Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 19 Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 19

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

ah! Mr. Tiny! To give us a hand to start the week.

Hold on….

there we go

“What?”

“Totally, phoned-in”?!!?

lol yeah, kinda

Promise to stop back in, got an inspection first this a.m., right after that we’ll come back try to … oh, wait,

This week we’ll totally be talking about the Six Sentence Café & Bistro. Mostly a description of the joint. Primarily ’cause we’re inviting you (or, if you’re currently reading over someone’s shoulder, the person at the keyboard) to stop in and visit a spell. We’ll introduce you around, show you the place… then, whatever you want to do! We are talking about virtual reality, yo.

 

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Know how cool the Wakefield Doctrine is?

besides knowing more about the other person than you have any right to, given that you saw them for the first time as they joined the raffle ticket spaced line at the supermarket.

It, the Doctrine, not the line at the supermarket, also allows you to better know your-own-self.

How? (You ask, rather rhetorically, seeing how you’re ‘out there’ while I’m still here typing. Hell, I haven’t even hit Publish yet. Damn! This is metaphysical gold!)

New Readers: If you’re here for the first time, we’re serious with the single word question. While it normally requires more than one data point* to figure out a person’s predominant worldview, aka personality type: clark(Outsider); scott(Predator) or roger(Herd Member), the process is simple.

Learn the nature of the (three personality types) relationship to the world around them along with their overt characteristics. Then, when you’re standing in the line, eliminate the one that, ‘There’s no fricken way they’re a ….” That leave two worldviews. Now observe as much as you can, without getting creepy or arrested, and one will make more sense than the other. Another analogy:

The three worldviews are distinct ways a person sees, (actually, the right word is ‘experience’), the world around them. Think of them, (the worldviews), as lenses at the optometrist and see which one produces the clearest, truest image. You know, “Look at the image. Is this one [click] clearer than [click] this one? Now, how about [click] this one?” Thats how we determine the worldview of the people around us and get a secret box-seat to their lifes and times and such.

Back to our special quality.

The cool thing is how the Doctrine, even as it allows us to better understand the world and the people who make it up, is a tool for self-improving ourselfs. And the key to this lies in the stated ambition/goal of learning and applying the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘How do I relate myself to the world around me.’

As always, this: I said ‘How do I relate myself…’ I did not say, ‘How do I relate to the world around me.’

Know the difference and the pilot light flashes green and you in business.

(Useful, btw, in any situation, not just figuring out another’s predominant worldview. If you find yourself in a conflict with someone, something, some event in the ‘real’ world, ask the question: How am I relating myself to the world around me.**)

 

* ‘ceptin, maybe a scott, specifically ‘the eyes of a scott One of the more fun and amazing things about this here Doctrine here.

** don’t forget to use the correct wording! a short cut will only reinforce the problem.

 

 

*

Share

TToT-the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is our contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

It is not raining at this particular moment (11:22) but an unlisted Grat for this post is that we know our Readers will not hold it against us if we skip the editing and get outside and doing something lawnistically-speaking.

thanks

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop  Six-Pick of the Week: ‘Sands of Time‘  by Eliza Seymour

5) the Unicorn Challenge  ‘corn in the morn pick, [funny thing about this pick*] : ‘Western Sunset‘ by Tom

6) * sure, we liked the story but, the thing about good writing (from the perspective of the Writer and the Reader) is sometimes our fiction contains elements that stand out that we, the writer may not have ‘tried for’. Taking liberites here, I haven’t asked Tom directly but reading the Comments makes me feel this story has one surprise elements

7) co-writing a serial story with Tom… “Of Heroes and the MisUnderstood

8) somoething, something**

9) ** spellczech. (ha ha)

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music vids

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Where to begin?

When you think about it, using RePrints to jumpstart a post is, kinda, just like time travel, ya know?

After all, we are, (on some level), what we write. And who can deny that what we write, (fiction, non-fiction, theories of personality types), are us, made loud.

New Readers! There is a thing in the Doctrine referred to as ‘the Everything Rule’. If you’re just getting the hang of this here Doctrine thing here, don’t be concerned if the part of you that felt, for a moment, like this applied to you is now saying, ‘This is all bullshit. I want to speak to the manager. It’s not right that they go on and on like this…” (lol)

While this post began, as many do, speaking generically, i.e. to all three personality types, clearly we are addressing the clarks in the Readiance. The Everything Rule, (which states, ‘everyone does everything at one time or another’) is there to remind us that, while the three personality types exist in characteristically-distinct personal realities, none has exclusive domain over any part or element of everyday life. How a thing, (a job, a love interest, an avocation, an idea, a nightmare or the best way to express an idea), exists for clarks, scotts and rogers without limitation. How it manifests is determined by the nature and character of that person’s worldview. Being a carpenter (manifests) differently to an Outsider compared to a Predator. Being a fan of a popular musician looks like one thing when we’re observing a roger versus a scott. A cop who is a scott will exhibit traits that are arguably more aligned with successful exceution of their professional duties than say, that of a clark who has become a police officer.

