Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 33 Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 33

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘The devil, you say?/ The devil, you say’

June 7, 2022 By

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

Speaking of the the Everything Rule… (well, we were yesterday).

So here are three movie actors playing the role of Satan/the Devil/Lucifer

Can you see how the predominant worldview of the actors results in a different depiction of this rather culturally-durable figure?

Anticipatory Response: the Everything Rule states: “Everyone does everything, at one time or another.” In terms of the perspective(s) of the Wakefield Doctrine it simply means, there is no such ‘thing’ as something that is of the exclusive domain of a clark (or) a scott (or) a roger. We all exist in what is safest to refer to as a common reality*. “That is something only a scott would do.” “Acting like that is so rogerian, too bad I’m a clark, I’d love to be that self-absorbent.”

To account for what is often very different ways, (among the three predominant worldviews), we employ the ‘manifest’. “Hey! I need a finish carpenter, do you know any rogers in that part of the business.”  “The award to the top real estate agent in the office, this year is a tie! It goes to rogerian male and scottian female!”

‘Yeah, but, you’re talking about actors playing parts. They are working from a script, thats not the real person being the devil. Blame the writer.’

We’ll let the New Readers find their way to reconciling the person and the role, at their own pace. The journey is the trip.

But! Lookee here! The role of the devil as (manifested) ‘delivered’ by a clarklike, scottian and rogerian actor.

We’ll let you sort ’em out.

*

Predominant worldview 1 (Robert DeNiro as Lucifer)

Predominant worldview 2 (Al Pacino as Satan)

Predominant worldview 3 (Gabriel Burns as the Devil)

 

* while predicated on the concept of personal reality, and much as we’d like to see it, just because our reality is personal to us versus your’s to you, sorry, no secret ability to fly or be invisible or be emotion-proof.

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

RePrint Monday Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

June 6, 2022 By

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

This particular Monday, let’s go look for two things: summertime and ‘the Everything Rule’

Couldn’t find an example of a post discussing summertime that we enjoyed all that much (most were focused on the end of summer.) We get that.

But! While we didn’t find a post that was the first mention of the Everything Rule, we did find a post that uses the terminology that preceded it!

lol

… no, now that I read this reprint (below), it’s clear that it doesn’t provide an example, explanation, illustration or music video that has all that much to do with the Everything Rule.

(In a touching example of faith in the Reader, here is the post from 2012 or something and beneath that, a slight discourse on ‘the Everything Rule’)

Before we get into this short Post with the  intriguing Title, a caveat to new Readers.
The Wakefield Doctrine is 2 parts art ( or as we say in the Wakefield part of the world, ‘ahht’)  and 1 part science. The ‘science part’ is pretty straight-forward:

we are all born with the capability of seeing the world/experiencing reality in three distinct and characteristic ways. At some point in early childhood we settle on one worldview and become what we call: clarks, scotts and rogers. Throughout our lives we experience the world with the biases, pre-conjecture and implications of this one view, we call this being a clark, acting like a scott and feeling like a roger. We all retain the capacity to see the world as the other two personality types do, if we try, if we have enough ‘flexible intelligence’, a strong enough clarklike side.  Everything in the Doctrinefollows from this. The Wakefield Doctrine, as it describes personality is gender and culture and age neutral. It is about the world that we perceive, not a list of genetic traits, parental training  that accounts for our behavior.  That is the science.

As to the art…

…the art (of the Doctrine) is found in the act of detecting small, characteristic expressions (physical, mental and emotional) of the other person.  …the art of the Doctrine is putting yourself in the other person’s shoes and trying to see the world as they see it.  …the art of the Doctrine is standing in their shoes, imagining you are a (clark or scott or a roger) and seeing if their behavior makes sense. …the art of the Doctrine is to do this with all three types in different situations until you see the world as the other person sees it.

…as to ‘the smile of the clark‘?  That is where the art creates the fun.  Ever see a person who smiles by compressing their lips and looks at you (either) through the corners of their eyes or ‘up through the top’ of their eyes?  Chances are you are looking at a clark.
…now look at that person’s posture.  Bad, is it?  Rounded shoulders,  slight hunch around the neck?,  a ‘looseness’ around the hips as if ready to make a run for it?  Chances are increasing that you are looking at a clark.
(now here is the fun part…the art part…) Look at the music video below at the bottom of this Post.  Albert Lee is the guy with the white/grey hair behind and to the right of Vince Gill. He is obviously having the time of his life, his smile… his whole face is smiling…
Albert is a clark.

(I know, I know)   “what the hell!! you said they are furtive and scared looking. You just told us clarks smile by compressing their lips and look like they are ready to run for it!! You said that, I have it in writing!!  

