self-development | the Wakefield Doctrine

the Wakefield Doctrine

May 1, 2024 By clarkscottroger 5 Comments

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

While everbody can see the Wakefield Doctrine as ‘an additional perspective’* it takes a little extra reflection to appreciate it’s utility as ‘a tool’* and a whole lot of clarklike imagination to accept that it (can/might) offer a lever*** on the world. It might be more accurate to use the term, ‘personal reality’. (While more comprehensive and conducive to understanding the Doctrine, the description of three ways to relate ourselves to the world around us was, originally, “Σοβαρά, θα εμπιστευτείς ένα google translate για ένα κρίσιμο στοιχείο στο Δόγμα; (ναι, φαίνεται ωραίο όμως, σωστά)”.¹

The concept of personal reality is both simple and irrational. (so, yeah, welcome to the world of clarks). It maintains that we, all of us, experience reality to a small, but not insignificant basis, as personal . Nothing cool, (or scary), like singing toasters or having the ability to fly (though, clarks out there are all too familiar with our capacity for being invisible, deliberately and otherwise), just personal. Therein lies the key utility of our little personality theory. The Doctrine reminds us that all that meets the eye is insufficient for complete understanding while, at the same time not conveying the ability to read minds (damn! was that too much to ask of this serendipitous insight?) but providing (an) additional aid to allowing the world to be different for the other person than that which we are experiencing.

In the early days we spent a lot of time with this concept of personal reality. Mostly because we needed to communicate that our personality types are not necessarily our conscious (or even, unconscious) choice. The clarklike female does not add neon highlights to her perfectly nice-looking hair and the clarklike male does not hunch his shoulders and look at anything other than the eyes of the other person because they’re (as a scott might express: goofin’ on the interviewer)… we do it because it makes sense. To us; in the context of the reality in which we find ourselfs. And that, according to many authorities with books and colleges named after them is a definition of rational behavior.

So, in conclusion:

Εάν δεχθούμε την ευθύνη για τον χαρακτήρα του κόσμου που αντιμετωπίζουμε, τότε έχουμε πρόσβαση στη δύναμη να τον αλλάξουμε.³

Teaser: so, we’re engaging in a live action application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, going all Sy Sperling on this here tool here. Will keep you up-to-date.

(for those with longer tenure, we might reference a period of time shortly after starting this blog that we provided an example of attempting to act as a live demonstration. and, for reasons uncertain but respected we will keep it simple and say ‘This link for that reference’

* “…on the world around us and the people who make it up”

** “…for seeing the world as the other person is experiencing it”

*** “Πᾷ βῶ, καὶ χαριστίωνι τὰν γᾶν κινήσω πᾶσαν [Pā bō, kai kharistiōni tan gān kinēsō” (Archimedes) That thing about levers and moving the earth. Yeah, extra points to the Reader who cupped handed ‘roger‘

1) we trust Nick, if he’s reading, to not so much do the translate check, as let us know if we’re saying something like, “The can of dog food forms the basis of a complete breakfast” or phrases other than what we actually wrote

2) something to the effect: ‘Seriously, you’re gonna trust a google translate for a critical element in the Doctrine? (yeah, does look cool though, right?)

3) damn! let this put to rest the persistent rumor that, at least in the public eye, clarks are totally risk-aversive (That said, everyone lets have a round of applause for Nick and his good-hearted efforts to eq this bad-boy (linguistically-speaking) into something that gets us at least a B-minus)

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 29, 2024 By clarkscottroger 4 Comments

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

RePrint?

Who said that?

