

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘Tristan and Isolde’ (now for something really fun)

May 12, 2015 By clarkscottroger

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

Couldn’t leave the classical literature thing alone. You know, certain stories or tales, fables or legends have endured and continue to show up in cultures down through the ages, clearly they’re reflecting some aspect of the human condition. But that’s not important now!* What is important is how much fun, (and scary perceptive), is our Wakefield Doctrine. (New Reader Advisory: the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective on human nature and, as such, is not ‘the answer’, rather it’s an alternative view of the actions, behaviors, motivations and intent of people. …you know, lets just say, this Doctrine? ‘as much art as science’, and let it go at that. There’s already too much “well, if you’d only accept my research findings and statistics, you would have no choice but believe me.” in the world today. Check it out.)

…so, anyway, this morning? I’m looking for some enduring tale or fable and I come across ‘Tristan and Isolde’ (or as wikipedia started my thread with ‘Tristan and Iseult‘) and immediately after, the Camelot version (i.e. Guinevere and Lancelot and King Arthur). And now I’m stuck with the topic! I mean, we all ‘know’ the story, but I’m after the worldview of our three main characters. Let me admit that, at first, I was thinking, ‘ok, she’s a clark married to the older guy (Arthur) and swept off her feets by this Lancelot. Simple clark*roger*scott triad, right? maybe

You want to see a fun way to use the Doctrine? look at the images below:

(that last painting, titled ‘Love Potion’…. I think you know where I’m going with this)…. hey! she’s no innocent clarklike girl!!! that’s a scottian female, if ever there was one!

I need to keep this short this morning. Anyone want to jump in and provide us with any additional evidence as to the predominant worldviews of our three characters, please, have at it. And, yes, I did make a leap to a conclusion of Guinevere’ personality type purely on the basis of images I found. Here’s my reasoning:

enduring tale, story of human weakness and foibles and such (and, sure, romance too… can’t ignore our college age readers)
characters remain essentially the same from the 12th Century
artists and painters and actors and directors interpret the characters and depict them…. from the 12th Century to present day
…she is totally a scottian woman

lol… ain’t this Doctrine fun?

* thank you, genius creators of one of the top 3 funniest movies of all time, ‘Airplane!’

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- “Who is it that can tell me who I am?” ― (William Shakespeare, King Lear)

May 11, 2015 By clarkscottroger

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

“[T]he bonds of outsiderness are stronger, in a way, because they’re not predicated on hierarchy or conformity, but a state of the soul,” Lizzi

“…We need to be useful to our own selves.” Denise

Sometimes people say, ‘Clark, your blog is topical, it’s about the Wakefield Doctrine, only the Wakefield Doctrine. You’ve been writing posts for, like, 5 years. How the hell do you do it?’ I smile and say, ‘well, the Doctrine is about life, about how we relate ourselves to the world around us, so everything is a potential topic. It’s not just things, it’s events and occurrences and situations that we, all of us, encounter everyday.‘ Of course, there are Reader Comments, now that is a source of Post topics that’s invaluable. As people who have been reading this blog know, the first half (of the time we’ve been writing this thing), was spent presenting the idea of the Doctrine, it’s principles, how to use it and like that. There came a point, a couple of years ago, when I realized that, not only did Readers understand this thing, but they understood it way better than I realized! Sufficiently to extrapolate its principles and, through their own experience, further the understanding we have of this Wakefield Doctrine. (Kinda funny about that, I was the last to know that Readers and Friends of the Doctrine were that far along in taking the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and applying it in their own life. )

What does this have to do with today’s Post and my Three Daughters?* Well, it’s about Readers Comments. They have become a really great source of Post topics. It’s no secret that there is much more to discover about the Wakefield Doctrine. We have the basic principles:

we all live, to a certain extent, in a personal reality (aka worldviews)
there are 3 characteristic worldviews that we all are heir to, the world of the Outsider, the Predator or the Herd Member
what others call personality types, the Doctrine maintains that everyone grows and develops ways of interacting, strategies for coping with the world that are in the context of the world that they are, as growing children, experiencing. Outsiders (clarks) learn to hide, Predators (scotts) know that ‘fight or flight’ works best and the Herd Member (rogers) accept that conforming to the collective wisdom of the group is really the only best course of action.
while we all experience the world as one of these three worldviews, (our predominant worldview), we always have the potential of seeing the world as do ‘the other two’

…and we have the goal: to understanding how the other person is relating themselves to the world around them. Knowing this last, we are in a position to know more about the other person than they know about themselves. And…. and! we will never have to find ourselves lamenting, “How could you do such a thing!! I really thought I knew you better than that!!”

fine.

what about the quotes?

Lizzi and Denise are referring to the most recent ‘development’ in the Wakefield Doctrine, i.e. the benefit (to clarks) of identifying with other clarks. It, (this ‘identifying with’), holds the potential to be remarkably beneficial (and) helpful thing that clarks can do to improve their very lives. Yeah, I know….