Thats the fun. The Wakefield Doctrine is like that.  There are guidelines and there are even rules, heck we even have Core Principles! But as a practitioner,

  • you will be the one to observe the other person
  • you will be the one to ‘try out’ the ways that the other person might be seeing the world
  • you will be the one who gets ‘a feeling’ they might be a clark or a scott or a roger
  • you will be the one who will tell another person, “hey look at this…does this seem rogerian or just a scott on an off day?”
  • …and you will be the only one to decide, knowing that you cannot break the Doctrine and that the other person will still be the clark or the scott or the roger that they are, whether you ‘get it right’ or not

Like we said….this is fun!

*

So. The Everything Rule is intended to remind beginner Doctoriaires that the three predominant worldviews (‘personality types’) are about the character of the relationship between the person and the world. A person may relate themselves to the world they encounter this Monday morning as implied by the relationship of:

  1. Outsider(clark) who, and this is top of list for the solution to the question, ‘Which am I?’, considers the world, (and the people who make it up), as being ‘out there’ and therefore apart from, (by a gap small or stupendous), themselves.
  2. Predator(scott) don’t have time for a consideration of the character of their Monday morning. The world is an adventure, a challenge, satisfying and if you’re not doing something to/with/at someone or something, then you’re asleep or dead. Which, for them, is kinda the same thing.
  3. Herd Member(roger) the character of their relationship to the world around them is as the hub of the wheel. This exists in the realm of faith, does not require proof, evidence or verification. They are. The world is. How linked, (to them), everything is, is the point of life.

ok! enough for this morning.

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

RePrint Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 30, 2022 By

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

This being a holiday weekend here in Oceania, let’s take a ride in the Wayback Machine and see what we can find.

Well, that was surprisingly difficult.

Wait!! Wait!! Insight moment!

So, as often happens, I had an idea in my head for a reprint post. It was to have been on the topic of holidays and the Wakefield Doctrine. Nothing radical there. The trouble started, (secretly), when I framed the topic as Memorial Day/summer holidays. Heck, it was right there in the first sentence. I wanted to discuss today’s holiday, which in local terms is Memorial Day. All, or most, of the returns on a search of ‘holiday’ came back with a) Thanksgiving and 2) Christmas.

damn. note to self: if one is looking to discover something new, it pays not to imagine what it will look like. And, if one is looking for supporting evidence for an idea best beware of how specific the descriptors are.

Not a complete loss.

Have the post below. And a couple of reminders: the Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral, culture neutral and age neutral; the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.

 

childhood memories involving  learning to become a better person:   …………………………… 6 hours
childhood memories involving learning bad habits and behavior:      ……………………………  3 days
childhood memories involving doing something publicly embarrassing to adults:    …………. 2 years
adolescent  fantasies   that result in being scarred for life:
(physically scarred): 3 years  (emotionally scarred): 5 years
workplace situations that result in receiving a raise:  ………………………………………………… 6 hours
workplace situations that result in being fired: ………………………………………………………..  3 months
workplace situations that result in being arrested: ……………………………………………………. 4 years
relationship maturity demonstrated in daily life:  ……………………………………………………..  1.4 hours
relationship immaturity demonstrated in public: ………………………………………………………  4 days
a Post trying to illustrate the ephemeral nature of creative ideas: ………………………………….. 75 minutes

Quick reminder about the Holiday tomorrow:  If you do not know that July 4th is one of the most scottian of holidays, then you need to write  in one of the Comment boxes below 50 times

“scotts love loud noises, it lets them believe they can have an effect on the world“.

Seriously, picture the coming Holiday:

  • takes place at the height of the Summer season
  • eating and drinking to excess is encouraged
  • minimal clothing allowed in virtually all public places (including churches and hospitals)
  • outdoor sports activities including chasing frisbees, being dragged behind a boat and the use of explosive devices (such explosives, that were it December instead of July,  a visit from Homeland Security would be the immediate result)
  • …minimal clothing

So for you non-scotts reading this, three July 4th Survival Tips:

  1. stay indoors
  2. keep the lights off and the glow of the TV shielded from windows and doors
  3. turn up the air conditioning and ….wear extra clothes

We hope that helps.

 

 

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

Monday RePrint -the Wakefield Doctrine-

May 16, 2022 By

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

(let’s see what happens when, going into the archives, we can retrieve something interesting and stimulating for you the Reader and us the curator (of the Wakefield Doctrine blog).

Full Disclosure: will give us three tries

…damn! Got one. First try! And…and! from a May in the past. In 2011.

Full Disclosure: I didn’t sit through the full nine-plus minutes but not for the pre-Doctrine obvious reason*.

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

But hey, why read when you can listen! Great for Doctrine Study while on long car trips!

Ok, that was…interesting…let us know how much you like the v-v-video format!

