Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine

et tu Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

September 5, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

Hey, sent this (post below) to myself the other day! Let’s see what it is we thought we needed to recall/re-read!

‘and a thousand telephones, that will not ring’ the Wakefield Doctrine: the theory of personality predicated on three characteristic worldviews

November 13, 2012

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of personality that you get to enjoy with your friends and them, before it gets all famous and mainstreamy and everyone will know about it)

Question: If your husband is a roger and you are a clark, is it true that they never accept how much you have changed over the years, since you first met?
Answer: Too true¹

(Welcome to ‘ya shoulda just asked Tuesday’! We will be presenting some common questions and the semi-comprehensive answers…along with a little commentary, mostly to let us get away with dividing the page into block quotes.’)

Question: My best friend is funny and fun to be with, but sometimes when we are around other people he gets like, mean even goes and picks on me. But this happens only with certain people, this big kid that (my friend) knows. What gives?

Answer: Chances are your friend is a scott and the person that, when they’re around, your friend starts acting mean?…well, that other person is a scott too, but they are what we call dominant (to your friend). So your friend, even though he is picking on you, doesn’t mean to hurt your friendship… it’s a pack² thing, you know?
Answer: jeez, if you say so

(This question deals with the changing pack order (from the scottian perspective) and it’s effects on the behavior of a scott. Note: this question (and by implication, the experience cited), will most likely be posed by a clark. Do you know why that should be?)

Question: My fiancée and I are getting close to the Big Day. When we first got engaged, we both agreed to keep the ceremony and everything on the quiet, low-key side, but lately, ( the wedding is in 3 months), she has been talking more to her sisters and some of her old friends and it seems like the guest list is getting bigger and bigger. What gives?

Answer: She is probably a roger. Forget about changing her mind. It means a lot to her, in a way that you will never understand. So relax! Sneak a couple of your friends that she might not have approved when the guest list was small, she probably won’t even notice now, and if she does make an issue of it, say the following to her (word for word): “I understand how important family is to you now. And even though I am not close to my family, you have shown me that my feelings³ of friendship with (fill in the names of you friends) make them like family. Won’t you let my family join your family …darling?“

(And there are those who would say, ‘Hey Wakefield Doctrinaires! Sure you have a uniquely clever take on personality types, but what about practical applications? Huh, what about those?‘ Well, here ya go! Who cannot not identify with this situation? …not counting the rogers, of course!)

Question: My boss is nice enough, but it seems like he tries too hard to be, like my friend or something! Every day it is ‘how are you doing?’, “is there anything I can do to make your job easier?” I mean, all the time! I can’t get any work done when he is in the office, he is always offering to ‘help’! I might be able to deal with this, except that every time I do get some work done that he needs to sign off on, he always finds fault! And if I come up with something on my own initiative (he likes to say that he wants me to try to ‘think outside the box’) he is either totally negative or acts like he is amazed that I actually did it myself! Should I quite my job?
Answer: Probably.⁴

(This Question deals with a scenario that is all too common. And, although we do not propose that all bosses are rogers, we will say this, ‘If your boss is a scott you have: a) a good time everyday up until the day he decides that it is time to change careers or b) a lead pipe cinch of a sexual harassment lawsuit, so the day you get tired of her shenanigans, ‘it’s sayonara see ya in court’
If your boss is a clark, then we know the following: a) if your clarklike boss is female then her boss is a roger, if your clarklike boss is male then his boss is a scott! and b) they (clarks) make great bosses, will stick up for you totally against all opponents, but jeez! enough with the leadership by consensus! Get a set, yo.

That music referenced in the Title of today’s Post? Totally weird. I’m sitting and watching TV and a commercial comes on and before I can hit ‘MUTE’ I hear the music in the background (of the commercial) and I’m off to the great and omnicient google… and here we are

1) rogers are about consistency, if they are about anything at all! The worldview of the herd (rogers) maintains that history, tradition, continuity…consistency is of the greatest good! The worldview is also one in which the individual’s relationship with the world-at-large manifests primarily in emotional terms. So when a (lasting) relationship forms, the details of ‘the other’ person are important, in a sense, manifesting the emotional investment. So, as time goes by, even though people change and grow and develop, the roger will still insist on seeing the ‘original person’

2) scotts, in the initial behavioral metaphor: like pack animals, i.e. wolves, dogs, lions and such. The social ranking in the pack is one of simple dominance, an alpha at ‘the top’ and everyone else in order of strength/prowess/capability downward from there. It is a primary characteristic of the scottian personality type to establish ranking when entering a new (social ) environment. Literally going from person to person, figuratively pushing them on the shoulder in order to establish ranking

3) emotions! always play the emotion-card when dealing with rogers!

