Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2 Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 2

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. Created by Lizzi R in 1894, the St. Bride Library being established in London just three years prior being most advantageous for our founderess as they waited on the internet to be created.

The theme is gratitude, the narrative is lists, freeform poetry, haiku* or discursive finger-painting. We have only a single requirement for participation and that is to have good intent. Pretty simple, isn’t it? Citing the people, places, things and events that inspire the state of gratitude is the point. It’s been found that reading a TToT post has nearly the same effect of writing one. So come on down!

Following is our TToT:

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) Front Meadow update

6) Wanna hear/read a really weird Grat? We all know that clarks are rather facile when it comes to imagination and spontaneous imagery. Sometimes this gift comes at a cost, albeit temporarily.

Here’s the set-up: we were working on the current landscaping project, i.e. clearing a very old brush pile. Check out the photos in Grat # 8 & 9. Our tools are a landscape rake, a snow shovel and a wheel barrow. Rake out the decaying wood, use the shovel to put it in the wheel barrow and dispose of it elsewhere on the property.

We pulled away an old log that apparently was being used as a burrow. A small animal immediately ran from the hole. It was grey with a pointy nose, whiskers …fine. As it ran away we couldn’t help but see what appeared to be a fan tail of feathers trailing from its hindquarters (think: peacock with tail down on the ground). Being a clark our imagination pulled up an image from the movie, ‘Annihilation’  Something like:

Can we get an aiiyee. Immediately, one of the mouse-ettes that were clinging to the mother most fell off and the world reorganized itself along more conventional lines. The mousette caught up, re-connected and the mouse family disappeared into the underbrush.

We decided to call it a day. The hair on the back of our neck and forearms needed a rest, don’cha know.

7) something, something

8) Current Landscape project. Before

9) Current Landscape project. Today

10) Secret Rule 1.3  from the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules

 

*haiku the original “You think you can write poetry? Of course you do.”

music vids

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Tewesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Misky, in her Comment to yesterday’s post, provides us with a topic and jumping off point:

“…tidy herd again, or at least a bigger herd than their little basic one at home.”

Well… where to begin!

rogers feel.

to M.’s characterization of (a) roger’s Herd as ‘little’ basic. We smile self-consciously and say, ‘Ya know, it’s true about size not mattering.’

The Herd, the membership to which, serving as the primary psycho-social behavioral metaphor of our 3rd personality is, as is, seemingly everything in the Wakefield Doctrine, about (a) relationship.

clarks think (and rely on the notion they understand), scotts act (and in doing so express their nature and, subsequently, the value they offer the world) and rogers feel (and surely there is no more pervasive force in the universe than emotion)

damn! we getting rather intense, yo

think about this: rogers live in a world that is held together and otherwise organized by Rules in a universe that is quantifiable (and therefore, knowable) and what it is is what is.

Herds are those people, places and things that are recognized/regarded/and otherwise acknoledged by a roger as conforming (or desiring to conform) to this description.

Hey! New Readers! Seeing how you’ve probably jumped down to the music vid, seeing how we’re getting all AP Doctrine this morning, are wondering if Jimi Hendrix was a clark? Yes. Yes he was. How do we know this? Start with the creativity. Then go online and find an interview video/tape. There’s a good one with Dick Cavett and …well, watch.

Supplementary Reading: rather than fill the page with facinating insight, what say we provide a simple link to a post that elaborates on the topic of rogers?

A closing observation: when considering the world of a roger, the notion of personal reality becomes essential. What rogers do, be it read the instructions with the intent of learning the proper operation of an appliance or how to assemble a model airplane to look exactly like the one on the box, they are not facing a chore. (As a clark might glance at the first panel and then the final diagram or a scott would make a paper airplane of it). They are celebrating the concise, complete world they live in. When you hear a roger say, ‘Are you ready for the big storm?’ They are not doomsaying. They are celebrating the Herd.

And that’s where one must start. To a roger, the entire world is their Herd. However, the level of personal congruence determines the immediacy and limits of their (personal) Herd.

And, while scotts being Predators, always establish ranking in any and all social settings and situations, rogers assume their place at the center of the Herd. Which is what brings us back to the previous statement that the entire world is the Herd. On a personal basis, the Herd are all extending outwards from their perspective (like there’s any other one?). So a ‘struggle for dominance between rogers plays out more indirectly, i.e. who is paying attention to you. Who else is vying for the attention of those in the room/at work/in class?

