three personality types | the Wakefield Doctrine three personality types | the Wakefield Doctrine

Satyr-Sae -the Wakefield Doctrine- “out visiting other bloggers, having completed this week’s TToT”

October 31, 2026 By 8 Comments

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

So, in a comment to Misky yesterday, we quoted a line from Robert Browning’s pome ‘Andrea del Sarto‘ “…a man’s reach should exceed his grasp…” In the spirit of adventure, not to mention, getting out a little more these days, we came across a ‘hop: at…

***********************************

Linda Hill’s ‘Saturday Stream of Consciousness’

Your Friday prompt for Stream of Consciousness Saturday is “costume.’” Use it way you’d like. Have fun!

After you’ve written your Saturday post tomorrow, please link it here to this week’s prompt page and check to make sure it’s here in the comments so others can find it and see your awesome Stream of Consciousness post. Anyone can join in!

***********************************

…and we thought to ourselves, we thought, “That might be fun! We’ve finished this week’s TToT, why not. Then we saw the prompt word: ‘Costume’

In the world of the Wakefield Doctrine, many holidays are associated with one of the three personality types than the other two. Costumes have the first order suggestion of the ‘holiday’ of Halloween. Where, in Oceania, as well as other parts of the world, children (and adults looking for an excuse) dress in costumes and go out house to house asking for candy. Trick or Treat is the official designation of this activity. As a child, putatively just like other children, I looked forward to the bag of candy at the end of the night. Being of a certain age, there was little in the way of healthy, my-god-the-sugar-content! items being handed out at the neighbors. Mostly sucrose with a dollop of food coloring (candy corn! who didn’t eat them to the point of getting sugar burns?) But the evenings included costumes which for my time and demographic were variations on ghosts and whatever-suggested-by-an-excess-of-mother-or-sister’s-makeup.

It was the best of nights, it was the worst of nights. And it was more than a measurable amount of time ago. We did not merely grow too old for such childish activities, the world itself had a hand in the distancing I imagine while typing. To say that the world changed or modern times exerted control would be the most of the over-simplification. We, collectively without regard to age or culture, were re-cast. The roles we auditioned for were re-tre-quatro-written. Without our consent or input in the editorial process.

But, here we are. At least our current roles allow us to retain the backstory of our memories. Of a time when kids went door to door, semi-alone and gathered back home to spill out the loot on bedspreads and dining room tables.

In the Doctrine’s system of three personality types there is one (of the three) that shows the highest level of tropism for the ‘costumes mean no one will recognize you’ element of Halloween. Hint: rhymes with ‘Outsider’

*

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology Tagged With: , ,

Wednesydea -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 28, 2026 By 9 Comments

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

Tonight we’ll post our Six Sentence Story (or two) and Friday we might try an catch ‘an out-of-town’ bloghop. If for no other reason than to to broaden our horizons, try to penetrate yet another blogosphere segment… you know, just to keep our ‘stalk ‘n hunt’ secondary scottian aspect from becoming bored, (or worse, lethargic and believing that his/her claws are permanently the pieces of chalk they are coming to resemble).

We will, continue to offer, at minimum, three days of ‘This is (the) Wakefield Doctrine’ posts. For New (and Experienced) Readers alike.

 

From Misky in her Comment on Monday’s post.

This: “Find a zen monk who’s a roger and hold up a picture of sub-adults all enraptured by a social app on their (collective) phones. Ask: is this a part of the monk’s Herd?
The answer: It is now.” …

I find this image somewhat unsettling, and I would avoid those particular sub-adults like plague in a petri dish. What if some part of the ‘herd’ goes against the rules of the collective? Will a rogerian sever that (renegade) portion from the herd, or try to persuade their thinking into uniformity?

ok. leave your reasonable expectations, extrapolations of behavior based on ‘do unto others…’ and remember we’re talking about fun with behavioral metaphors.

Picture a workplace. One focused on technical/scientific/rules-based activity. The business is thriving. To simplify this example for any New Readers, lets say it’s a analytical laboratory, an engineering and design company or…an old-school seminary.

The defining demographic of employees and management? rogers!*

*New Readers: the Everything Rule, if you please. Sure, there are such things as scottian aeronautical engineers and you can find clarklike CPAs in ‘the Big Four’. But remember! This is for fun with with our imaginations

Bonus!!!! (from an old post)… we totally promise(ish) to get back on topic right after:

if we didn’t have rogers you would not want to have to fly from Newark to Biloxi in a plane designed and built by a scott!