4) you could try to…nah, don’t even bother. Maybe if you got to the Doctrine sooner, you might have learned enough to invoke your own rogerian aspect to re-configure your work relationship… but too hard, too frustrating, easier to get another job. But then again, most bosses/middle managers/supervisors/Principals are rogers! so maybe you should be asking about the Wakefield Doctrine School of Self-Improving Oneself…school

*

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- Part Next

August 22, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

As promised, the follow-up to yesterday’s post

As to the language describing the core Doctrine concepts, has it changed over time? If so: Compare and Contrast

Once again a Reader has offered, (consciously or not), the suggestion of a perspective that, while not directly bearing on today’s stated theme, is one that offers perhaps an even more interesting look-see at this here Doctrine, here.*

Mimi’s Comment to yesterday’s Post:

All things being equal, perhaps they are about equal.

Yes, in the everyday sense. All (three) have strengths, weaknesses and ‘omg-you-can’t-be-serious?!?!! or ‘that’s what you think/how you’d act/the way you feel!??!’

(lol) We all have our own experiences with the more outlying behaviors of ‘the other two’ personality types in our lives. And, even if we can’t see it in our ownselfs, if lucky we afford ourselves of the opportunity to witness another person who shares our predominant worldview doing something that is total ‘wtf’?**

That said, we’ll take Mimi’s ‘the three are equal’ and raise her the admittedly less obvious, but definitely worth the stretch, view that the three predominant worldviews are one fractured whole person.

The (unstated) goal of the application of the perspective made available by applying the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine (out-of-breath-emoji here) is take advantage of the strengths of ‘the other two’ predominant worldviews. And, before you say it, as a personality theory, we recognize that it is not practical to think one can simply decided to ‘be a roger‘ or ‘go at them like a scott‘¹.

Well, not quite.

From the very beginning of this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers there is the belief that while we may not have grown up relating to the world around us a(n) Outsider (clark), Predator (scott) or Herd Member (roger) we did, and still do, have the potential. The innate ability. Whatever the cool wordification for the capacity to act in a given circumstance.

Ok… too clarklike in our writing. (There! See?!?! Just Demonstrated the rogerian ‘honest, self-crit’ of my public behavior here. And… Hey! This is kinda fun! Lets go steal a car!!)

* New Readers? There’s a reason we recommend reading as many old posts as possible. It is beyond our ability (and focus) to present a totally comprehensive list of characteristic behavior/responses of all three predominant worldviews. (Bonus note: we just said ‘behavior/responses. That choice of verbs over nouns would allow a determined enough person to, dare I say it, reconstruct the entire Wakefield Doctrine. Being focused on relationships (to the world around us and the people who make it up) we did not say: traits and tropisms. But that’s not important now.) What we were about to say regarding the choice of words in the introduction above is that our choice of words were indicative of a clark, finding themselves lacking the succinct and eloquent words to complete the sentence, choosing to indulge in what we probably (and, mind you, a certain pride), pidgin intelligence.

** and surely this experience is the most difficult. to get ourselves to the point of being able to observe, appreciate and identify with another person of our own predominant worldview. Which is, of course, the ‘point’ of this post.

extra credit to whoever shouted, “What about secondary and tertiary aspects, huh? What about. them! ‘nother post yo. But, seeing how you brought it up, what say you Comment the thesis and we’ll see what we can do.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, personality types, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…Better Wait than Never (a) Back-to-School 1968-style”

August 9, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

~~As promised~~.

Damn!

First, a shout-out to Mimi* for reminding us of our promise to free-hand a post on the nature of this time of year.

The Wakefield Doctrine is gender, culture and age neutral. It doesn’t matter if’n you’re a seventy-one-year-old high school Freshman, a nineteen-year-old dropout starting her first day at the local supermarket bringing grocery orders out to the cars of people indulging their crowdaphobic tendencies or a recent immigrant from a country that does not appreciate them.

