Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

a manifestation of the creativeness of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia. See 1) note-of-pedia at bottom of post.

Another RePrint!

Plus, shoutout to them what write Comments and contribute to the conversation, looking (for today) at Mimi an Misky and Ms Pie thanks!

A word to New Readers:

The beauty part of the Wakefield Doctrine is how true and accurate it is when describing the personal characteristics and behavior of it’s three personality types, aka predominant worldviews*. That said, a little fun-with-our-imaginations is required here. One word: personal reality.

And in practical terms, only one of three. The reason for this aside yo, is a thing called ‘the Everything Rule’. Simply put, (and we’re telling you now so as not interrupt the lyric flow of this narrative lol) the Rule is: Everyone does everything, at one time or another. Obvious right? (if you answered ‘of course’… you’re in the right place.) The thing about the Doctrine is that while it describes how one (of the three types) might react/respond to a situation in a characteristic (and therefore consistently reliable manner), that doesn’t mean that… running out of time. Damn. What it means is that there are not three separate and distinct categories of life and such. There is no, “oh! That is something only a clark would do.” or “Only a scott would experience that situation.”

Remember how we said each of the three predominant worldviews reflected a different personal reality? It’s true. But in the interest of preventing the rogers from embarrassing theyselves by saying: “I must be a new, fourth, personality type. A special ‘all three at once’ type. To this we say, “No. Stop that. That is simply not how this thing of ours works.

We use the term ‘manifest’ to account for the fact that clarks, scotts and rogers do not inhabit three different realities. Try this:

Occupation: police person (aka ‘cop’). All three can be a cop. What the reality of the occupation is? Very different for each. We’ll leave this as a homework assignment. (Hint: ‘Predators love to ___ prey’, ‘With a lot of ____ and other special effects’, When successful they totally enjoy ___(ing) their kills/captures.

there ya go. let us know if you have any questions. While it is true that ‘You can’t get the Doctrine wrong’ It is very true that a person can’t willfully mix shit up. Thing of it is, we (and this means all those of us who think this is a useful, productive and fun additional/supplemental perspective on reality?) we’ll know. And, in answer to the thought-balloon question out there, ‘No. No one is going to correct you. At least not ex cathedra. The only cost of getting it wrong is that you miss out of the utility and fun. Kind of the whole idea, ya know. (Usually when a person ‘gets it wrong’ they figure it out or just don’t bother. After all it’s just a blog. And a little tiny group of people who get a kick out of the strange and unusual.)

 

the Wakefield Doctrine (…break time!)

Apropos of nothing, one of my favorite sayings is ‘you can’t step in the same river twice’. If this internet, and by extension the blogosphere is not the perfect proof of the truth of this statement, then I am going to sit here and wait for roger to get it into his head to write some more Comments. Because even though the Wakefield Doctrine itself has not changed, if anything the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers has become even more ‘real’, the writing and therefore the writers have been changing.So what? I’ll tell you so what!
I am writing this prima facie that there is a reader. You, in fact, are that person. (You read therefore I have written). Without this assumption there would be no reason to write. Independent of the practical value of the Wakefield Doctrine in terms of understanding those around us, the drive here is to be heard  [read:read  ha, ha]So if we are writing this on the assumption there is a reader, then whats the river shit all about? Huh?(I said ‘apropos of nothing’ didn’t I?) But since you asked, the point I guess is to get a sense of the fundamental impermanence of reality. The fact that there is nothing of the past that immutably connects to the present. Only our willingness to assume that we all keep to our scripts.I think that noise you hear is the baleful mewling of a herd of rogersRogers, as we should all know by now are the guardians of continuity. By maintaining the past through rules and science, laws and traditions rogers let us learn! More so rogers are the reason we are self aware. Scotts are pure energy, here and now, no past no future, not much to build a civilization on. By keeping the belief that the world is by nature a quantifiable place, rogers allow us to stop and reflect on what was. Myths and legends are as important a contribution from the rogerian faction as is the science and engineering that they also have given us.(Quick break.) (Hey clark, easy up on the metaphysics there, pal! The rogers are getting glassy eyed and the scotts are starting to gnaw on the furniture)(OK, I get.  Anyone for Bullet Points? (Everyone loves Bullet Points!)

  • rogers are your engineers, accountants, doctors (but not surgeons)
  • rogers are your carpenters and craftsmen, (but not your General Contractors)
  • rogers are your teachers (at least the ones that end up becoming school adminstrators)
  • scotts are your performers, your front men/women
  • there are three occupations in the world: salesmen, scientist and machine operator
  • scotts are your salesmen, not necessarily literally, just the person who is driven to make others conform to their Will
  • clarks are your scientists, the creative one of the three, looking for what isn’t, not at all concerned with practical application
  • rogers are your machine operators, not just engineers, but musicians, any one who needs to follow the rules

OK.