It’s all about how one relates themselves to the world around them and the people who make it up. The world is ‘the same’ for everyone. How we experience it can be viewed through three difference lenses, i,e, that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) or the Herd Member(rogers).

We haven’t used ‘the Wakefield Doctrine Promise’ in a long time! (Here ya go): Learn the character (and characteristics) of these three relationships/predominant worldviews and you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

Tuesday too the Wakefield Doctrine (nope! we were not joking about the destiny of the content*)

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

Destiny_-_John_William_Waterhouse

(So …we all good with the realness of your personal reality? …the reality of the other person’s worldview?) We’re spending a lot of time on this because, when we get to the part about using the Doctrine in influencing/helping/understanding/impressing/scoring-big-time with another person, it will be your acceptance of the very real difference (between) what the world is for you and what it is for the other person, that will carry the day.

Speaking of trying to change/improve/enhance/fuckin-stop-making-the-same-mistake-over-and-over-again!, lets take a look at a new concept we’re trying out:

Personal Limiting Condition (PLC), a term for the mechanism inherent in all of our lives, that contrives to limit change. (By change we mean anything that we feel we could or should do differently, anything that we believe will, a) improve our lives or 2) decrease our unhappiness (with our lot in life).  Lets say you, (a clark for the purposes of keeping this discussion somewhat credible) decide, ‘I need to get into shape’ (or) ‘I need to apply myself more and do better at my job’.  Fine. (Being a clark), we will think a lot about how we should attempt to do this thing, whatkind of schedule, necessary equipment and will devote a significant amount of time imagining how great it will be to finally…. whatever you anticipate the ‘new you’ look(ing)/act(ing)/feel(ing) like.

The first day of the jogging program/be serious and ‘on the ball’ at work, goes great! It didn’t hurt too much/it wasn’t too embarrassing. The second day of the jogging/’someone on the move’ at place of employment: hey a little sore, but better shape than you thought (hope it doesn’t take too long)/people seem to be looking at you funny, but the boss seems impressed… Day Three: this is boring/I’m so far behind everyone else…I’ll show them, I’ve got to give 143%/ fine!! I got my regular day’s work done (not that many errors) and the boss seems to be busy with other things…I am so far behind in life, big rewards require big risks!! … until: you run as fast as you know you should be able to run (and something gets fucked up) or  you suddenly have the best idea ever for a book (or starting a band) or maybe sending out resumes, cause your cousins sister-in-law is in the HR Department of a big corporation and everyone knows you should be in…

These last, they are the Personal Limiting Conditions.

The power of PLCs is that they are quite real. You don’t have to give up jogging to not be able to get into shape, you can get hurt. You don’t have to quit your job because you know that you’re in a dead-end mode, you have so many other potential possibilities (yeah, zoe, I know lol).
These are real events. We all encounter them. Doesn’t mean that we are not capable of avoiding them. What it does mean is that, as clarks, we should recognize that this kind of thing happens to scotts and rogers (and other clarks), therefore it does not constitute proof of the unchange-ability of your life.

That’s it for now. for the new(er) Readers… and Jak, here:

(from May of last year, a portion of a Post (in part) Titled, ‘want to know the most dangerous, corrosive word used by a clark?)

It’s an innocent enough word. More than innocent, this word is often considered to be one of positive meaning and intent, a hopeful word, an optimistic word. But as a loan shark is to your local bank, the price of the loan is always higher than the value secured.

The word is ‘maybe’.
In the hands (or on the tongues) of clarks, the word is meant well. “It is a good job, maybe I’ll get it“. Perhaps because, when clarks look at the world we see people and institutions, groups and family members who, while certainly not intending us harm, (they all) clearly know something that we don’t know. “Maybe I don’t want to be a doctor, maybe I really want to find my own way”. The words we use when describing the world we find ourselves in, are  picked with the hope of blending in, looking to be a member or, one of the guys/one of the girls. “I think I should ask her out, maybe I’ll wait until a better time” “How many times do we have to discuss this, maybe next time you’ll listen to me”

Not really sure what it was that struck me about the use of the word ‘maybe’, it just seems that it has a certain resonance when employed by clarks. It is a word that lets us ‘commit without committing’, a word designed to insulate us from disappointment. clarks fear disappointment almost as much as we fear fear. More in a way. Fear can be run from. Disappointment is a sentence of reduced possibility. And if clarks are anything, we are people who believe that having possibilities is the difference between a possibly happy life and a life where we still have options. In a sense, as long as we have the possibility (of something) there is hope.  Maybe.

 

*

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.  A tribute to the soundness of the Creatorini’s strength of vision (and) the enduring Will of it’s participants, the TToT continues to this day, like…(insert metaphor employing either chain saws or anvils juxtaposed with human infants or the Eiffel Tower HERE)

For the Doctrine, we cite the following people, places, things (and) events as stimulating our sense of gratitude.

