Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 13 Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 13

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Hey, you know you really should call in next Saturday, right?

The Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive, that is.

Heck, we might even drive around Wakefield, if’n you do, (call in), the number is: (605) 475-2200 code 6660467# 8:00 pm EDST

So, this last Saturday’s Drive we were delighted to hear Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia (Need help with your website or online marketationing? Get on over to ArtFunky! Tell ’em the Doctrine sent ya!)

I was late joining the Call. Which prompted the question to her: ‘So what was it that prompted your first call to the Doctrine?’

(New Readers: We ‘met’ Cynthia on the Facebook, way early on in our tenure here. But it, (our nascent friendship), was all in Comments and association with a FB group, Bloopy Bloggers. (Yeah, we know!) Those were simpler times and we were so new and enthusiastic then. In any event, we’d been doing the Call-in a relatively short time when she called. As luck would have it, we were not on the call that particular Saturday Night due to being on a roadtrip. Fortunately, Denise was. And the rest is Doctrine history.)

Well, she, Cynthia, she say, “I was curious and had heard that you were doing an online radio Show.”

 

RePrint

the Wakefield Doctrine: the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ‘…more at 4!’

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks (who are the creative ones and therefore the ones to show up with something like this here theory here) and scotts (who are the ones who are all about ‘the doing’ action-oriented who thought doing an internet radio show was a good idea) and rogers (who are the ones in touch with the feelings and emotions of the masses and has the voice that the audience will respond to))

Allow me to say, Thank you for your encouraging ‘knuckle bumps’/’chest bumps’/’high fives’ and your (secretly destructive) well wishes and other booby-trapped sentiments!

Today’s Post is going to be brief as I am trying to outline some sort of  script for the Test Show that I will be doing on BlogTalkRadio today. There are a lot of reasons for trying this thing, but for now, bottom line is that I will have 30 minutes to fill this afternoon at 4:00 pm.
The interesting thing will be how I manifest not only my pre-dominant clarklike aspect but my secondary scottian and (distant) tertiary rogerian aspects in the course of the day today.

This is, of course, the beauty part of the Wakefield Doctrine and it’s use and value to anyone  who has ever said “I know I can do better, why do I always hold back? I know my bad habits,  when I change them things get better, but somehow I end up back doing the same thing that I know I don’t need to do!’”
Sound familiar? Well, good news! The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that self-improvement/self-development is not about getting rid of bad habits and trying to learn something totally new (and therefore so unlike you) and then trying to remember to do the new thing instead of the old thing!
No, it is not!
It is way better than that, but I need to save something for later today, so you will just have to dial in to hear how the Wakefield Doctrine can change your life and such.

The thing about this radio show format that is daunting is that, unlike the Saturday Night Drive Call-in show, I will need to assume that there are listeners…for the entire 30 minutes. On Saturday Night, in-between calls I don’t need to talk!  Well, I’m sure it will work out, I will simply need to bring out my scottian aspect (for the lively pacing, the enthusiasm, the excitement) and my rogerian aspect for the words, and descriptions and that (god, how the hell do they do it?) total conviction that the world is hanging on their every word!

(as they say in the radio biz..)

The lines are now open! So write us a Comment and suggest ways I should spend the 30 minutes of internet fame.*

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/the-wakefield-doctrine/2012/11/14/the-wakefield-doctrine-episode

* back in the days of Pictimiltude

Share

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

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

Denise is the host

The prompt word is:

PRESENT

Time is not the falling of anonymous grains of sand. Time is not the un-human tick of insensate teeth ratcheting down in circular metallic viscera. Time is not the breathless sighing of decorated and divided paper, claiming past hopes and X-ing out failings like overly-sensitive girls and vainglorious boys.

The present is the waist of the hourglass, the future, heard in the metronomic beat of the clock and the past, the greatest of life’s poseurs, leaves an ink-stained trail of written promises and silent disappointments.

It has been truthfully said that time waits for no one. Yet the presence of god lies in its nature, to accompany us until we no longer require its progress report.

 

Share

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

So, the question is, (almost always): would knowing of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine at an earlier stage of life made any significant difference to the course of said life?