(What’s that? Yeah, the Doctrine maintains a standard that evolves and includes developments such as non-binary identity and the like. We have a work-friend, a scottian female, who was the first person we introduced to the Doctrine (in the workplace). Consistent with being a scott (with a strong secondary clarklike aspect) she got it immediately. And insisted we should change our nomenclature to distinguish between male and female clarks, scotts and rogers. Naturally, we listened to their impassioned thesis, nodding encouragement, our face that of a five-year-old watching a professional shoe salesperson tie the laces of their new footwear. And, after the presentation we smiled and said, ‘No.’

lol. Seriously, we did all of the above. But being a friend, we awaited the final quod erat demonstrandum. She was, (and remains), a friend. In any event, we explained that the Wakefield Doctrine, being grounded on the notion that it is the character of the person’s relationship to the world around them and the people who make it us that determines personality (type). That gender is, for our purposes, a manifestation of the being, not a distinction between types of beings. Society and cultures and even physiology all have an effect on the being, allowing for/encouraging to/preventing from all sorts or expressions, demonstrations and manner of interacting with the world. In fact, in the early days of this blog, we looked to the scottian man and woman as illustration of how these influences inform behavior and style of interpersonal relationships.

But that’s for another post.

This is supposed to be a ‘freehand written’ back-to-school post.

The First Day of School:

clarks (Outsider) everything bad and wonderful about the world combined with a hyper-awareness of the fact of not-being-a-part-of. Of course, clarks get through the first day of school, (which, as you’re thinking, applies to: all grade levels/ college (if so inclined)/employment/ professions/marriage and life-altering physical developments, somehow, for the most part, ok. Like Dante on Maundy Thursday thinking, ‘How hard can this be?”
scotts (Predator) you know how, you’ve not had a chance to eat in the course of a workday, nothing bad, in fact, you’ve been ‘too busy to eat’ and then, against all reason, you stop at the supermarket to get something for dinner? a scott stepping, (ok, bounding), up the steps into the school bus, a sense of excitement tempered only by the caution to not ‘tear off more than they can chew’
rogers (Herd Members) a cautious sense of satisfaction that the world beyond the family is what they thought it would be; sure larger and fuller of variables and unknowns, but even as they walk down the aisle of the bus they sense there is order, kids are sitting according to a Rule; the roger‘s that first schoolbus trip is everything the the bride and groom feel as their limo pulls away from their wedding church.

* the hardest working woman in the blogosphere**

** we’re sure James wouldn’t mind, us borrowing/adapting his moniker and such for Friend of the Doctrine, Mimi***

*** hey the caesium fountain atomic clock ain’t got nothin on her, you could start a Rush song to the downbeat of her content being posted

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “… of tissue paper and hidden pins.”

August 7, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

‘Regular’ Readers will be rolling the subtitle to today’s post around in their (metaphorical) mouths by now. Some will concentrate on any random word that appears, others will, remembering an admonition* from the earl(iest) of days here at the blog, simply wait. Knowing, as do we all, the Answer is never simple, (but) always accessible.

Speaking of Answers. That’s easy. It’s not the answer that provides the benefit, it’s accepting the question.

ok, ok, will stop with the opaque “oooh! I divine the the secret of the universe’. (Clearly there are some times we appreciate the mechanism of the ‘RePrint’ post more than others. After all, there is only so much to say about the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine. Of course, about the relationship between us and the world around us and the people who make it up. That’s the near infinite part.

Ya know?

So, let’s stay with the method and print an old Doctrine post.