Time to get back to the show!
When we last left her, roger was sidling up to the scottian executive. Thinking that the wind was to her back she would be safe. But in walks a clark, making a fearsome racket of ‘why is this?’ and ‘what is that?’. Drat! the scott has caught a scent.
Run away! Run away!

*ProTip: get used to using the term predominant worldview. It will make learning (and more, way more importantly, enjoying our little personality theories. Hundreds of posts have been written on this subject, but real quick: the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the relationship we maintain with the world around us. As in, like, right from before we could even talk. We’re born with the potential to have three, settle on one and, here’s the key: develop our social strategies, styles of interpreting the immediate world (babies at this point, remember?) and practice. In other words our personality type. We’re fond of saying, ‘In terms of the Wakefield Doctrine’s view, we all have the perfect personality type on the basis of the world as we experience it.

1) You can buy Cynthia’s delightfully whimsical coloring book HERE

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Bella. (After Ola but before Una)

 

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weekly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Created by Lizzi R this grat ‘hop has thrived and endured and, once again, is thriving with new Readers and a new Host (Spoiler Alert!! Grat #4)

Simple in concept, the TToT invites all to Read and Comment and, if so inclined, contribute their own list of Thankfuls. It’s easy and it’s fun and it’s beneficial for those who believe it is better to act on the premise that the world is, with a certain act of will, a positive place. That good (can) be seen to outweigh the bad and the path to leveraging this premise is the (personal) choice to identify, encourage and otherwise nurture those aspects of Life that elicit and inspire the psycho-emotional state of gratitude. Not always easy. Totally worthwhile.

Following is our list of Thankfuls

 

1) Phyllis (from the Before Time)

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) Easy Grat: On behalf of the Hostinae and Host, (Mimi, Misky, Denise, cai, Kristi, Dyanne, Lisa, Knitcat and Andrew) we welcome Frank Hubeny as the newest Host of this here gratitude bloghop here.

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

7) Front Meadow status update:

8) Current Landscape Project

Before:

Semi-After:

9) something, something

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

music

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Wedneszdae -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Well, yesterday was fun. More fun, in fact, than might be apparent. Stemming from the Comments of our Readers

While we did not get back to respond to them in the course of the day, they certainly are worthy of another look.

Pardon us for being ‘all over the place’ in this post.

(If we must blame someone, let’s agree to blame Mimi)

Why? Why not Misky or Frank or even Reelika?

Because she has that capacity to …not stop the room. …not say a thing that inspires one (and then 66 percent*) of the individuals in a crowded room to say, one decibel short of a shout, “My god! We’ve got to get out of here! Now!!”… no.

(You know the thing we say about how one of the three predominant worldviews manifesting true creativity and how the nature of that (creativity) is to bring into existence something that simply was not of the world before they did what they did? Well, the thing about that is that that ‘place’ where they got it is/was not bound by any rational metric. It’s here and now, not there-over-here. And …and it’s non-chronologic. Bottom line, others of this particular predominant worldview feel the echoes when one of their kind is hurt or in pain (however for-the-moment) even if they’s not aware of the person or their creation. ya know?)

and so we have two music vids that share something and the result is two-out-of-three Doctrine personality types muttering, ‘Well, guess we know who has a lock on this month’s  John Cage 4-33 Post Writing Award.’

So, in closing, embrace chaos up until it begins to unravel your next to last inner sweater.

Don’t forget! Tonight is  Six Sentence Story Eve.

For a special treat check out the ensemble(ish) Six that Chris started with her Six Sentence Story last week!

* there is an accepted ratio of clarks to scotts to rogers in any given population** 66 represents the rogerian component

** remember! The Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral, culture neutral and any other subdivision of humanity free

 

*

 

Share

Túsáde -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Lots of Commentationing (on yesterday’s and other Posts)

Who indeed!

Above is a photo of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia. If you have done your reading you should be able to correctly guess her predominant worldview. AP Readers? Goal? Learn the Doctrine sufficiently to allow you to identify (on the basis of this single photo) her secondary aspect as well.

ok, in no discernible order* lets throw some comments on the blackboard and see what comes of it

Mr. Hubeny! Please stand and repeat your statement for the benefit of anyone who did not see the Post

I think I’m going to change my life and become a clark. If I’m already a clark, this should be easy. If not, well, there are always miracles.

Mimi, if you’d help the class grasp the concept

Not for nothing you wear gloves and be careful when working outdoors, the critters do pop up sudden like.

Misky, would you care to share the contents of that note with the rest of us?

My mother-in-law was scottian (she probably still is — up there in heaven somewhere) and I remember as clearly as a sunny day thinking “I’m going to wear red because it makes me happy, and everyone will think, “Oh, look at her; she’s happy.” And I knew she’d comment, which she did. She was most certainly scottian but there was a good dose of rogerian in her gene pool also.

It’s not that we didn’t get along — we did, exceptionally well at a distance.

Ms. Pie

always enjoyable… always laughter… learn some new insightful aspect of the threes that I can take to the grocery store with me while I’m shopping… processing processing processing

 

Well that certainly provides us with discussionable** topics for today!

