Understanding Human Behavior | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 29, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

…now, where were we?

oh yeah…

But in the beginning, we spoke of the individual, (albeit mega-young lifeform), realizing their reality was that of (an) Outsider(clark), Predator(scott) or Herd Member(roger). And we meant it! (lol) Serially, we intended then, (and, at a certain level of discussion, now), to maintain that personal reality is real.

(Hey, on a personal note? We did not decide, at the age of five, to sign our Christmas cards to other family members with our full name because we were trying to be funny. (lol) We signed with our full name just to be on the safe side. To avoid scrutiny. (Honey, I can’t quite make out that first name, do we know a carl far.…)

A clark (or a scott or a roger) lives and, more importantly for today’s discussion, grows up in a real reality of one of three characteristic qualities. We didn’t find a ‘See and Say’ book titled ‘So You’re an Outsider!’ We adapted and compensated and developed the social strategies as best we could to survive in our worlds.

Fine.

But lets go back to the beginning of this line of…reasoning?!

We’re in a phase of transition in the ‘real’ world. (In the world of real estate, it being essentially self-employment, a business framework is necessary, usually a broker with all necessary services, admin primarly and….)

“Yes? The hand in the back. You have a question?”

“How long are you going to bore us? The 2:00 am commercial totally promised we would, ‘Learn the Principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, How to apply them. You know, like the guy in the record by those guys in the 90s? ‘We’ll talk right down to earth In a language that everybody here can easily understand.’ Come on, already! I want my Nineteen dollars and ninety-nine cents worth!”

(Yeah!! What the scott said!!) (And no Jack Nicholson quotes!!) (Except that one from that movie with Niles in it!) (Yeah… that one!)

Fine. No one really needs to hear the details of the context of our lesson.

Surely, if y’all have done your assigned reading, you will be hoping the vid will be on the Final Exam.

Sorry, It won’t be on the Final Exam if for no other reason than there is no Final Exam.

But, serially, what’s not to love about this (movie) interaction between a scott and a roger. Remember how we talk about the personality types (of this Doctrine thing) are simply manifestation of the individual’s relationship to the world around them and the people who make it up? Never mind the context here. (In the movie, ‘Wolf’, James Spader got Jack pushed aside at the publishing house they both worked at. and a girl’s in it too… or something)

Doctrine ProTip: Everything Rule* notwithstanding, of the three, rogers are the natural politicians. The maneuverization and influentializing (neither are ‘real’ words but…) within an established organization? They are possessed of a natural ‘ear’ for and their ability to socialize. Perfect,

Hokey Smoke!

We just noticed an inference to this discussion of scotts and rogers that a) provides a heck of an insight, and 2) being way beyond the scope of today’s post allows a graceful (and informative) exit.

What we started to say, that James (rogerian) character had out-maneuvered Jack’s character? That was quite accurate. But… but! what about Jack’s (scottian) character’s strategy. Being in the world of the Predator, he would, initially, be limited to the predator/prey wide-open Savannah approach to Problem Solving(lol). He would not be aware of the ways and avenues to exert his will, in a bureaucratic environment, that James’s character possessed ‘naturally’.

Lesson: When in a situation, say in business like our original theme proposed, one would be wise to reflect upon how the terrain looks to ‘the other two’. Using ourselfs as a starting point, that means asking ourselfs, ‘What does a scott see here (fill in the blank with scenaria from the workplace) how would a roger feel about (ditto on the POV).

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that I am quite able to experience the world around me (and the people who make it up) as do all and each of the three personality types:

the Outsider (clarks) creative, curious to a fault and insanely fearful of scrutiny
the Predator (scotts) decisive, powerful and totally lacking in the capacity to remain still; subjective reflection being total anathema
the Herd Member (rogers) organized, analytical and devoid of the capacity to not take everything (and everyone) personally

… enough for today.
*

* ‘Everyone does everything, at one time or another… aka there is nothing in human experience that is the exclusive domain of one of the three predominant worldviews. That said, the styles of one often is more aligned with the expectations society assigns…

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 21, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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 bloghop. The goal, (for participants), is to compile a list of ten people, places and things that have elicited the state of gratitude. It, (the list), can be historical, contemporaneous or, (don’t tell anyone), essentially fictional.