*

* We can and will go on at length about the differences in our life in the ‘real’ world since taking up keyboard and holding forth on the use and abuse of the principles of our favorite personality theory. But it’s Monday, so we’ll try to keep this brief. Remember those Hair Club for Men commercials? This is pretty much the same. (‘ceptin for the royal we**)

Anyway… the thing about the video and the Doctrine is that by virtue of being a clark, we would have recoiled in horror at the notion of recording our voice, much less our image, (ok, not so much on the image thing being in a moving car and all). The thing of it is, the Wakefield Doctrine has provided us, as a clark, an opportunity to alter how we relate ourself to the world around me. Change the relationship and both you and the world are different. But that’s for another post.

 

** Would someone please tell us why we haven’t looked this up before?!?!  The Latin is: pluralis majestatis Eye-fricken-yee. lol We knew there was a good reason to do RePrints!

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- (Quick RePrint… got two Sixes and one Tale from the SSC&B to work on!)

May 10, 2022 By

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

So, there was this post, once, where I said,

July 1, 2015

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

Card_Players_(5th_version)_1894-1895_Paul_Cezanne

It’s understood that a significant portion of the effort behind (understanding, developing and applying) the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine is specifically intended to help clarks.

Which is not to say that clarks need the Wakefield Doctrine more than scotts or rogers. Wait a minute, we do say that. Which is not to say that clarks are the only one, (of the three), to see in the Doctrine the possibility of direct benefits, impacting their daily lives. Wait… we do say that. Which is not to say that the Wakefield Doctrine offers insights and perspectives that our scottian and rogerian friends cannot, and, in fact, do not benefit as a result of coming here and reading and commenting and such. Wait! we do say that? Well, I guess that leaves us where we have always been:

the Wakefield Doctrine is a unique and useful and very much (a) fun way to look at the behavior of people. the Doctrine is a perspective that offers us (an additional) opportunity to better understand the people in our lives. employing this tool, we all can gain an insight into the world, ‘as the other person is experiencing it’, and, because of this increased understanding, we need never again say, “how could they go and do such a thing? I really thought I knew them better than that!“

But we already knew that, didn’t we? Lets, then, broaden our understanding of this here Doctrine here, shall we? We all know that the personal reality experienced by clarks is referred to as, the world of the Outsider. As a person who grew up and developed (their) personality in the worldview of the Outsider, clarks are creative and introspective, funny and hardworking. Because they live in the personal reality of the Outsider, clarks are subject to a seemingly endless cycle between (near-unrealistic) hope and soul-crushing despair (survival being an indication of an inner strength that, were it not expended on surviving what would seem an un-justified and un-necessary level of self-criticism-doubt-fear, would be, like, totally impressive). Thats simply the nature and character of the world as experienced by clarks, scotts and rogers have no picnic-of-a-life either. But today is about clarks.

So what is it about clarks that makes today’s post interesting? Well, to appreciate that, we first must understand the double bind that lies at the core of every clark, and that is: a) clarks maintain that the only path available to them is the intellect, the ‘knowing/learning’ of things and 2) they, (the clark), are Outside(r)[s] and c) there must be a reason for their being different.  (I sense that those Readers who are not clarks and/or those Readers whose secondary clarklike aspect is developed only to the degree necessary to find this theory interesting, but not developed enough to imagine the world of the Outsider (at least be able to imagine it without being forced into a reflex sympathy response), are beginning to drift off, so lets get to the point.)
The problem with being an Outsider (who is) trying to understand their way, ‘back to being a real person’, is that, ‘an Outsider’ is, by definition, unique. As in…. only one of a kind. If I am the only one of a kind, then how can I gain a perspective/understanding of the world that is anything more than what I already possess? If I’m ‘the only one of my kind’, then how can anyone tell me anything that genuinely applies to me? And, besides, if I spend my life looking for ‘the Answer’, then how can I know more than I (already) know?

see what I mean?

gots to cut this short. work calls. if there are any clarks (or, hell, scotts or rogers) who want to know what I believe the answer to this conundrum is, the answer is: identification  I’ll have to follow-up, later in the day to this tease-ending. tempus fugits, yo, tempus totally fugits

*

Contemporaneous Thankfully, as a clark, we’re secure enough in ourself (surely the only part of our existence to enjoy the benefit of self-confidence) to check the definition of the word. Wanted to add a note to the reprint above, you know, like an after-thought and loved the sound of the word. But…but! not correct in this context. oh well.

Now, damn it, we better go up there and read the reprint.

Who wants to bet we said whatever it is that we’re about to say about the confidence of a clark in their intellect…. hold on, be right back

They’ve got a point there. About clarks and identification. Should write an updated post on the challenge and benefit of learning to identify with others. (Hint: it’s possibly the only human interaction that lacks the mandatory assumption of (a) social debt.)

  • We can chose (and therefore decide) to identify with you
  • Unlike any other relationship* you need not provide consent (or even be aware of the new ‘relationship’)
  • One of the secret keys (and, arguably a cost) is that by identifying with another, we accept there is a (potential) relationship with others (who might identify with us)
  • And that, that last thing, is the ‘being part of’ made available to our people, ‘unique’ Outsiders

* because it is… for us on the identifying side of the equation

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »