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

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

RePrint?

sure, why the heck not?

(oh yeah!  before this shortcut: the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on the world around us based on our relationship (since, like right from the start life) with it there are three of (these) and the one you have based your social strategies and interactional styles of behavior upon is your personality type (aka predominant worldview) you only have time to learn/practice one and while the ‘other two’ ways to relate to the world remain as potential, one is all you gots, luckily, it’s the perfect personality type based on the personal reality you exist in (and have, since you was babies) clarks are Outsiders not to be confused with introverts, but to be fair, lets say during our young school years, we summered in Spectrum-ville, (lol); scotts are Predators full of life and determined to ride all the rides, they will nip at your hells and be at your side for the climatic showdown all guns a-blazing while laughing the scottian female will totally have a derringer and maybe a knife (or two) with wicked martial/marital skills (“We’re surrounded, one chance. Now go!! I got this!!!”) and rogers of Members of the Herd so certain you’d think (or chose) to believe what they say, but the thing is it’s not what they say, it’s what they know that’s important, ready to be reliable, often distracted/offended by the novel, they will surely be remembered by their works if not their thoughts.)

 

ok, we promised a RePrint

… no, you’re absolutely correct how the above all ee cummings manual of style (ish) is sufficient

the coolest thing about the Doctrine is that you already know what you need to know to take advantage of it’s curious organization of views of the world.

one thing: the Wakefield Doctrine, while possessed of the glorious ambition to allow us to see the world as the other person is experiencing it, is not for everyone.

the Wakefield Doctrine (and it’s perspective) is for you, not them.

 

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

It’s Complicated

You wouldn’t understand

You’re different, this doesn’t apply

Life is not so neat and organized

Sure, it’s clever but to be genuinely useful it’s fairly under-validated

Derivative, been done

People simply don’t fit into so limited a taxonomic scheme

Everyone will laugh

Life doesn’t fit into three categories

What were they again? (clarks, scotts and rogers)

And the basis of this paper-doll phylogeny? (one’s relationship with the world)

Stop it, now.

There’s no way you’re going to backwards-answer the above statements and bring it to a conclusion. (no, not if you maintain that attitude)

An additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up. The Wakefield Doctrine is not the Answer. It is a question. As such, you are responsible for the product of its application to your life.

One thing: a) you can’t get it wrong 2) you can’t break it.

It’s not for everyone. Not everyone enjoys the constructive make-believe that is hidden (all too effectively for most) in the world.

*

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Speaking of the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules)… this pitcha is good for, like, 13 Grats

 

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. Created 13 or so years ago by Founderess Lizzi R what sets this grat blog apart from the many, many, many others with the same theme is that it (the TToT, not the theme) encourages all to be as creative as the spirit moves us. Ya know? To that end, while we hope to get a list of ten things that you (the Reader/Participant) have found to inspire and instigate a state of Gratitude it’s total WWF-no-holds-barred list writing. The only requirement is ‘good intent’. Won’t spend a lot of time defining that; suffice to say, if you get it deliberately wrong you will have to answer to Kristi.

1)  Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) Front Meadow Status Update

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

6) Ola’s bridge

7) something, something

8) Hypo-Grat* So, like, everyone pulls out the chrono-reverse** refrigerator ever time they vacuum, am I right? The photo below shows a bottle of dog shampoo we bought for Una in the throes of ‘My god! What kind of humans are we… (backstory: Una was a chodsky pes and, as such had a double coat and, wicked long hair. She didn’t particularly enjoy being brushed. So we didn’t. We did take her to a groomer once, back in, like, 2016 or so. They did a great job. Went back the following year and Una made it abundantly clear that the first grooming she did for us. Naturally, I paid the cancellation fee and we beat a hasty retreat. While the photo for Grats 1 & 2 was not taken at the time, it is a good facsimile for the expression on her face when we left the groomers in our rearview mirror;) that fell behind said refrigerator. The grat is an appreciation of exercise and a brief time-travel to that day with Una.

 

9) grateful for the Hostinae (and Host, Andrew) Just this week, the codes that link this thing of ours suffered from an operator error. (ikr? like we made a mistake with the date span. knock us over with a feather). Be that as it may, Hostinae cai alerted TToT Host Central as to the error and it was rectified.