As to the (near) infinite supply of blogpost topics, themes and inspiration? Consider:

There will be a clark in your day ahead. You will see them best by not looking (or throwing something weird into the room first, the clark will respond with… enthusiasm).
witnessing a scott (in any multi-person social context) is like being with friends, watching an old TV series, (one of your total favorites), and realizing you had, somehow, not yet seen the episode. Don’t shout, “I’ve never seen this one, but you should…” (As a matter of fact, remain quiet. No sudden moves.) There will be interaction between the scott and… well, whoever she/he decides. Enjoy the show. Save the critique/appreciation until you’re alone.
bumping into a roger. sure, kinda hard not to, the Herd Member comprising easily 66% of the population. Like that movie ‘A Quiet Place’. Stay calm to the point of serene, don’t contribute to the conversation … blend into the Herd. You can remark later. When you’re safe from scrutiny

Well, that was pretty interesting. (Remind us tomorrow to reprint a …err RePrint. lol)

The thing about relationships being endless? In number, not (necessarily) tenure. The Wakefield Doctrine describes three relationships with the surrounding world to which we, as humans, are heir to from the day we are born.

clarks (the Outsider) real simple: It’s not merely that we don’t seem to belong here, it’s that we seem to be missing a key bit of understanding. Whether that understanding is (of) ourselfs or the people around us is not important. What is important is our belief that we must learn the reason before we are discovered (by nearly everyone else). The hope lies in the ‘nearly’ of the preceding sentence. There are other Outsiders. We can learn from their mistakes. We can benefit from their successes when we share with them. (At least to the edge of their comfort zone.)
scotts (the Predator) the coffee of the human experience. lol. No, not merely the caffeine, the coffee. They aren’t overcoming a weakness, roger. The Tasmanian devil (of Warner Brothers cartoon fame) is not seeking to demonstrate his/her view of the world. They simply exist in the here-and-now, knowing that there is only one real place, one genuine time. Now.
rogers (the Herd Member) there is, for this predominant worldview a Right Way to live/act/respond. Nothing more is needed. And, oddly, (for rogers being the essence of society/culture), they will seize the intended meaning of the David Oglivy quote at the beginning of this post. Well, to be absolutely accurate, the quote is down below, the reference is above. Details are important. (To paraphrase: The Details will set you free.)

enough.

time to get out there and see what the day holds.

The Wakefield Doctrine.

*there are no stupid questions, just your questions. That ‘joke’ (bon mot when we’re feeling clever**) is borrowed, or maybe better to say ‘inspired’ by a famous adman in the 1950s, David Ogilvy who said, “The customer is not a moron, she’s your wife.”

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, relationships, self-development, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- (RePrint, as promised)

August 2, 2023 By clarkscottroger

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

… as promised*.

Hey! While we have you ‘on the line’** don’t forget, tonight is Wednesday night which means the gates open for the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Ever ones gonna be there, you should stop in. Serially! While not the most skillful of prompt-post writers, we have been told by unnamed others that the Doctrine’s contributions have a certain, je ne sais quoi, no matter what the weekly prompt word might be. Be that as you may*** stop by and check it out. You can thank us later.

[We won’t take offense if anyone feels that the premise of the following is outdated and without value in the contemporary blogosphere. But, we always assumed there is a value to links-out to other bloggers. Maybe the algorithm that ‘more-links-the-better-for-the-linkee‘ has long since sailed. Until convinced otherwise, we’ll keep at it. So, keeping with our mention above of many talented writers at Denise’s Six Sentence Story ‘hop, lets see if this shortcut/combined link works: Sixarians from last week.

the Wakefield Doctrine just like Summers of old… a re-run! …Post from August 2011

August 5, 2014

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

Rizzoli and Isles ain’t got nothin on these two…

From August 2011…. You know what’s funny? This (reprint) references a failed collaborative writing project. Well, if you go to his blog now, and the Wakefield Doctrine does, in fact, recommend that you do, you will find an un-failed collaborative writing project! Denise (over at Girlie is co-writing a story with the Progenitor roger. And it’s getting pretty good! the roger, being the wildly creative, blog-risk taker that he is, is posting each chapter as they are written. So, when you go over there to read it, you might want to scroll down to Chapter 1 and ‘read your way back to the top’. Be sure to Comment (tell ’em ‘the Doctrine’ sent ya!).

As we all know, the Progenitor roger ( nom de plumage RCoyne ) started his little blog in the hopes of creating a Collaborative Writing Project. Attracting and combining (the efforts) of the full range of talents, that seem in so plentiful supply in cyberspace, it was RCoyne’s hope to produce a totally original literary work, (and) given the apparent variety of interests  found among people in the blogosphere, it  would have been one helluva a blog.
….It failed, of course.

