the Wakefield Doctrine

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

Simple RePrint.

Will use our (traditional) favorite Hendrix vid, given how it’s all raining and such.

A brief contemporaneous aside, before we get to the blockquote section. We find it somehow reassuring when we read very early posts that include insights into the Doctrine that have since become significant in (our own practice of) applying the perspective afforded us.

The role of secondary and tertiary aspects are especially useful, not simply to account for what seem anomalous behavior given a persons’s predominant worldview. Interesting observation in the intervening years (today’s 2013 post and modern times): the presence of a significant secondary clarklike aspect is almost a necessity when encountering (predominant worldview) scotts and rogers.

interesting.

on with the RP

‘…of Hendrix, good questions and intriguing dreams’ the Wakefield Doctrine

May 15, 2013

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

Question from Considerer question:

“Yeah I’d like to know my secondary aspect, after all, knowledge is power…”

When you first practice inferring another person’s predominant worldview, you watch a person and look through the ‘lens’ of the three worldviews. (Often, it is helpful to pick which of the three is pretty damned unlikely and then focus and then begin to compare the remaining two)…watching for the sense of consistency between the observed behavior and what you know about the characteristic behavior of the worldview being held up for comparison. Keep doing this until you feel comfortable with your choice. Want to hear 2 encouraging facts? a) you can’t get it wrong¹ and 2) you can’t break it².

From Denise is this Questionment:

“It’s been said around the Doctrine that it’s like learning a second language. The goal being to eventually think in “Doctrine” … woke up today remembering a snippet of dream.”

Good! The goal is to have the perspective of the Doctrine practiced so that it is not work to apply in the course of your day. A note here to Readers who may be expecting more from this personality theory than we intend. Of late, I have been in conversation with Friend of the Doctrine, Molly, on this very question, i.e. does the Doctrine require total commitment in order to have any value to the individual? ( I may not totally appreciate Molly’s position on this topic, but that in and of itself is the reason for allowing that more is better than less, when it comes to the ways that we view the world around us⁵⁾.  I do say that, as a tool for self-development and self-improvement, the Wakefield Doctrine will prove to be without peer. However, it is still simply a perspective. A way to view the world and the people in it.
Just as becoming fluent in a second (or third or fourth) language, should not interfere with your native language, acquiring an understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine need not cause any conflict with whatever belief system you may choose to employ in your day-to-day, ‘my god! I really thought I knew them better than that! How could they say a thing like that?’…activities. (lol)

So, as with so much in life, the greater the range of your experience in day-to-day living, the better are the chances at getting this thing right!⁶

 

Readers familiar with the Doctrine, seeing two partially italicized block-quotes, have stopped reading and gotten up to get a re-fill on their coffee, tea or whatever tasty beverage they may be sipping. The common reaction, among Readers familiar with these pages is, ‘oh goody/hot shit! one of those Posts!
If you are a new Reader, let me simply say… the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective, a tool, a personality theory that,  if you are willing to allow yourself to see the world as being comprised of people who are living in one of three characteristic worldviews, will give you an insight into the behavior of the people in your life. With the Wakefield Doctrine you can know more about the other person than they know about themselves… while they may know the ‘what’ of their behavior, you will know the ‘why’. Warning to new Readers, if you are successful in learning the simple suppositions, then you will begin to see the clarks that are in your life (there is a passing good chance that you yourself are one) and the scotts (we know they are there...) and the rogers (if they’re not on bicycles or in their workshops, they can often be difficult to distinguish from scotts). And….and! if you succeed in being able to see them, there is a really good chance that you will not be able to stop seeing them. Hey, what can I say?

Today’s Post is, in fact, one of those Posts.

To answer the question⁷ asked by Considerer:  well, the best approach is to establish the person’s predominant worldview and then look for anomalies.  Cyndi is a clark (like you didn’t know that in the first encounter…) but there she is, not only doing video Posts (a totally not clarklike activity), she is doing them effectively, more to the point she is enjoying doing them…thriving in that context. So, which of the 3 personality types are the natural performer, the front man?  …exactly!
Today’s 2 videos are from Jimi Hendrix. Now, he might be confusing because his secondary aspect is so very strong. Man! he’s got to be a scott!!  right?  well, most of us would go with that pick… (see footnote 2) until you see an interview of him. Then you totally know that he was a clark. So, the rogerian Reader is quick to ask, “how do you know he’s not a scott with a secondary clarklike aspect, huh? how do you know that?” Great question.  The answer to this is the same as the basic description of the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘how does the person appear to relate themselves to the world around them?’

*