Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [an Ian Devereaux Six]

January 14, 2026 By clarkscottroger 9 Comments

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

This is the Doctrine’s contribution to the Six Sentence Story bloghop.

Hosted by Denise, constrained by a sentence limit (high and low) of six, there are worse ways to spend the remaining time you have on earth.

Previously…

Prompt word:

VOW

“So what’s the most useful insight into the Order of Lilith that you can give me?”

Leanne lead me, through the miasma of college hormones and ambition, across the quad to the Pavement Coffee House at the Smith Center where we confronted the social challenge faced by patrons of sidewalk cafés where round tables are deployed; the strength of the partnership element of most marriage vows is often the first to crack while decided where to sit.

Still standing to my right, she said, “If this were a first date and, for god knows what reason, I wanted to impress you, …and I was in a Zen mood, my answer would be ‘Mu’”

I was not surprised when the chairperson of the Department of Cultural Semiotics and Advanced Anthropology pulled out a chair and nodded for me to sit; I sat.

Without a word, Leanne walked away; in a far shorter time than one might expect, given the coffee shop was in Harvard Square and it wasn’t July, she returned with a cardboard tray holding two coffees and three Pain au Chocolat.

She sat; “Any other questions?”

Filed Under: Fashion Center Tagged With: Six Sentence Story, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 12, 2026 By clarkscottroger 5 Comments

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

Funny how some of the useful and fun insights afforded by the use of the Wakefield Doctrine as an additional perspective on the world around us may seem, at times, as totally serendipity.

Being a clark, we have no problem with making that statement. (After all, we’re not rogers) lol

And so, this is where the more advanced practice in the use of the Doctrine, is observed. It is not as simple as seeing a person give credit to another for something or other. It is how this giving credit manifests. And…and to make it even more intriguing, it, (the determination of another’s predominant worldview through a singular observation), comes down to ‘how it feels’. As the observer, not the actor.

And so, our point? The more involved we allow ourselfs to be, (in the perspective of the Wakefield Doctrine), the more we are capable of appreciating in the world around us. Like music and art, the more we know, the more we hear and see.

And, of course, a bit of luck never hurts. A chance observation allowing a level of detail that otherwise might be overlooked.

One of our favorite insights into the personal reality of rogers is the ‘true cause’ of their ‘lashing out’. (Beyond the scope of this post. Suffice to say, for clarks, knowing that lashing out is about them and not us makes reading a couple a thousand posts well worthwhile.)

…anyway. The true prompt for this post was a (chance) occurrence this weekend. It was while watching one of our favorite youtube channels. Nothing remarkable about the content, the ‘plot’ of that particular episodes. (It is, after all, a channel devoted to excavation, as in large, earth-moving equipment.)

That said, in the course of watching, we saw an example of one of the three predominant worldviews in a person. Feeling less than confident in our writing skills, the first thought was to simply link it and say, ‘Do you see that?!!?’

But then again, we realized that not all Readers are sufficiently fluent in the this thing of ours.

So, our take-away.

There was a person in this episode (not appearing in earlier posts). And it was not even what the person said or, (as we go at length in these posts), how he said it. It was about his physical presence, i.e. how he moved. The fun of this insight was how it prompted us to find synonyms for what we saw. a scott in motion.

the first thing that comes to mind is naturally, ‘quickness’ and ‘decisiveness’. It was one of those, once you see it, you can’t un-see it.

Everything, (about the person’s physical presence), was deliberate. And, no, not carefully considered or studied. Simply deliberate.

Alacrity was one of the first words. Unhesitatingly was the first adverb.

damn! that was a fun moment. to see the Wakefield Doctrine in motion.

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 10, 2026 By clarkscottroger 11 Comments

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the weekly grat bloghop, the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT).

Below is our list of the people, places, things, events and dogs that have elicited a state of gratitude at one time or another

1) Phyllis

a very young chodsky pes. (Una, the 3rd of our three dogs)

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) work is a challenge, as are most of the more interesting aspects of life. the Instagram thing (the reels, pretty much are our primary foray into the toxically youthful world of social media) are coming along. Stop by. kind of a Post but shorter. (ikr? soul of wit, yo)

here’s a link to my real estate agent page on the Facebook (the only place I could find that lets one watch our reels.)

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

6) the cold has moderated but the pond is still frozen

7) technology for all of the above including the canines who, with the exception of Ola were found online. In the case of Una, we were totally dependent on technology, specifically google translate, as the breeder was located in the Czech Republic. Which, for a pleasant change, she (the breeder) spoke as little English as se understood Czech.