(thank you, very much)

(all we had was a couple of examples/illustrations/manifestations of ‘the Everything Rule’*)

* ‘Everyone does everything, at one time or another’

But, interestingly enough, it (the Rule) has become less necessary than it was in the early days. Most likely this is attributable to a) the frequency of visits from people coming to the blog for the first time, 2) the percentage of rogers confronting the lack of herd evidenced in the posts, comments etc or c) developing the idea of predominant worldviews (the ‘personality types’ of our system) as relationship (‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’) as opposed to the notion of encountering three characteristic personal realities. i.e. that of the Outsider, the Predator and the Herd Member. We suspect Readers are more comfortable with the former paradigm than the latter: ‘are you saying I am stuck in the screaming dimension‘ / ‘no, sorry, but you have overlooked one thing, ‘my opinion‘ / ‘cool‘.

damn! interesting but not as invigorating as this Monday warrants

wait! shit! all this way before the topic appears! ‘Aging and the three predominant worldviews of the Wakefield Doctrine’

nah

the level of comprehension, (if not natural affinity for the concept), of Readers these days is too great to stay interested in a topic as simple as:

‘While age neutral, the Wakefield Doctrine accounts for the subtle changes in one’s personality as time goes by. This is not simply because there is, on the whole, less energy for the individual to express and manifest the effects and products of their interaction with the world around them. The interesting thing is that a person’s secondary aspect rises in relative prominence as their predominant worldview declines.’

Just as in the early days of this blog, the question tends to be: ‘I know my (spouse/friend/boss) is a (clark/scott/roger) but sometimes I’d swear they were not. Worse, sometimes they act inconsistently with your theory! I know the Doctrine is perfect in it’s basic premise so what gives?’

As the predominant wanes, the secondary, (and on occasion, the tertiary), aspect becomes more apparent.

ok… RePrint

snippets, tidbits and snicky-snacks, stop and set a spell at the Wakefield Doctrine personality spa

October 2, 2011

Welco

Welcome to ( ah! much better! ) the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )

As the title purely implies, today is an easy day…easy font, easy title and easy on the complex, OMG! I had no idea how totally insightful you people are…kinda way. No grammar concerns, no worries about ‘story arc’ just going to have a little conversation. Well, we know it is not going to be a ‘conversation’, because that would require a give and take, an exchange of ideas, a frickin effort to get out of your Chair-of-Total-Self-Idulgence and and actually do something. ( And we know you are too fuckin lazy to bother doing that! Life in the Virtual Zone!! ain’t it grand?)

Lets play with fonts, seeing how we’re all ‘comic sans-ly this morning’. Like the following short statement:

This is type on wing dings font what the hell!

now, would someone out there please tell me why this ‘font’ would be permanently installed in my software? Seriously, other than some pudgy-fingered, greasy-hair, bad-complected roger (male or female) using this font to send secret messages to other rogers, why do we have it? No answer, is there? (And we now arrive at the Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day):

We all know that this Doctrine is based on the premise that there are three characteristic ways/manners/styles that all people perceive the world, i.e. ‘as an Outsider’ (looking on) if you are a clark, ‘as a predator’ (watching out) if you are a scott (or) ‘as a member of the group (looking around) if you are a roger.
With me so far? good! Then you know that at an early age, we all become predominantly one of these three, (and this is where the magic happens):

If you are a clark: you are different, you know that everyone and everything around seems normal and you know you are not crazy (well, not crazy crazy) but everything is out there and you are here watching and hoping that you can understand what it is that everyone else seems to know (and then) you will fit in and you won’t be out here

If you are a scott: you just got to do something, you see people act and move and you feel….you move you suspect that you are different but everytime someone does something you re-act and you are …not glad…not happy…it’s just right. Sometimes you feel like you maybe, shouldn’t do so much so fast, you feel bad when others seem to not enjoy it…but you know thats the way the world is

If you are a roger: you are busy, all the time, things need to get done but they must be understood and appreciated and …and enhanced You feel the responsibility, the sense of duty but it is not oppressive, sometimes you know that there are people around you who are in the way, but for the most part, everyone has a place and life will unfold as it should

What we are talking about here is not the dominant aspect, the fact that we are mostly clarks, scotts and rogers (most of the time), what we will look at is the role of the two ‘non-dominant’ aspects. Remember! We never lose the capacity/capability/drive/instinct to experience the world as any of the three types, so what happens to the other two that we are not (mostly)?

*

Hey! That was interesting in a dissappointing-but-haven’t-we-matured-so-we-don’t-feel-the-need-to-get-upset way. The font effect of the original did not copy forward.

