the Wakefield Doctrine

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

The is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weakly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. An exercise in the exploration, appreciation and nurturification* of the state of gratitude. Such an endeavor results in both increasing the levels of positive energy and providing a momentary diversion or (dare we say it) entertainment for visitors, contributors and Readers in the collection of accounts of err encountering the state of gratitude.

welll. that certainly was a clunky intro?  but, serially, this ‘hop is fun and you (the Reader) are invited to join in with your own post listing ten people, places, things or events that make you think, ‘ok, that was not bad’ (or any other level for those more in touch with their emotional selfs.) lol

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) another decent rain event this week, the result being the water in the pond is approaching levels normal for this time of year

5) new real estate office. where? (you think to yourself) Wakefield! (yeah, that Wakefield!) google map fans, Wakefield is the ‘developed part of the municipality of South Kingstown, RI

6) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

7) the photo at the top? that is, we believe, a photograph/artifact from our RoadTrip (like, 2009, 2010…sometime) well, the photo marks our attempt to identify ‘the Crossroads’ immortalized in the legend of Robert Johnson. cool, ney?

8) something, something

9) shout out to the participant in our little bloghop who recognized the existence and proper use of Secret Rule 1.3. Gonna go out on a limb and link to the TToT participant we believe it the one…. Hey! Humanist55 good job, yo

10) Secret Rule 1.3 “[t]he recognition of the completion of a list (of ten things of thankful) constitutes a valid Item for (said) Grat list...”  (ibid.  Book of Secret Rules (aka Secret Book of Rules)

* not a ‘real’ word

music vids

*

*

*

*

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

“…no, I was talking to the Texas School Book Depository Building behind you!”

Friend of the Doctrine, Misky asked a question (ok, implied a question) in her comment yesterday that is very helpful to us to remember to ‘stay on message’.

“It’s possible that I wake up a Clark, and by 10am I’ve shed that disguise, and I’m a proper Scott.”

Well, actually, no. It’s not possible to ‘wake up a clark‘.

It is not possible to wake up in any personality type other than one’s predominant worldview, i.e. a clark (Outsider) a scott (Predator) or a roger (Herd Member).

But, as is so often the case with Comments from Readers, Misky’s comment offers us an opportunity to re-calibrate our messaging, or, to be a little more forgiving, to check the tuning on our instrument as, with any instrument. With use comes the risk of getting off pitch.

In the very earliest days, the primary foundational perspective employed in describing and explaining and instructioning New Readers on the Wakefield Doctrine was the concept of ‘personal reality’.

This concept of ‘personal reality’, in no way original to this blog, maintains that the world you experience today is subtly/outrageously different from the world as experienced by your: spouse/ex-lover/girl-with-too-much-metal-in-her-face-at-the-gas-station/your third grade teacher/the doctor who insist you come to his/her office to discuss recent test results… and we mean different. Not flying toasters or magic-waving-of-hands (ok, maybe with the ex-lover), just personal. The facts of the world remain in common. Nothing weird.

…now that you bring up ‘weird’. What we focused on in the early days of this blog was that the reality we found ourselfs in at the earliest of ages were one of three characteristic realities. That of the Outsider, the Predator, the Herd Member. What has been left behind in our approach to explaining this here Doctrine here is that these (three) personal realities are…real.

We did not open our eyes on the world (as chiluns) and make a decision (pre-ordained or otherwise) to act like an Outsider, like a clark. The reality (personal, remember?) was such that we were an Outsider. Our role/part/existence was as an individual who the world regarded as an Outsider.

We only realized it. We did not decide to be one.

That’s why we manifest one and only one predominant worldview. And not switching.

Our querent/correspondent, Misky, lives in a (personal) reality of (self-reported. Always self-reported. First Rule of the Wakefield Doctrine and all) the Predator. (Lions and tigers and bears!! And, slow rodential animals).

It was in order to survive this personal reality that she developed the traits and attitudes, social strategies and such others witness.

We look at ourselfs and our behavior* and think: “Ok, guess I’m a clark” or “Hey! I’m a scott” or even, “Allowing that some people might agree, for the sake of this discussion, I will agree to be a roger. For now.”

Hope this helps.

Even if it doesn’t, the reason Readers come to this blog is that, for some people, it is fun (here and elsewhere) to trick our intellect into arm-wrestling with our imagination.

*our behavior. that is the reason for our peculiar wording: ‘understand how we relate ourselves to the world around us and the people who make it’ The ‘relate ourselfs is the catch’. The whole know thyself thing.

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

OK!

We just spent twenty-three minutes on yourtybe trying to find a song from 1974 for two reasons: 1) to flush an earworm* and b) to find a song from the same album but with a killer guitar hook… ’cause, Seventies!.

Just gotta test the ‘Start At’ function and we can proceed with this Monday’s Monday Doctrine Post (‘Did the Seventies Ever End?‘)

Fine.

Of late the topic of interest has been focused on the practical uses (and value) of the Wakefield Doctrine. We have, hopefully, made clear that the primary advantage of employing everyone’s favorite personality theory as a tool to self-improve oneself lies in the idea that while we become a ‘personality type’ by virtue of learning to exist, survive and thrive in a personal reality (one of three) we have, within, the qualities inherent in ‘the other two’. And, simply put, if you find yourself lacking in behavioral adaptations/strategies/’hey-this-is-easy!’ then one of the other two surely has the skills.

Of course, seeing how the Doctrine posits that our personality types are the result of a lifetime (more importantly an infancy and childhood) of developing and practicing a certain style of interaction, (you remember! clark/Outsider, scott/Predator and roger/Herd Member) so, it does us little good to sit and wish: “I claim my inner (one of the other two).”

That said, the key lies in the ‘inner’. You might have been a clark (and you’ve already read most of the posts with an excitement building from a sense of the increasing familiarity to this thing) or a scott (laughing and seeing nothing fleeing/attacking at the moment and so indulge in a rare moment of speculation) or a roger (looking around, seeing no little ‘r’s in circles or too many comments at the bottom, look for the hook in this system, knowing when it might come in handy sometime).

So with the Wakefield Doctrine you can dispense with one of the most fundamental (and therefore effective) mechanisms employed by ‘Society’ to achieve a certain degree of consistency among it’s constituents: “Sure they might do it, but you? That’s just not you!”

Yes. Yes it is.

ProTip: the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, age and culture neutral. It’s all about how you, the Reader relate yourself to the world around you and the people who make it up.

Good luck

*always works for those of us unfortunately grounded in a reality in which never mind, if you identify, that’s all thats important

*