This is not to disparage RCoyne’s idea nor his Intent. It is a reflection upon the fact that he is a roger….or more precisely, it is a reflection upon the inherent limitations of the aspects of being a roger. Do not misinterpret our feelings on the matter, we are making this statement without placing the onus entirely on roger (or his people). This statement is equally true of the other two personality types, the clarks and the scotts. Each of the three personality types, that comprise the Wakefield Doctrine, represent a worldview, a ‘reality’, if you will; each a perspective  that is unique and (one) that has great strengths and terrible weaknesses.
(Readers! Remember that the Doctrine maintains that all people are possessed of the qualities/the potentials of each of these three ‘types’ and while we become predominately one of the three, the other two aspects are always within us, waiting to be called upon by the dominant personality. At times of extreme duress or peril they are available to be called upon.)
We call this…the…. Mystery of the Wakefield Doctrine and the Proof of the 3 Personalities

What is the mystery of the rogerian personality type that prevented RCoyne’s blog from taking off?

What should have the roger done, in order to be successful with the Seccesscessionisticalationist Rag?

Why are we picking on the roger so much?

Lets start with what we do know, about rogers:

they believe that Life has rules and that if followed everything will be as it should be

rogers believe that reality is essentially quantifiable, that 2 + 2 equals 4 is true now and will always be true, even after the human race is extinct

the world is perfect to a roger, we use the word in the sense that implies completeness and order, as opposed to virtuous or good

rogers experience the world in general and people in particular with an organizational bias predicated on the herd mentality, ‘like gathers with like and excludes that which is not like’ (or some such nonsense)

for a roger, the ‘backstory’ is more attractive than the narrative, (an example from the progenitor roger: early in the days of this blog, one particular Post drew an exceptional number of Comments, we asked  roger what he thought about it and he indicated that he didn’t bother reading the Post, he only read the Comments)

rogers are responsible for civilization, for the development of civilized society, for all social development and refinements beginning with cavemen and moving forward to the Present

in expressing their perception of the world as a place of rules, rogers become: Doctors and Lawyers, Accountants and Engineers, Surveyors and Writers of Popular Fiction, Missionary Families and Dynastic Families, Pioneers (geographically), High Priests and Politicians, Homemakers and Trendsetters, Judges and Executioners

The rogerian component of the Proof of the 3 Personalities?  rogers are the only ones who can ‘ manage and maintain‘ the scottian element of the population. Without rogers, we would all be living under bushes, darting out to drink from nearby streams at dawn and duck, shoulders hunched in anticipation of the attack from the nearby  Umbrella Thorn Acacia tree. Damn! The thing about scotts, they are all drive, instinct, appetite. Someone, ( I think it was Claire ), was recently musing about the three-ness of the Wakefield Doctrine and that got me to thinking about Freud (have not got a clue) and his Id, Ego and Super Ego. Who out there does not see that our scottian element is so the Id. And while it is essential to life, appetite and impulsivity, left un-checked would be kinda short-term.

Let us end today’s Post with a little example that came up in a recent letter to Molly, in which we were discussing the difficulty encountered in distinguishing between a (very) robust roger and a scott. Both are active, and charming and totally gregarious. But if we watch these two walk into a social gathering ( a party, a picnic, a business conference) what we will see is:

the scott will make a noise (figurative or literal) immediately upon entering the space…this is meant as a first effort to flush-out any other scotts
the roger will stand in a prominant place at the entrance and wait for a sign of recognition from the various herds making up the crowd
the scott will go to the first person they can get to and start to tell a joke about the fact that they (the scott) are present
the roger will go immediately go to the first person they recognise (provided the person is another roger, if however, the first person they recognize is a clark, the roger will wait)
the scott will go from person to person and tell a joke or introduce themselves to each individual (if there are too many people, in which case the scott will treat each herd as a person)
the roger will either join a herd or gather clarks to start a herd….and wait for a scott.

Bottom line: the scott sees the social environment as a hunting ground, therefore everyone is either prey or predator. If the scott encounters other scotts then ranking must be established, either dominant or submissive, as long as they know where they stand.
The roger, on the other hand, sees the social environment as an expression of themselves. All that the roger encounters is either of the herd or not of the herd. Those that are ‘not of the herd’ are as important and valuable to the roger as the outsiders. Rogers cherish outsiders, they are the dross that accentuate the beauty of what the roger builds in his little herd.