  • jet airliners designed by scotts:  very fast with at least 5 or 6 engines (not necessarily required to get off the ground, but make them louder than frickin anything)
  • a part of the cabin has a basketball net/hockey/or batters box
  • the stewards would have to wear bathing suits… male or female  and they would carry those little air horn things (can of compressed air) to warn the unruly passengers or just in case they get bored
  • the flight deck would have windows that open, so the pilot could yell at passing jets

0r a clark:

  • instead of normal seats, there would be couches with pillows and quilts (that would have a disturbing tendency to slide around when the plane has to bank for final approach)
  • the stewardesses would be scotts and stewards would be rogers
  • there would be a bathroom-to-passenger ratio of nothing less than 1:2

ok….oh kay! a promise is a promis. To Misky’s question.

If you have ever been in such an environment (or have heard reliable tales of life in a rogerian dominated workplace) you will say…”I accept that there will be a significant level of intrigue and political maneuvering for advancement but…. but!! why do they (the rogers) seem to be able to overlook such behavior? Say, getting bad-mouthed before a performance review. Because (remember!! you’re a roger in the world of the Herd!) you let it go, because there will be a time when you are the one on the delivering end.

This is the most difficult aspect of the personal reality of the Herd Members for clarks to accept. The mutual agreement not to ‘do unto others’ when it’s not (yet) your turn.

Direct answer to Misky’s question: a roger seeks to become the center of the Herd, not the leader. Force/control is exerted by influence radiating out from one’s position in the Herd. There is no direct force.

Thanks! Misky

*

Share
Filed Under: Lead Stories, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 19, 2026 By 10 Comments

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

We’re gonna start the week’s Doctrine post series with some AP Wakefield Doctrine insights, courtesy of our diligent correspondent, Misky. In a comment at last Tuesday’s post, she say,

…which leads me to a person that explains a problem to the electrician in 200 words when 12 would do the same.

New Readers! the question our friend raises goes to the heart of the Wakefield Doctrine. It’s primary conceit, (in the good sense of the word), is to afford all those with the intellect, curiosity and desire to add to their respective realities an additional insight into the acts and behavior of the people around us (and the world that makes them up*). The Wakefield Doctrine offers and insight into three distinct ways to experience reality, as a:

  • clark (the Outsider)
  • scott (the Predator)
  • roger (the Herd Member)

Through the pages of this blog are a buncha descriptions of the characteristics of the above three predominant worldviews (aka personality types). Spend the time learning. Today’s post is designated as AP level as we are considering the Everything Rule.

ok! back to Misky’s Conjecture as to how verbosity relates to personal reality. Our invocation of the Everything Rule brings into play a key concept: manifestation. Specifically, how does giving instruction (to a trade or other non-related individual.**), manifest in the personal realities of clarks, scotts and rogers? As with the standard process of determining predominant worldviews, Misky has, in effect, thrown out one, (of the three), leaving us with a comparison to two seemingly identical actors.

btw: a scott tends to be less …loquacious than ‘the other two’ if for no other reason than in the world of the Predator, ya don’t need too much filigree on: Run! Run Away! Eat! Reproduce! Sleeeep! lol

As to verbosity in clarks and rogers:

  1. the Outsider (clarks) are eternally curious. their lives being a search for the information that might enable them to become ‘a part of’. As such, all information has value. Combine this view with their tendency to want to share with others (yeah, half-thought-through protective coloration lol) and so will in our scenario provide more (information) rather than less. just ’cause
  2. the Herd Member (rogers) are concerned, first and foremost, with the Herd. Everything in their world is connected (to the people and elements of this) and so, in the process of giving direction to an electrician, see no reason to leave out: the electricians that they have known, the people who have had bad experiences with the work under consideration and the fact, that as a person, all of this puts them in a position of being… well, a peer, to the expert they are now directing.

ain’t this Doctrine fun?

 

*lol a little reversal of our standard, ‘…the world around us and the people who make it up.’

** yeah, if related? way different conversation lol

 

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

2sdae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 13, 2026 By 14 Comments

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

Now that we’re all safely in Tuesday (the mildest day of the workweek) what say we check in our friends/Commentationers/-ettes

from Mimi:

In my reality, it’s good to be an outsider, but to see things through the lens of a predator or a herd member when needed.

then Misky:

I will say this: The Doctrine has given me a wee bit more patience for other perceptions that might’ve (well, actually, that really thoroughly) bugged the heck out me previously.

finally (the later episodes opening song lyrics ‘the Professor and Maryanne are here on….) Frank:

It sounds like we have better (I mean, worse) things to repent of than being either a clark, a scott or a roger.

How true (and perceptive)!

(In reverse order)

  • the three ‘personality types’ of the Wakefield Doctrine, more properly referred to as one’s predominant worldview, is both label and description of the first/primary relationship we, all of us, establish with the world. It is this context that we maintain and build a set of coping (and thriving) mechanisms/social strategies that persist throughout our lifes.
  • as an alternate perspective on the world around us, (and the people who make it up), the Doctrine offers a view from aside
  • to see the world not only as it exists for us, but to understand (or, at very least, gain an appreciation of) the world and everyday life as those around us are experiencing it is the most worthy of ambitions

cool

hows about we close with a RePrint/ReMinder of the ‘Eureka Moment’ of this here personality ‘theory’ here?