Sure. Of course.

No, not necessarily.

WARNING! Turn the page if you are not certain* that your predominant worldviews (aka personality type) is that of the Outsider (clarks),

New Readers? It’s a given that (if) you’re still reading, you are either a clark or a scott or roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect. We used to refer to this as (having) a quality of flexible intelligence. But that definition has been surpassed by the more elegant statement of secondary aspect.

Ayiiee!

We just re-read today’s post. ‘El-oh-El y’all.’

No, we’ve got an excuse for the content. You, on the other hand, are not necessarily off the hook for reading and getting something from this rather short post.

Like the wise old saying reminds us: ‘If we would self-improve ourself, everything is a lesson. Provided we can remain silent enough to hear our second response.’

 

* ha ha clarks are smiling**

** sure, of course the Everything Rule applies to how laughter is manifested in the three. That said, it is worth exploring further, as there is one of those passing, ‘Holy shit! Look at the complementarity among clarks, scotts and rogers in the matter of laughing!!’

No time this morning. Extra credit to anyone willing to address this fascinating question.

OK one hint, that’s all. Consider that the most awful of states (of being) that each of the three can imagine and then, consider the inter-relatedness of each.

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Who is this? The author I want to grow up to be: Robert Sheckley, that’s who

 

Being Tuesday, this needs to be short, direct and to the point.

No, really!

First goal*: Find out how we managed colored-text in the early years. We have a writing assignment this week. Ok, it’s just a Six Sentence Story submission but we can’t for the life of us figure how to create text in any color other than black. Not saying any more other than it will be the first Six of the week and it’s a return of a … thing that we tried in ‘Almira’. ‘Nuff said!

Second goal: Hey, we kinda took care of that in our asteroid at the bottom of the post! Damned efficient of us, no? Well, shit. You’re** right. We are forgetting our primary mission/target demographic, i.e. the New Reader,

Of the Days of the Week, some are favored by one predominant worldview more than others. Presenting no conflict with ‘the Everything Rule’, we offer the following. (And then we gots to go find that html)

  • clarks (Outsider): Tuesday, Thursday night (at a younger, school years (1-23) stage of life), Fridays and, (later….much later in life), Sunday mornings (as opposed to Sunday evenings (which obtain only for the ‘hopeful-because-how-could-you-have-known’ years earlier.)
  • scotts (Predator): any day except early in the morning, camping trips, drives across two states to see a girl/boyfriend … a special place for Saturday night (with the option on extending through whatever morning might be noted, after the fact)
  • rogers (Herd Members): Monday, Wednesday and Sunday. Damn! for a complicated people, them rogers have simple tastes in days of the week.

RePrint:

Sorry! Forgot to copy a RePrint post.

Good news, we think we have the code for text color. Attendez vous

This is blue?

It is!

ok. ok now to look up red.

Holy shit! It works!

Kinda blah for a red, maybe pink?

aightt!

well… (don’t tell anyone, but the point of all this color text is to hint at the speaker in a totally un-tagged dialogue… so lets try one more… let us know which you prefer. and remember ‘Mums the word!’

hmm! let the votation begin!

See ya at the Six!

 

* Tuesday, all things being equal, would be adjudged by clarks as the best day of the week. This for no other reason than it’s too early in the workweek to acquire excessive baggage in expectations and too far, (by a day), past the previous weekend, to have the events of those two ‘non-work-days’ do more than sting. Just a little.

** thx out to Mimi hey! New Readers!! She say something, you can take it to the bank as Doctrine.

 

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

damn!

we are such a clark. we totally missed what most would consider a reasonably-significant milestone in the world of blogging and post-writing and such.

Apparently our three thousandth post has been written and posted and without so much as a rogerian ‘Everyone keeps telling us how amazed they are at how many posts I’ve created here at the Doctrine.’ ‘and how wonderful everyone tells them they are… the posts, not the people. well, ok, the people. but they still like the posts. the ones that they read, mostly.”

that is so clarklike. (tho in our defense, we’re grateful for our significant secondary scottian aspect. ’cause, this post)

so, (remaining everybit a clark) what was the 1439th Post here at the Doctrine? (plus or minus, as is the inherent right of our people to, like, estimate… (no sense giving up all options by submitting to a determinant number, are we right?)