(Warning to New Participants: thinking that simply making up a list will insulate you from any emotional blowback on ‘making up a grat list’? Way riskier than you might imagine. So, go ahead, keep it simple, just type-down the stuff that made you think, ‘Whew! Glad that did/didn’t happen!” If it’s your first visit to the TToT and you start to falter and despair of completing your contribution, lets us know. We keep a pack of breeze-dried Grats just for the purpose of helping a new Participant.’

Our list, for this week at the crumbling precipice of Summer, is:

1) Una. A very young chodsky pes. Taken in her home country, the Czech Republic, before her impressive, Air-Miles intensive trip to here.

2) Phyllis (somewhere to the West Northwest of Una, a buncha miles.)

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) something, something

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop Six Pic of the Week: ‘And the Finalists Are…‘ by Anne McSommers

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop. Ya gotta read this one!: ‘Time Passing‘ by jenne

7) Current summer project: Figure out if it’s worth renting a combine for the front and side meadowland.

8) Fern Circles: Kinda hard to see in the photo. Every Summer there appears a depression in the middle of this patch of ferns. About this time, (in July) it appears and grows. The individual ferns are not broken or otherwise destroyed, just bent flat to the ground. And the eponymous cool thing is: a) it grows larger by the week and 2) takes on a spiral pattern. Hopefully we’ll find a way to get more meaningful photation going forward as the process continues.

9) new home office (the computer on the left) A much shorter trip to the office now.

10) Secret Rule 1.3

music vids

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

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 15, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

Had occasion to talk to a person about the Wakefield Doctrine this weekend. She was only familiar with the name and the three personality types. We were in a social situation, a number of other people we both knew were in the hall and so, naturally, the question came up, “What do you think so-and-so is? A clark or scott or roger”

[New Readers: a note on propriety. There is no basis for anyone to ‘assign’ a predominant worldview to a person. At least in a manner that suggests, ‘You are a clark/scott/roger because I said so.’ The Doctrine does not work that way. One can only come to decide their predominant worldview for themselves. That said, there is a case for discussing the (likely) personality types of others. Provided it is done tastefully, with a personal enjoyment and a smile. It’s all about using objective examples to aid in presenting how best to determine one’s predominant worldview.]

…which is: observe your target* and throw out the ‘no-fricken’ way’ of the three personality types. Now, you’re down to two. Hold the remaining two relationships side-by-each, compare and contrast. (See! Now only does the Doctrine provide a fun and productive way to decipher the behavior of the people in our daily lives, it explains some of the more aggravating minutia of early life, i.e. essay questions and tests in general. (Go! Doctrine!)

Anyway.Obviously reading as many posts as possible will provide one with examples of characteristic behavior of three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine.

But the simplest of all is to look at the person (or the self) and ask the question: “How does this person relate themselves to the world around them and the people who make it up? Are they thinking they are Outsiders, do they act like Predators or maybe they just feel everything is pretty much fine the way it’s always been, so what’s the ruckus?”

Pretty simple, isn’t it?

* or your ownself… this works on the observer provided one can set aside any preconceptions of self-as-seen-by-others. aka only a clark has the motivation and only a clark thinks it matters

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: personality types, psychology of personality, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 11, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

This is the Doctrine’s contribution to the Six Sentence Story bloghop.

Hosted by Denise there is but one rule: our stories, (inspired by the week’s prompt word), must be exactly (and only) six sentences in length.

Prompt word:

CONE

The attic apartment, in the mill district of a small city, was one of six in a building clad in asbestos shingles, the preferred building material at a time when worker health in exchange for durability was the sign of good business sense; the grad-student enjoyed his cluttered vocabulary when describing his new home to the handful of friends he claimed, usually rolling out Shakespeare-on-the-cheap by calling it his urban ayerie.

One particular Thursday morning in July things changed; deciding to take a professional day, (his current part-time occupation being: ‘Find a job until it’s time to become a real person’) to his credit, he took his job as seriously as a Tahitian adolescent sitting before a black flannel missionary telling him the path to salvation was intentionally uncomfortable.