Tell you what read and discuss (kinda open book) and we will return after lunch.

you guys know this stuff

and thanks to our four correspondants for helping form an instructive Wakefield Doctrine post

 

* at least not for two of the three predominant worldviews

** well, while not a ‘real’ word, this might provided us with a quick refresher on grammar and pronunciation and such***

***  what?? a bullet point list?

  • clark: one of the three predominant worldviews aka ‘the Outsider’ adj: clarklike (ex. “…is anyone gonna inform our clarklike narrator that correction is not criticism…at least not in the sense understood by Outsiders and Predators?”)
  • scott: the Predator and one of the first of the two ‘say what now?’ pronounciation of the adj and adv form: scott: ss cot; scottian: scoe-shun
  • rogers: the Herd Members and cultural wardens; rogerian is an adjective (scenario: long class wrapping up, even the professor is clearly ready to call it a day, yet says, “If there are no other questions, read chapters….” and, of course, someone raises their hand. visualize thought-balloon: “Oh man, that is so rogerian” (pronounced: roe-jeer-ree-an)

somebody just say, “More ‘Top!!”

more Top indeed.

*

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Hey being the First Day of Summer School here at the Doctrine, what say we start with a Q&A?

Here, from the early, no, really, early days of this blog* our FAQ page

I think sometimes I am (a scott) then other times I must be (a clark). Whats up with that?

You’re a clark.

Hey, wait you can’t be that sure on the basis of one question!

Yes I can. (I’m a clark)

The question you should be asking is, ‘why does it seem that sometimes we are one form, other times others’. And the answer is that we have the potential of all three, we just get in the habit of seeing the world one characteristic way, i.e. clark, scott or roger.

Is there any scientific basis for the Wakefield Doctrine?

No. (see the ‘About’ page.)

When I read this site, it seems like there is really only one person writing. Can that possibly be true? What happened to the collaborative thing.

Nothing.

I thought this was a FAQ pages, I don’t see all that many Questions.

…I’m waiting for a question… ‘what part of ‘Frequently asked questions’ are you brainiacs missing? There would be useful information if some of you scottian adhd cases or you middle-of-the-herd rogerian mouth-breathers would conquer your fear of anything that doesn’t already have a DYNAMO brand embossed label stuck to this blog letting you know that it was within your admittedly limited range of initiative and realise that you would not be struck down by Jethro were you to actually  reach out and turn on your computer and asked a question.

Will there ever be new FAQ questions?

Yes, yes there will.

I heard that you have been doing this for nearly a year, what have you learned about the Wakefield Doctrine that you did not know when you started?

Which part of your statement are you calling a question? Rather than wait for you to move your lips as your try to re-phrase the question, I will answer this way. The Wakefield Doctrine appears to have an appeal beyond my immediate circle of friends, in fact, it appears to have sufficient appeal to out-weigh my meager writing skills. By presenting the Doctrine in a blog, the virtue and value of this thing is put to the test. And it seems to be passing that test.
What a well-thought out question.

What?

Never mind, you would not get it. Other aspects that you would not get is that the Doctrine is proving itself to actually be an effective tool in aid of an effort to change life habits. (Given the unlikelihood of your comprehending this answer I will continue), and say that anyone reading this with a true desire to ‘change their life’* should read this blog and do whatever they must do to get actively involved in it. This includes, but is not limited to: writing Comments.

*Is it true that if I have to ask the question, I will perforce be unable to understand the question?

Yes.

oh…kay! This is probably where we should do a Person of Interest** timeline slider thing from 2009 to 2026. But let’s just get us… well, first off, what’ with the ‘tude? ;p

As both Reelika Pedak and Frank Hubeny alluded to in this week’s TToT conversations, the first/earliest posts one writes can be the most difficult. Given that the tone of the FAQ was a bit aggressive if not a touch strident, let’s chalk it up to Opening Night(ish) jitters and let it go at that.

No, not necessary to Update/Refresh or otherwise edit this Page. The Wakefield Doctrine is, as are many things of the mind, kinda alive. We can say without fear of contradiction that the early years were conflict free for us. In point of fact, despite being a clark, the mantra of ‘if that last post sucked, then write another and bury it’. See? No problem.’ One of the undeniable examples of the efficacy of this here personality system here lies with its effect on us. Hard to convey, but compared to the clark we were before committing to this medium, theys surely something going on.

Rambling now.

There is much to the early days of this blog that still strikes us as remarkable. Not so much the content, rather the attitude we had towards going public and, through each post (now in the mid-3k in numbers) reaching out to the virtual world to say:

“Hey! Wanna hear about a really cool and useful perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up?”

 

* hokey smoke! this was written July 21, 20….09!! as in, ‘Well, it’s been a month, where’s the Nobel Committee?!?”

** most excellent of ‘TV series’

hey, chance to head off a mind worm of a song from that Little ‘Ol Band From Texas

Share