Oh well, Readers will have to use their not-inconsiderable imaginations to visualize the effects we were going for back …. er holy shit! thirteen years ago!! ayy-fricken-yeee

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

Tewesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 23, 2024 By clarkscottroger 1 Comment

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

There! That does it.*

So not to get too metaphysical. (yeah, right If metaphysics were imaginary food, we’d either weight six hundred pounds or be on a permanent intravenous drip of Rao’s Caramelized Onion Sauce over extra broad egg noodles.)

No, seriously has anyone ever wondered why the clarks in their lives have so much difficulty with the simple things while achieving more effective results with the unnecessarily complex topics?

Well, damn! If we knew you were going to be tossing the softball Doctrine questions, we’d a waited to more of the last minute to answer.

Two words: emotion. (No, it’s not that clarks are not emotional/bereft of emotion/emotionally-impaired or otherwise disadvantaged. The problem for clarks in the execution of the ordinary challenges of normal, day-to-day living isn’t that they are trying to compensate for a lack of emotion. The problem for clarks is the perceived excess of said emotion. Or, more precisely, the potential of emotion to create chaos and otherwise push the car down too steep a hill. ya know?)

Alright! If we were in a classroom and a pop-quiz was announced, you’d totally hear the word ‘define and refine’.

lol

Hint (for the ambitious rogers (with significant secondary clarklike aspects)… the scotts… nah, they’d be drawing crude life figures to illustrate and clarks?

Welll. This is actually something more of a challenge for you clarks out there than it would occur to you to admit.

Chill. Not to worry. It’s not like you’re going to be asked to come to the front of the room and read what you wrote in response to this essay question.

...much

oh yeah? I’ll step in yer frickin river as many times as I

July 11, 2010

Yeah, it is Sunday again. And no, there is no rule that we have to get all weird (alright, weirder) on Sunday Posts. But the Doctrine allows for virtually anything, as long as there is something (in the Post) that advances the understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine.
The Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day: talking yesterday to a person who has recently encountered this blog. She expressed some concern about knowing for certain which of the three (clarks, scotts or rogers) she was, which is appearing to be a rather common experience among new Readers and as such is important to us here at the Doctrine. We want everyone to immediately get the Wakefield Doctrine and then conribute to the blog through Comments. As to the un-comfortable part, I suspect there is an element to the writing “style” of these Posts that imparts some kind of “you better get this right” vibe to the First Time Reader. Damn.Hey Readers, yo. (No you’re wrong, I am totally entitled to affecting any (writing) style, slang, patois, pidgin, dialect or any other form of projectile cool (including a delusional perception of sounding cool, inevitably limited to my own imagination) if I want to cause I am the one writing this Post and who is anyone else to say that I am not in fact a dreadlocks-sportin, surfboard-on-the-car drivin’, pants-worn-down-about-mid-thigh wearin’ scott or roger or, for that matter clark(except the part about the surfboard and pants and dreadlocks but otherwise, I’m there) Sorry, lost control of the parentheseses. Besides, the job is open, anyone got a Post you want to write then step right up. Let us know in the form of a Comment and we will be too damn happy to let you write one of these rascals.Anyway, the important thing here is this: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and roger) proposes that all of us start life with the qualities ascribed to three (‘personality’) types (clarks, scotts androgers). Further, at some relatively early point in life, we begin to experience the world mostly from the perspective of one (of these three). At that point we can say we are a clark or a scott or a roger. Having said that, we always retain the qualities/capabilities/capacities of the other two types; but except for you Readers, we all seem to forget that we have a rogerian side or a scottian aspect.
The reason you are reading this is that you have the intellectual flexibility to imagine that which is not. (Yes, I know what you clarks are thinking at this point, but let’s just keep that to ourselves for now, shall we?)
The short form (lol, as if) is this: you already know this shit. The Doctrine is a productive, unique and fun way to look at the behavior of those around us and understand why the people in our lives act the way that they do. Pretty simple, isn’t it?So, New Reader…relax take a deep breath (not too loudly, scott) (not too dramatically, roger) (breath! clark, breath!). There is no rush. Since you are already all three, deciding for yourself which of the three you are predominately will take care of itself.
The most frequent experience of new Readers is to say, “Yeah, I get the theory, but sometimes I am like one type and at other times one of the other two. Almost as if I am all three”.
To which we say, “Very good! Many of us feel that way when we start, then we frickin read what is written about being all three and it being predominately one of the three and we get over it!” Jeez…come on, people I know you have an extra capacity to understand new shit or you wouldn’t still be reading this, you would have long since moved on to crocheting-with-emily.com or wrench-and-sports.com. Relax, trust your instincts and get over it. Have fun! (clarks, see us after class and we can help you apply an overly long, convoluted, tail-eating definition with complete instructions on how-to have fun).And write a Comment. Win a hat (for your damn head).You want pressure? I give you pressure…watch the following music video and tell me (through a Comment) if the Conductor is a clark or a scott or a roger…(come on scotts, some of you must like classical music)…but the challenge is identifying the type.
Not easy, of course, but I don’t want anyone to feel that they should not submit an answer….there is a hat (for someone’s damn head in it) for the correct answer!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZwgLrVEw84…put down your keyboards, your time is up…answers are in…remember what we say here at the Doctrine, “there are no stupid questions, just your questions”(Come on Readers, lighten up. Take a chance, clark; don’t feel threatened, roger; hey scott, you can do this)Hey! Who said, ‘What we really want is a pleasant melody with near-incomprehensible lyrics? Here ya go, clark!