It is a soft war. But it is war. All rogers know there is a Right Way and while they spend most of their lifes nurturing view, the rest of the time is spent helping other rogers learn it.

Maybe you should follow the link above. This is a complex subject.

 

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s weakly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

Each week a number of exceptionally skilled and talented bloggers gather here and link in a list (or interpretive rhetoric or any format their individual creative impulses may demand) on the topic of gratitude. Not as simple and/or simplistic as it may sound. After all, ‘gratitude’ is one of the more elusive frames-of-mind available to any of us. And, not for nothin’, way beneficial.

The following is a list of the things that have elicited a state/awareness-of this state of gratitude for us

1) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Hostinae (and Andrew): Mimi, cai, Misky, Denise, Kristi, Dyanne, Lisa, Knitcat and Andrew they provide that one quality that all successful bloghops must possess, community.

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

6) our late-March, early-April weather was interrupted by a couple of days of ‘oh, so this is what a late-May nice day felt like...to our parents‘. lol

7) front meadow update (yes, new addition with the sunflowers see Grat #9 below)

8) something, something

9) oh, yeah… new sunflowers (a lotta pressure on them Helianthus annuus least round in these parts) err the round, yellow things to the left of the sidewalk

10) Secret Rule 1.3 from the Book of Secret Rules aka Secret Book of Rules. specifically, the approaching completion of one’s list of Grats is, in point of fact, a legitimate item for said list.

 

music vids

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of changes and mis-memory’

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

ruh roe

Ree…Print!

 

It is not necessary to understand this…M. Eckhardt

The topic of today’s Post is: Discourse and Discussion  (quick definition so we will not get any shit from people saying that this blog is amateur scholastecism),
discourse: from the Latin discursus; the act of running about. Sociologists and philosophers tend to use the term discourse to describe the conversations and the meaning behind them by a group of people who hold certain ideas in commonAlright lets start there people, the sooner we get through the “serious” part of the Post, the sooner we can get to the music videos. This the Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day. The question before us is:What is the goal, the perceived object of the act of conversation/discourse for clarks, for scotts and for rogers? (and as a follow-up question), What does the Doctrine offer to aid the person trying to effectively communicate with a person of the other type (clark, scott or roger)?First up, clarks. clarks value knowledge information above all, therefore they will attempt to bring as much fact, knowledge, information, inference and implication as possible to the discourse (see?). You will know a clark by the fractured sentence structure. Their goal is to offer (the listener) the maximum choice in paths to take, because (to a clark), everything branches off everything else and each branch offers some information that is discrete from other (branches). That accounts for the (heavy) use (as opposed to light use) of parenthesis. It is a clarks way of saying “hey! by the way, had you considered this…?
Sample: “what is it that real people do with all the time in between sentences?”Second up, scotts. scotts need to know: are you predator or prey; are you dominant or submissive. For that we require a verb.
Sample: “Hey!” secondary example: “pretty simple, isn’t it?”

Last, rogers. rogers are not using words to communicate or carry specific questions, rogers use words to exist. They live in a purely social world, one comprised of people, however these people, all being rogers do not interact. Instead the rogerian members of the herd are relating to each other…and s0 the only thing to talk about is the past. The past of each of the other members of a herd is the topic of all rogerian discourse. That is why rogers tend to be good at writing, they are laying out a world, not imparting information. It is a fabric of emotion.
Sample: “did you hear what she said about him…?”

Now you know how each of the three converse/communicate/engage in discourse/run about. What good it this information? Glad I asked. So you can understand the other person, knuckleheads! There is this old saying, “clarks are crazy, scotts are stupid and rogers are dumb”
Why is it necessary to mention this?
Because the best tools in the world are useless without the skill of the person using (them).  And skill in the use of tools involves understanding the material/the object that the tools are being used on as much as (understanding) the tools themselves.
You know that clarks are trying to impart too much information, so take what you need and ignore the rest.
The scott is barking aggressively at you, so decide if it is in your interest to be prey or predator/submissive or dominant and bark back  or roll over.
The roger is spreading information throught your workplace about you, and you do not want that. Take a clue from terminex and contribute information into the network of your own, it will work its way into the social matrix and maybe surplant the bad information.

That concludes the Lesson of the Day. Now to the entertainment portion of the Post. We have a mix, two music video and one movie clip for the scott, the roger and the clark. (In that order, in case, you are a new Reader)

*

Share

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