…sorry. Hey, no one said this would be all seriousy and academic and, you know rogerian…. at the risk of losing a tiny small handful of Readers (those who might have missed the statement of how the Doctrine is a fun…and useful tool to help better understand the people in our lives. oh well)

But the serious part of this topic today is that there is a thing that clarks can do with other clarks that will not only help, but will be useful to other clarks, all without invoking any requirements that might trigger the ‘run away!! they’re getting too close!! I’d love to help, but I don’t want to let you get too close (and run the risk of you learning too much) or be in your debt (and run the risk of disappointing you), reflex.
That a clark can identify with another clark is obvious. What might not be so obvious is that, by doing so, I benefit in ways that simply would not be possible with, say, a scott or a roger. And even though I benefit, I don’t have to worry about the relationship (created by this ‘identification’). I remain free to benefit or not, from seeing a person (another clark) and knowing that they experience the world as I do. I’m free to know that, if they weather a certain storm and survive, then I might.
It’s not that I need to learn shit from the other clark… hell, if learning was all it took, clarks would be….well, rogers and scotts! lol.

No.

What happens for me is that I see, say Lizzi, survive a bad time and maybe she did a little thing differently, then I know that when those conditions apply to me, (that dark place is available to all clarks), maybe it can be different. That’s all. And if I see a clark, say Cynthia, and see that she can take the totally un-ruly ambitions and interests and enthusiasm for life and channel them in a way that keeps one strength from neutralizing the other, then it becomes a possibility for me!

(end of Part 1)

* well, because odd and (semi)random references to classical literature and stuff is fun, if for no other reason than, with surprisingly little effort, you can see the Doctrine in everything. Take the three young women in the painting above…please (bar rump bump!). Who out there is not thinking, ‘ok… I see the roger, pretty sure I got the clark…that leaves the red head as the scott. Hurrah!’

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

-the Wakefield Doctrine- “..Ood-gay ob-jay on the allenge-chay” (Dyanne) and other valuable insights

May 5, 2015 By clarkscottroger

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

No, I’m not only being serious, (with today’s subtitle), I am sincerely appreciative of the insights that are to be found in the Comments on yesterday’s Post. Before I tell you why I can make that statement, let me cite two other Comments:

Oh, yes, that phrase fits very well! :-) Knowing that everyone was laughing at me (or at least at my mistake–no one except John actually knew I was the author of the title), really the best choice was to laugh, too. That way they were laughing WITH me, not at me. (Kristi)

(and)

Here’s the sad part. As clarks, we set such high standards/expectations of ourselves we often lose sight that others most likely do not have those same expectations (of us). Therefore we’re not really in danger of “failing”. Only in danger of “failing” ourselves. (Denise)

(New Readers? the above Comments were written by people representing the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine. As such, you can, (after learning the characteristics of the three worldviews), obtain a glimpse of three different worlds! No! really, we are quite serious. Read on.)

If there is one, simple-to-a-fault, statement about the Wakefield Doctrine, ( as a roger might express it: the condensation of the Doctrine), it is this:

clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel

Why these Comments? What insight into the three worldviews do they offer?

(we’re being a little unfair to Dyanne), in using only one of her Comments. That being said, we know that she would not complain about how we’re not using her Comments in the ‘correct context’, not framing them to allow Readers to appreciate the full and comprehensive meaning that she intended… (if you turn your good ear to face the middle of the country and ask every in the room to please stop talking, just for a second, you might hear a sound, off in the distance, “Hey!! I said good job in pig latin ’cause your Post was about languages! That’s it! Lighten up! Move on! Lifes too good to sit and ponder implications!“*) scotts tend to speak with ‘special characters’…a lot! (lol)
Kristi illustrates the identification with the Herd… as a roger, she is not immune to feeling uncomfortable or ill-at-ease, however she lives in a world that she knows that she is ‘a part of’… (you know that meme out there, seen on many a spare tire cover on the back of jeeps and SUVs. “Life is Good’? Kristi, if she did not own one herself, would smile when a car with that saying on the back passed her on the highway.) Heck! you really want to know how different a roger is from a clark?! do you? well, if that car (maybe a jeep cherokee with the spare tire on the back door with ‘Life is Good’ on it, or even just a bumper sticker), cut her off on the highway because she was driving too slowly, she, (Kristi not Denise or Dyanne) would smile. She would not be happy at such driving, she would not be approving of such rudeness, but she would not be swearing and thinking “what a jerk!” Well, maybe a little… lol But what would happen is that she would know, (or one might insist on saying, ‘choose to believe’), that this other person might be in a situation that made the aggressive driving unavoidable. This is not to say that Kristi, (or rogers in general), are very forgiving people (anything but!)… but she would tend to identify with that other person, and understand, even while being annoyed at such dangerous driving. (that particular inference, i.e. the driving being a threat to other drivers is a huge insight into how the rogerian worldview is experienced).
Denise (who is a clark) writes and writes, offering not one solitary answer (and therefore only a single, valuable insight, i.e. high risk bet), she provides us with everything she has, offering all she knows (in the context of her Comment) on the subject, assuming that we might want to play with the parts and possibly come to our own, different conclusions. …all for free. No demands that it be acknowledged, satisfied that she was considered a significant participant in the conversation. We all know how much most people value the free stuff, right?

* this, to use an old cultural reference, is like me saying, “I will now do an impersonation of Ed Sullivan. “Its been a really good shew…really good shew…”**

** famous TV guy in the early 60s. This is, of course, meant to imply a badly done impersonation… that I might have simply said, ‘this is a badly done impersonation’ never even occurred to me…. no, really, did you not read the bullet point about Denise’s Comment?!