the Wakefield Doctrine

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

Open your pages to where we left off last week, please.

what?

Fine. Put your bookmarks into Page Wednesday.

Given we’ve hinted at a topic in our post title, lets go with:

With a proper understanding of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine you will be a position to know more about the other person than they know about themselves.

It’s true.

ok, not to get all dramatic (aka rogerian) but we just pulled ourselfs out of a shortcut to posting this post. aka RePrint post.

Don’t get us wrong, it was a good ‘un. And made sense (for the early years, that is), but, if the truth be told, more often than one would think, we write to learn and practice this here personality theory here.

So, how is it we can know another person better than they know themselves?

When you are engaged with:

• clark know that they will not tell you everything, as knowledge (and his slutty half-sister, information) is the only coin-of-the-realm they believe they have and, besides, revealing all about a person, place or thing invites scrutiny
• scotts they act with out (necessarily) thinking, rely on their instincts and often battle their prey drive; any inquiry should be brief, succinct and lead to action or actions, hopefully involving chasing and retrieving
• rogers words are nothing more than fricken coat hangers (mostly the cheap, dry-clean type with a non-slip cross piece, if you see the equivalency of anything close to a all-wood high quality hanger, like from a custom clothing shop, you have them at their most vulnerable. (Ain’t no time to indulge in R. King)

OK!

Tune in tomorrow when we talk: Creativity and three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine

*

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

(If we might continue?)

iii) The three predominant worldviews, aka personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine are:

1. 1. clarks (Outsider)
   2. scotts (Predator)
   3. rogers (Herd Member)

So there you go.

What? Define each. Give list of characteristics?

What do you think this is, the Oscar/Meyer ABC schedule?

Here is all you need to complete the picture: ‘The Three Personality Types of the Wakefield Doctrine’: it comes down to relationships, as in, ‘How do I relate myself to the world around me and the people who make it up’. (Hint: We said ‘relate ourselves to’ not ‘relate to’.) Critical point. Like we said, the Doctrine is about (a) relationship.

Second necessary part (for your successful assembly of our little personality types.) Wait. It’s already been provided above. ‘Outsider’? ‘Predator’? ‘Herd Member’?

(ed. Don’t feel bad. A lot of clarks do that. You know, be so excited and in such a hurry we neglect to read every single line of instruction, rather than only the ones that give the impression of ‘getting closer to the Answer’.)

Hate to get rogerian sounding on y’all,  but. “The Wakefield Doctrine is not an/the Answer. It is only a Suggestion”.

Suggestion massaged into a Proposition: Suppose everyone lives in a reality that is personal. Nothing weird or gigantic. No flying without planes or total self-acceptance in the here and now. Just personal, in a zone outwards from the mind, the body, the heart. In this zone, things are as the individual’s nature would have them be: a world where thought and reason combined to create belonging; action becomes love and acceptance conveys peace.

like that, ya know?

Fortunately for any New Readers two things happened once this blog saw the fluorescent/LED(ish) light of reality: a) the characteristics of the three personality types became self-perpetuating, to the extent that followers found ‘new’ examples of characteristics consistent with the Doctrine and 2) people found this thing useful, valuable and fun.

what more can we ask for?

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

ok, ok, we did promise to discuss, ever-so briefly, the concept of serendipitous insights into the personal realities inherent in the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine.

this will not be on the Final Exam for one very good reason.

…

if you haven’t found this thing of ours fascinating, fun, weird-but-you-know-kinda-true. and possibly even useful, you are no longer reading…

(lol. jokes on them. well, technically, the joke (or the necessary premise of said bon mot), does not exit for them what clicked away five minutes ago*)

New Readers!! Following is our statement of role:

Your Narrator, being a clark with a significant secondary scottian and weak tertiary rogerian aspect, is the Curator of these pages. That is the extent of it. The reason for this seemingly clumsy exhibition of humility is to be found in the ‘Eureka Moment’ of the Wakefield Doctrine. (Hint: found in the ‘About’ or one of the other Pages (as opposed to Posts).

The Eureka Moment is Number One!! on our ‘List of greatest insights into another’s personal reality’.

(Quick Note: sure, the Doctrine will, in the course of describing the characteristics of the three personality types, enable anyone to see examples (of them) in their own worlds. But, beyond that. there have been occasions when we simply get lucky, spot a situation and correctly infer what a person of a different predominant worldview  is experiencing as they are experiencing it. In other words, see further into their world than even the principles of the  Doctrine ordinarily permit.)

anyway… in no particular order**

• ‘Referential Authority’ in the world of the Herd Member, the ultimate exertion of will on their surroundings always involves referring to a commonly-held belief system/coda example: HR person says to new hire: “This folder contains the SOP of our operation, we call it ‘the Bible'”¹ Any religious leader-wannabe will always speak of higher authorities on… shall we say, ‘as a personal friend, confidant’
• ‘Lashing-Out’ again in the world of the Herd Member, this is an extremely effective (and efficacious) strategy to exert dominance in a Herd. It (the identification of and definition of this mechanism/tactic), is also the greatest gift the Wakefield Doctrine makes available to clarks. (Hint: It eliminates the damage of the reflexive thought “What could I have done to make my rogerian friend say such a thing?”)

ok,  out of time

Don’t forget!

The Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them.

*no, we wouldn’t be making fun of the creatively challenged. no way

** we did identify ourslefs as a clark, did we not? lol

1. you clarks out there know that no one, with the exception of the referenced HR person ever calls it that