* the writing prompt effect of a RePrint post eliminating all that blank space. As always, ‘It’s way easier to edit than it is to write fill an empty page.’

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 22, 2024 By clarkscottroger 3 Comments

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

Hey, you know you really should call in next Saturday, right?

The Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive, that is.

Heck, we might even drive around Wakefield, if’n you do, (call in), the number is: (605) 475-2200 code 6660467# 8:00 pm EDST

So, this last Saturday’s Drive we were delighted to hear Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia (Need help with your website or online marketationing? Get on over to ArtFunky! Tell ’em the Doctrine sent ya!)

I was late joining the Call. Which prompted the question to her: ‘So what was it that prompted your first call to the Doctrine?’

(New Readers: We ‘met’ Cynthia on the Facebook, way early on in our tenure here. But it, (our nascent friendship), was all in Comments and association with a FB group, Bloopy Bloggers. (Yeah, we know!) Those were simpler times and we were so new and enthusiastic then. In any event, we’d been doing the Call-in a relatively short time when she called. As luck would have it, we were not on the call that particular Saturday Night due to being on a roadtrip. Fortunately, Denise was. And the rest is Doctrine history.)

Well, she, Cynthia, she say, “I was curious and had heard that you were doing an online radio Show.”

RePrint

the Wakefield Doctrine: the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ‘…more at 4!’

November 14, 2012

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks (who are the creative ones and therefore the ones to show up with something like this here theory here) and scotts (who are the ones who are all about ‘the doing’ action-oriented who thought doing an internet radio show was a good idea) and rogers (who are the ones in touch with the feelings and emotions of the masses and has the voice that the audience will respond to))

Allow me to say, Thank you for your encouraging ‘knuckle bumps’/’chest bumps’/’high fives’ and your (secretly destructive) well wishes and other booby-trapped sentiments!

Today’s Post is going to be brief as I am trying to outline some sort of script for the Test Show that I will be doing on BlogTalkRadio today. There are a lot of reasons for trying this thing, but for now, bottom line is that I will have 30 minutes to fill this afternoon at 4:00 pm.
The interesting thing will be how I manifest not only my pre-dominant clarklike aspect but my secondary scottian and (distant) tertiary rogerian aspects in the course of the day today.

This is, of course, the beauty part of the Wakefield Doctrine and it’s use and value to anyone who has ever said “I know I can do better, why do I always hold back? I know my bad habits, when I change them things get better, but somehow I end up back doing the same thing that I know I don’t need to do!’”
Sound familiar? Well, good news! The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that self-improvement/self-development is not about getting rid of bad habits and trying to learn something totally new (and therefore so unlike you) and then trying to remember to do the new thing instead of the old thing!
No, it is not!
It is way better than that, but I need to save something for later today, so you will just have to dial in to hear how the Wakefield Doctrine can change your life and such.

