the Wakefield Doctrine

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

Let’s get started with two jumping off points: 1) yesterday’s Post which we ended with the suggestion that we (your HN) may serve as an illustration example and  b) yesterday’s Comment from Misky, (“…which of three is an “ourselfs” – and is that the same as ourselves, as in how do we put ourselves into someone else’s shoes“.)

The fact is that although we, all of us, have but one predominant worldview, we never lose the potential to experience the world as do ‘the other two’. And, seeing how we are so unselfishly, graciously and desperately offering our ownselfs as test monkey/space gerbil/psych-major’s thesis volunteer college sophomore, we offer ourselfs as: clark predominant worldview with a significant secondary scottian aspect and a weak rogerian tertiary.

So, to keep this simple: we have a meeting today with some people in a new organization. We have something to explain to them, (kinda like selling), and they are motivated to want us to convince them they should do what we suggest, (kinda like successful sales).

What does the Wakefield Doctrine offer in this context/situation?

The coolest thing about the Wakefield Doctrine as a way to self-improve oneself is: there is no need to ‘learn’ anything ‘new’. While my predominant worldview is not most likely to suceed at sales, my secondary scottian aspect is. (Note: we’ll leave the distinction between ‘sales’ and ‘relationship building’ for another post. Spoiler Alert!! One is scottian the other is… rogerian!!. Don’t tell anyone.)

But, before we continue, let’s take a moment for some real Doctrine fun.

In the early days of this blog, when we sought to describe the three personality types, we would use the concept of personal reality. We’ll say now, as we did then, personal reality is something most people find reasonable. It’s not anything weird or extravagant, no flying toasters or talking dogs (well, maybe, the talking dogs)… but simply put, everyone’s reality is, to small but significant degree, personal.

Still with us? cool. With time and development of writing skills(sic) we’ve come to describe the Doctrine in terms that (hopefully) are more accessible to the New Reader while still useful to any Students to the School there. In the matter of personal reality, we’ve come to focus on the concept of relationships, specifically, ‘How we relate ourselves to the world around us and the people who make it up’.

But in the beginning, we spoke of the individual, (albeit mega-young lifeform), realizing their reality was that of (an) Outsider(clark), Predator(scott) or Herd Member(roger). And we meant it! (lol) Serially, we intended then, (and, at a certain level of discussion, now), to maintain that personal reality is real.

(Hey, on a personal note? We did not decide, at the age of five, to sign our Christmas cards to other family members with our full name because we were trying to be funny. (lol) We signed with our full name just to be on the safe side. To avoid scrutiny. (Honey, I can’t quite make out that first name, do we know a carl far.…)

A clark (or a scott or a roger) lives and, more importantly for today’s discussion, grows up in a real reality of one of three characteristic qualities. We didn’t find a ‘See and Say’ book titled ‘So You’re an Outsider!’ We adapted and compensated and developed the social strategies as best we could to survive in our worlds.

(Anticipated Reply to Comment from our more emotionally-developed Readers: Yeah, at first (and later at times) but we found much to occupy our time, so loneliness is not the first descriptive word that comes to mind.)

…to be cont’d