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “the second best day of the week for school lunch (not hamburger fricassee, but close!)

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

(not everyone may know this, but that red building in Chicago? World Headquarters for the Omni Corporation... read all about in 'Blogdominion'

(not everyone may know this, but that red building in Chicago? World Headquarters for the Omni Corporation… read all about in ‘Blogdominion

Lets discuss religion.

lol  wait! come back!  no, serially, I won’t say anything bad!  Well, I’m only speaking for myself, my secondary scottian aspect hardly ever listens when I try to advise moderation. But, hey, what are ya gonna do?

For the sake of brevity and to leave me time this morning to work on the final edit of Chapter 40 of ‘Almira‘, following is a reprint (of a reprint) of a Post from a couple of years ago.

We say with complete authority/certainty/confidence that the Wakefield Doctrine never challenges or otherwise criticizes (an) individual’s religious beliefs, unless it forms the basis of a really good Post. But since you raised the question, lets look at what the Wakefield Doctrine tells us about religion and it’s appeal to each of the three personality types.

When it comes to religion and the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine, the answer boils down to two words: rogers! It is not just that rogers are the personality type that is drawn to religion, they are/is the one who invented it! The link between the rogerian personality type and religion is so strong as to form the foundation of the description of the rogerian worldview.

As we do know, it is integral to the rogerian worldview there be organised religion. This is true simply because rogers have the need not only to establish rules and order for everyone, but to have these rules posess a degree of moral imperative that can only derive from a deity or deities

Simply put, rogers are religious, clarks are spiritual and scotts… well, that’s kind of a long story…  no! not a bad thing, it’s just that for scotts religion and spirituality are more about the features of the environment and therefore can be good or bad.

If rogers have the baseline lock on organised religion, where does that leave our other two personality types?

clarks?, they’re easy! clarks believe in the unbelievable. Unfortunately this capacity prevents them from ever having complete faith in anything. In regards to religious dogma, clarks will give convincing lip service, particularly the clarklike females (who have a slight edge over their male counterparts in terms of protective coloration); a clarklike female, especially one with a family unit, will conform to the local norms for religious activities. But the odds are, even these devoutly religious clarkmoms will be filling their downsprings heads with all sorts of apostolic nonsense at random points in their upbringing. If backed into a corner, most clarks will confess to a definite spiritual tropism, but you better have a thesaurus and a comfortable chair nearby! If you read the page on clarks, one of the primary characteristics of this type is the love of knowledge…useful knowledge…useless knowledge, knowledge for good and knowledge to anger people, does not matter to your typical clark. So as to organised religion, lets put the clarks in the woman’s auxiliary section.

scotts now, they totally relate to religion, even organised religion! scotts relate to the ‘product’/ the result/ the ‘output’, if you will, of organised religion. (Ed note: this section is written more to the male scott, though not inappropriate, as the Doctrine is gender neutral, it might leave a new Reader with the impression that all scotts will view religion simply as an opportunity, as opposed to a skill, which in the case of the female scott, it can be… I’ll leave the bullet-points in place, but check back for a Post on the scottian female and her pack.)
Back in my parent’s day, there was a ‘restaurant’ called The Automat, it was sort of cool for us suburban kids in the early 60’s to hear about a restaurant that was totally mechanised. (This was all pre-fast food as we know it today). The Automat’s ‘hook’, was to offer a variety of choices of foods to customers with no intermediary such a waiter or waitress, everything there was available and purely the choice of the hungry customers.
….Throughout history, organised religions have basically served as Automat for scotts.

Aight… enough with the free-form, echolistic rambling.

Final thought this Tuesday: rogers provide structure, scotts push and clarks create…. all in the name of god.

*

Hey! World of Doctrine fiction insight: the red building at the top of the post? World HQ for the Omni Corp. the one that a certain Anya Claireaux operates from. (As executive administrative assistant, Not being one to put much in titles and honoraiae.)

Share