The thing about this radio show format that is daunting is that, unlike the Saturday Night Drive Call-in show, I will need to assume that there are listeners…for the entire 30 minutes. On Saturday Night, in-between calls I don’t need to talk! Well, I’m sure it will work out, I will simply need to bring out my scottian aspect (for the lively pacing, the enthusiasm, the excitement) and my rogerian aspect for the words, and descriptions and that (god, how the hell do they do it?) total conviction that the world is hanging on their every word!

(as they say in the radio biz..)

The lines are now open! So write us a Comment and suggest ways I should spend the 30 minutes of internet fame.*

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the-wakefield-doctrine/2012/11/14/the-wakefield-doctrine-episode

* back in the days of Pictimiltude

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

April 20, 2024 By clarkscottroger 6 Comments

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Our foundress, L, as the recipient of a grant by George V as part of a deal to ‘get the rest of those malcontents off to the ‘new’ world and generally clean up London’. (The subtext being to focus on the rabble-rousing nouveau-social activists like Mrs Cooper and her sisters-in-law, Ann and Margaret Fletcher who seem to have travelled the length and breadth of Lancashire raising support for the locked-out-workers*. This last, one of those elegant (and mnemonic) slogans and catch-phrases that dot the admittedly under-researched period of the worker’s rights movement in both the UK and the States. The thing about these events? One might infer something about catchy phrases and… well, it rhymes with ‘Pen things of Rankful’. (Seeing as we’re on the topic of worker’s rights, we would be negligent if we did not mention the strike of personal interest, ‘the Bread and Roses Strike**’ (‘Short Pay! All Out!) which served as a focal point for the first part of our WIP ‘Almira’.

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Unicorn Challenge ‘Prime Ear of the Week’: ‘The Robber‘ by jenne (‘In which our story-teller walks us into a veritable maelstrom of un-tagged dialogue. Some of us Readers found ourselfs running through the story like a puppies in it’s first snow flurry’.)

5) the Six Sentence Story, ‘The Six of the Week’: ‘Untimely Utterances- Part II, Mystic Rains‘ from Friend of the Doctrine, Spira/Nick In the way of the virtual world and synchronicity our intro here was written prior to reading Nick’s post. We love that stuff. “Linear, monolithic timeline reality!?!? “We don’ need no steeken’ linear, monolithic timeline!” As it happens, we’re the clear beneficiaries of this juxtaposition as our reference to the seemingly endless river of antipathy towards those without power by those with, could have gone afield, had it not been the availability of the jinn of hyperlinks to provide context. Nick’s most excellent post was far more challenging.

6) yard project/status in photation (Grat 7)

7) as soon as it stops with the endless rain

8) something, something

9) Bridge Update (Nothing new to report. We suspect the timeframe for the project has been pushed back as Phyllis’s mallard family are, as the New Yorker Magazine* might say, ‘In residence’)

10) Secret Rule 1.3 (From the Book of Secret Rules, aka the Secret Book of Rules) that states and provides for, in part: “[t]he process of reaching Grat Items eight (or seven, if you’re feeling all-powerful) is, legitimately, and without qualification, a valid item on the list (“…gratum notatio gratitudinis.” op.cit. page 222); with the proviso (Latin: prōvīsiō (“preparation, foresight” but said while wearing, like, a toga)

* reference here to Ten Percent and No Surrender Strike 1853-1854

** ok, here is the perfect example of the difference between rogerian literalness. The title of the Wikipedia article we’re citing is: ‘The Lawrence Textile Strike’ also known as ‘the Bread and Roses Strike’. While we are not experts in the history of the worker’s rights movement in the early 20th, we are experts in a certain theory of personality. Guess which of the three would be drawn to the first title and which would be attracted to the second. The question you might ask yourself, provided you, the Reader’ are still with us but are pausing, ‘What is it you’re trying to say?’

music vids