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

 

* Hypo-grat: one of the distinctive features afforded participants by the rules (SR 1.5 chapter 9 subverse 8) of our little bloghop… most of us not living in Vincent Peale-ville, ya know? So bad things happen to nearly everyone. Find and include the grat aspect and you’re good to go. (Some restriction may apply. When in doughnut, consult the TToT resident maven, Mimi)

** when ordinary, every day objects, devices, things and/or ambition becomes heavier with each passing year

music

*

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Regular Readers know that, of recent, we’ve divided up the week into posts by subject (or perhaps, more properly, of arenae of special interest): Monday through Wednesday the principles, application and good practice of the Wakefield Doctrine as an additional perspective on the world around us (and the people who make it up); Thursday (with option on Friday) Six Sentence Story(s); Friday open topic and Saturday the TToT.

(well, that certainly qualifies as ‘stem-winding’ although, if truth be told, a liberal application of italics would be in order. The history of the phrase is…)

Wait. A. Minute.

The history of the phrase, or, more properly the inference from the process of researching the etymology of it, is a good example of the differences between the three predominant worldviews!

attend:

Having spent twenty minutes on the internet looking up and otherwise trying to learn the origin of the phrase ‘stem-winding’ (or, ‘stemwinding’):

  • clarks (the Outsider) would ‘feel good’ in the acquistion of a new and hopefully accuate understanding of the phrase; the rub being: it does not quite conform to their understanding (of the phrase) prior to their inquiry; lets be charitable and simply do (on movies it’s kind of a trope to have a block-lettered stop appear, for us lets go with ‘CONFIRMATION BIAS’   lol*
  • scotts (the Predator)
  • rogers (the Herd Member)

jeez Louise! sometimes being gifted with insatiable curioisty is not such a good thing.

We went in search of an image of a Patek Phillip watch, (’cause they had a hand (arr arr) in the genesis of the expression ‘stemwinder’ and that lead to reading about the most expensive watches sold at auction and that, naturally lead to reading up on Duchenne muscular dystrophy which produced a side-trip of blessedly short duration to inquire about Gower’s sign and, finally back here.

damn! still gots to complete the one part of this terminally-prolonged post that relates to the Wakefield Doctrine (hint: bullet points)

*our confirmation bias in this case is a memory of the use of the phrase. it was in a description of an old-time politician standing behind a podium before a crowd and deliberately, if not ostentatiously, taking out a pocket watch and making a show of winding it, the effect on the crowd is the realization that the speech would go on and on**

** who just said, “So, you were right about the phrase!!”***

*** ha ha

 

the least we can do is post some engaging, if not dated, music1

1) you’re really thinking ‘I wonder what the link from this post to the choice of music is?? Click away, just click away and we can stop typing lol

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

the ‘reality morphology’ that is threatening to rogers, amusing to scotts and useful (bordering on essential) to clarks

any questions?

~yes, the Wakefield Doctrine can anticipate a new Reader’s reaction/response at a distance

~no, there is no proof necessary to support this assertion

~well, because the unavoidable conclusion as to the Reader/User side of appreciating the utility, value and fun inherent in the perspective of the Doctrine makes that moot

~the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated on the relationship of the person with/to the world around them

~no, we agree, few things in the world are more personal than a ‘relationship’

~sure, physics, mechanics and (some) medicine…roger

~ we will, thank you for your approval and permission!

~as the end product resulting from the employ of the perspective(s) of the Wakefield Doctrine involves a subjective relationship, i.e. ‘she is a scott, I am a roger… ain’t a snowball’s chance of gaining control’

~… on one level, of course, being adults we have come to learn that in all relationships that include a dominant/submissive dynamic…ain’t one without the other

~sure

~the ambition of the Wakefield Doctrine is to allow us to be in a position to improve ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us and the people who make it up’

~that italicized section, the ‘relate ourselves’?

~that’s the hard part, that’s what leaves 2/3s of Readers behind with a ‘yeah, it was weird, but fun, kinda made sense but… you know, incomplete, ya know?’

~we do

~if you’re to indulge in knowing more about ‘the other person’ in your life than they know about themselves, a list of characteristics that designaties their ‘personality type’ is a party trick, suitable for amusing friends and beating up on a significant other, aka a ‘mirror-shaped club’

~if you have the hubris to believe you can appreciate the personal reality of a total stranger, then you gots to be willing to get some skin in the game (for our scottian Readers, articles of clothing in a game of strip poker)

~ unlike the ‘real’ personality theories like the Oscar-Mayer Alphabet personality type (motto: ‘they’re only capital letters!! a) easy to apply and 2) what harm can it do you?‘) the Wakefield Doctrine posits three relationships one might maintain with the world around them

~come on, you’re better than that

~shed enough of the ego to allow that we all have parts of our selfs that fight against becoming more

~the Wakefield Doctrine is one (of a multitude) of the tools that make that (more) possible

*

Share