1) Phyllis

Una and (most of) Phyllis on our first, away-from-home family vacation

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) serial fiction, writing of, this one inparticular: “”…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop… Doctrine’s ‘Hey This One is Fun’:  ‘Six clumsy sentences!‘ Keith has that much envied gift, (yeah, skill too), of creating enduring, if not fictional, realities. Case in point this: an invitation to stop by the Baamy Inn,

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop… our Pick of the Week: ‘After the End‘ by jenne

7) Hypo Grat*: the quick brown fox… once again quicker than the old grey blogger! (the photo? the yellow dots? a fox, not a apocryphal Road Runner™ ran along the path at 7:04 as it does every weekend. We must’ve had, what, ten seconds? The fox was loping, not sprinting.  Of course, in the World of the Young (WYmotto: ‘Sure, but you coulda done a movie, edited it and posted in that kinda time. Unless your walnut-like finger joints slowed… gotta go…. no problem‘. ) it would not have been a prob.

8) finding a workaround to having to buy a new camera. This is big. A lot of the work we do requires photos be date/time-stamped. Always had to buy a camera to get them as, at least up until this week, our phone required a 3rd party app, and to use it required 18 steps of edit. This new one now is one step. cool

9) something, something

10) Secret Rule 1.3 (From the Book of Secret Rules aka the Secret Book of Rules) ‘…using superscript always elevates the appearance, if not, how content is perceived view by the Reader. [P] rovided the Reader is at least fity-years-of-age’  (BoSR/SBoR 2011 op. cit)

 

* hypo-grat one of the reasons this here bloghop here is still in ‘print’. A hypo-grat is the person, place or thing that is, on the surface, not a good person, place or thing, at least on first blush1 One of the long(er) term benefits of participation is acquiring the capacity, however rudimentary, to find ‘the positive in the negative’. (Mimi is our go-to for reference in this admittedly advanced gratitacious whatthhellia temporus2)

1) one of our all time favorite old-fashiony expressions, apparently it dates back to the 1300s! (surely if there is a place where time-travelers hang out, those native to the 1300s must have some serious cred “Hey. Hey, man. When’re you from?” “13th C” ‘Dude!“)

2) hey, don’t laugh, that’s some straight-up fakey-Latin. But, serially, M is one of our Grat Misstrae Supreme in this aspect of the field.

*

music vids

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. In the week/month/quarter/including-the-one-not-given/decade/collective-lost-weekends/idealized-mid-childhood/and most re-constructed memories we are grateful for:

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) something, something

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop  Six Pix of the Week: ‘Torn Seam‘  by Denise. (a nice little, quick glance across time (and, maybe dimensions)

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop Best of Show: Margaret‘s ‘The view from a diving bell‘ (a little exercise in the art of employing the rhythm of language)

7) writing colaboration with Tom (“…of Heroes and the MisUnderstood“)

8) Six Sentence Café and Bistro. Hey! Mark your favorite characters’ calendars… a couple of weeks, (or so), Tom and I will be concluding our Serial Six (Grat #7). And, one way or another we’ll, (collectively and metaphorically), find ourselfs at the Café. Send you characters (or be, bold-devil-may-care and show up however you manifest). A Splendid Time is guaranteed for all! Not to worry about setting/physical context, will provide descriptive references leading up to the event. (Or you can check in with any of the regulars (or their metavars*): Nick/Gatekeeper, Denise/Bartender, Mimi/(ma’am or ‘cher’ will work or whatever moves you), Chris/Raconteuse or Tom (Anyone with Ford’s current address, feel free to send it on) and jenne. It’ll be fun in a meta meta kinda way, ya know? (Quick overview: in a semi-deserted factory/mill district of most cities, (Misky has a excellent story that manifests the concept that Six Sentence Café and Bistros can be found anywhere provided there is sufficient desire to find it. Easiest description: rectangle shaped, entrance at the lower right corner(ish). Once through the foyer, with it’s cigarette machine piled high with free magazines addressing: local real estate offerings, band-members and used cars, copies of the Watch Tower and brochures from the local Chamber of Commerce. You might see Frank there, sitting on the single vinyl-upholstered bench seat (for the busier nights). Through the doors to the Café proper, the bar runs down the right wall, the rest of the public space is to the left. Architecturally-opportunistic alcoves are found along the exterior wall, opposite which is the long interior wall, (looking at our non-existent floor plan the top edge of the rectangle), in the middle of which is a small, one-step up stage. Back to the bar behind which the shelves of liquor are interrupted by double-swinging doors (with those cool porthole windows) that give access to Tom‘s domain, the kitchen. At the far end of the bar is the start of a hallway running to the right and the Manager’s office. Further past it no one is quite sure of anything other than the overhead lights always burn out too soon.

9) minor yard project (Yeah like a bagatelle for rake and wheelbarrow) Before and after (clearly all our hard work and effort paid big dividends! lol)

10) Secret Rule 1.3  sub-chapter 18; “… the effort to

 

* if this combination of meta and avatar hasn’t already been coined…. then you can thank the Doctrine

music:

*

*

*

*

 

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share