8) something, something

9) and… a Husky

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music

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

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 7, 2026 By clarkscottroger 2 Comments

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

Hey, there’s a thought*

RePrint of Origin Story:

As the ‘About’ page of most blogs is, for the New Reader/Accidental Visitor, the second-most read (and the shortest-time spent) location, allow us to go the beginning of the story. (Despite this edit taking something like ten years to appear, this approach really seems to make sense.) Ah well, for some of us, insight might seem instant, the capability to effectively tell the story, perhaps a little more drawn out.

Following is the ‘eureka moment‘ for the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers (the Wakefield Doctrine):

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)

*bar rum bump!!**

** at least for reg’lar Readers and clarks***

*** New Readers? The thing about this here personality theory here is that there are certain qualities, (to one’s relationship to the world around them, aka personality type), associated with one more than all three, that is: curiosity and deriving pleasure from the novel and… the confidence (not really the right word) that reality is…well, relative. There are such unfortunates, (as certain friends express it), who are incapable of making the leap to: ‘sure, this all (visual: look around wherever you might be) is real. But, there probably are other realities that are just as real.’

They are the unfortunate ones. In our experience, they are scotts and rogers with negligible secondary or tertiary clarklike aspect¹;

Reminder: we all are of one predominant worldview (clark, scott or roger) that is our personality type, in terms of the Wakefield Doctrine. We never lose the potential to relate to the ‘other two’. These are referred to as one’s secondary and tertiary aspects. Some have more ‘active’/significant secondary and tertiary aspects than others. But if a person were to have a near-zero secondary clarklike aspect, you could never tell them about what they lack, they simply couldn’t hear you. Better to say, your words would be noise and they would ignore you, no matter what you promised, i.e. ‘Hey! You would know way more about they to other person than you’d believe and…and!! you could self-improve yourself way more efficaciously than ever before!’ (cricket sounds) Leave them be. You are the insane dancer. The are the real(ish) people. Damn! We forgot about of origin story!! the RePrint thing. Fixed it now.

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

January 5, 2026 By clarkscottroger 2 Comments

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

Thanks go out to Misky for asking a question that serves as an excellent launching pad for the first Doctrine post of the week.

Q: is teamwork more apt to be prevalent in one more than the other?

Excellent questions. Are there any other questions?

ha ha

Serially, to address this question we must agree upon a definition of the concept of ‘Teamwork’.

Colloquially it is a group of individuals sharing a common purpose, goal or pursuit and (this) endeavor is made successful by the contributions of each member without individual self-interest distracting from and otherwise diminishing the achievement of the state goal.

(After checking for yourself), we cite the goofiest of definitions, courtesy of Indeed-uk: “…also relates to the cohesiveness of a team, their ability to create a positive working atmosphere and how they recognize the strengths and skills that each team member brings.”

Yeah, right.

All kidding aside, the first step (and totally consistent with ‘the Everything Rule’) is to ask, how does ‘Teamwork’ manifest in each of the personal reality of the three predominant worldviews:

the Outsider (clarks): solitary by definition, the Outsider is willing to work without ego, any satisfaction attendant to accomplishing a goal is both personal and private. The scrutiny of (their) efforts is both anathema and, more often than not, abhorrent to the clark. Menial labor (working in the mime-light, if you will) is preferred for being less the center of attention.
the Predator (scotts): Follow me! Do you want to live forever!?! We brave band!! Nothing less than totally natural-born leaders. While it’s recognized that leader is a valid and, even necessary position in a team, our Predator will remain in the ranks as long as there is action, forward motion, (and nothing too subjective or confusing, forget the interminable zoom meetings).When they’re not cutting off the heads of the opponent, they are keeping their eye on the leader (and the sigil of his/her position).
the Herd Member (rogers): all for one and one for all…right? Correct. A herd. An open grazing field. Teamwork! A lion or a crocodile at the ford in the river separating these fields? Compress the ranks and avoid the fringes. But then again, all is rarely ever serene and harmonious among the ranks. A herd, despite the temptation to judge it from afar as being stable and consistent, is anything but. You can’t spell ‘in-fighting’ without the ‘g’ in ‘roger‘.

So the short, easy answer to the question of who of the three is more predisposed to exhibiting the qualities that result in successful teamwork? rogers

The more productive, (and, therefore, useful), insight: all three are desirable when left to their strengths and not distracted by their indulgences. Meaning: When it’s time to charge the field of battle, put a scott in front; every team needs to be organized and supplied, get the rogers to believe they have the essential among multiple logistic tasks and the dull, monotonous work? If you could see them, the clarks are probably already doing that work.