In the early 1980’s, Scott (the progenitor scott) worked at a music store in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. He was the only full-time salesman and (also) ran the store’s repair department. In addition to musical instruments, the store provided repair services for a wide range of electronic equipment, including  tape recorders and other audio equipment.

One day I happened to stop by the store to visit. While there, a young man walked into the store, went directly to the ‘repair department’ where Scott and I were talking and without preamble placed a ‘dual cassette recorder’ on the counter. A dual cassette recorder was designed to allow one cassette to be copied directly to another, what today we would call, making a back up. The controls on this ‘dubbing recorder’ consisted of two sets of tape recorder controls: Volume, Treble and Bass. Where it differed from a single recorder was that it also had a Master Volume control. As the name implies it controlled the volume level, for both recording and playback. The tape recorder the customer placed on the counter appeared to be new and showed no signs of damage or abuse. I stepped back, Scott looked up and said, ‘What can we do for you’?  The customer said, “This thing is brand new, it worked for a couple of days, then it stopped working entirely. I can’t figure out what’s wrong”.

Scott looked at the device for a second, then, without a word, reached under the counter, brought out a roll of black electrical tape, and, tearing off a 2 inch piece, taped over the Master Volume control (after returning the dial to it’s highest setting). He then slid the device back over the counter and said, “There, it’s all right now.”

The customer asked to plug in the recorder. Taking a cassette from his pocket he put in the machine and ran it through it’s paces. Satisfied that  his ‘broken tape recorder’ now worked like new, he thanked Scott and walked out of the store, a totally satisfied customer.

My reality shifted. For reasons unclear to this day, although I observed what scott saw as to the nature of the problem with the dual cassette recorder, I realized that the character of his solution implied a reality, a ‘context’ that was clearly different from mine. At that moment I came to believe the personal reality that I experience as I went about my life was not necessarily the exact reality of anyone else. That the manner in which Scott perceived the ‘problem’ was fundamentally different from the way I witnessed it.

From that moment, standing in a small music store in Pawtucket, I’ve been observing the behavior of others knowing with the conviction that what I could see was not necessarily what they are experiencing. That, in fact, all reality is personal to a small, but significant degree, personal.

This blog is all about: ‘Can I find a way to better see the world as the other person is experiencing it?. And, (through this effort), ‘Can I improve and enhance how I relate myself to the world around me and the people who make it up?‘

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (already in progress…feel free to wander around)

(above excerpt from 2009)

 

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

October 12, 2026 By 5 Comments

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

Our reliable correspondent, Frank, wrote, last week

It is a comfort that I have a perfectly suited-to-reality worldview. If I want to improve myself, is there anything that I need to do? It is hard to improve on perfection. I suspect the answer is no.

thanks, Frank!

Being Monday, it’s only natural to think: RePrint!

…with a slight twist, why the heck not?

(from a post published on December 8 2014)

“…let you in on a little secret: the most difficult part of using the Wakefield Doctrine as a tool for self-improving oneself is that the key lies in recognizing others of your own worldview, observing how they act and interact and accepting the fact that their actions (and interactions) are simply their best effort to deal with the world as they are experiencing it.  (I just lied. the real  ‘most difficult part’ is to see another person of your worldview and realize that you are living and acting in the world pretty much as they are… for better or worse, ya know?)”

err not really doing it for us, ya know?

Quick, down and dirty ‘splanation…

Each of us have the personality type, (predominant worldview), that is most efficacious in navigating the reality, (personal reality), in which we grew up, developed in and live our daily lifes. The potential to ‘end up’ in any of the three predominant worldviews is inherent in all of us. Ours was that of the Outsider, therefore, just didn’t need to learn to hunt or to keep track of the world’s behaving properly. We could have. But our (personal) reality is as it is.

While it’s tempting to try and shortcut the ‘potential to grow and develop the personality traits of the other two into: ‘Hey! I could be a scott! Fuck you!’ or ‘I’m hate to be the one to break it to you, but your system falls apart in the real world. Is that rogerian enough for you?’

lol

ok. basic premise: open your youngest eyes on a world of a certain character. Proceed to do as every life form does: learn to adapt, develop appropriately to conditions, in other words, practice (SPOILER ALERT!) … practice this style of behaving (and interacting)… for.a.lifetime.

lets end on a positive note: if you’re reading, (and it’s at very least your second visit to the blog), you have the capacity to imagine. More than that, you can conceive of a different perspective on the world around you. (And have fun doing it).

ok, learn the characteristic, the way-of-relating-to-the-world, of ‘the other two’ and there’s a good chance you can imagine how the other person is experiencing the world differently. As real. As valid. Different.

there ya go!

 

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