The first hint of a good day was the wood-on-wood clap of the exterior door three flights down; moving through the three room apartment to check for hygiene boobytraps, he debated where to wait for his visitor; the living room was unfurnished, the bedroom screamed of a confidence he could only dream of… and settled for the kitchen, which made sense, as it had the only door out of the firetrap he called home.

The knock on the peeling-painted door, with characteristic impatience, pushed it open ushering in a greeting with the kind of teeth that provided the special effects to many a bachelor dream,

“Jesus Christ, it’s gotta be a hundred degrees in here, good thing I stopped to buy you breakfast.”

The grad school student watched as a young woman, wearing shorts and a wife-beater (a Maxfield Parrish silk-screened on what little remained of the front), a gift he’d bought her on a dare (to himself) after their first date, stepped into the room holding a single ice cream cone.

He didn’t stand a chance.

Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: Six Sentence Story, the Wakefield Doctrine, Understanding Human Behavior

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 8, 2024 By clarkscottroger

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

RePrint!

Original Content Here: (yeah, right), then RePrint (not a bad one, if we say so ourselfs).

Not that we actually read it, at least beyond the scan typical to our people. (Major Secret Flaw to the All-Thinking, All-Learning Outsiders (aka clarks): We’re in more of a hurry than we realize. Because, (if we may venture an opinion), we believe that once we learn the thing that everyone else (scotts, and rogers), were obviously taught during the one Lesson-of-Life we missed, we will become Real People. And so, we scan the world around us and the people who make it up. As quickly as possible.

The trouble/deficiency with/of this approach of scanning the world? We catch the contrasts before we can become aware of the similarities. If your strategy is to ‘Spot the Difference in These Two Drawings’ then all you are left with is a partial impression. (To employ the foreign language metaphor that is actually quite useful when learning the Wakefield Doctrine), Hint: New Readers! We mean this in all sincerity.

Consider that everything you think the other person is saying to you might, just might, be in a foreign language. Even if… no! especially if it sounds like they’re using the speaking language as you.

Wanna know why, despite how carefully you consider and then respond to a person and they, for some reason, react way differently than you were planning?

Their words are in the same glossary. They just gots different meanings in their respective personal realities of the Outsider (clarks), the Predator (scotts) or the Herd Member (rogers). Accept that simple premise. Consider the suggested different perspectives (of ‘the other two’) and you’ll be surprised at how much less tangled-up-in-stress you are.

ok, as promised:

on the other hand, there is something to be said for the stupid approach

July 8, 2010

Yes, I could publish a Post with only a subtitle and some aquisified¹ music videos.

But that would be cheating² and as we all know it is wrong³ to do that/this. So we won’t. But since we are on the subject of shortcuts as found in blogs of theories of personalities it would seem to beg the question⁴ which is a journalistic style of saying, hey fuck you I won the debate on the initial premise that I did not bring up and now, as the old joke goes, “we’re just haggling over price”.
Where was I? Shit! I forget…started doing the footnote thing which, which requires spending time to go and do some extra format thing so that the little number thingie shows up and then go back to the bottom of the page to write the footnotes⁵ which are the supposed punchline⁶. Damn, lost the thread.

When all else fails, get back to the reason for this blog: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts androgers)!
(…ok…I’m here….hellooo anyone around?….shit…don’t make me wake up the only imaginary character that is still around…Jimmy, of course! everyone else is off somewhere for the Summer Vacation).

Better now, back to our topic/theme/point-less Post.

What’s the deal with rogers? They always act so put upon. You know, you go up to one, ask for some help or (even) offer some help and what’s the first thing you get? Is it:
a) “why no I don’t mind giving you a hand”…
b) ” Hey! love to have the extra help on that, really appreciate it…” (or)
c) “What do you want? Can’t you see how busy I am? Man, you are really slowing me down, sure if you really, really need to lend a hand…wait you got that all wrong God…how did you get this far…this is the second time today this has happened to me…why does this always happen to me…everytime I go out of my way to help you people it is always the same thing, I have to do it all myself…I probably will have to do it all myself…yeah…thanks a lot.

Ok, Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day!!! After seeing the above multiple choice question in print⁷ it became immediately clear that one of the trickier ways to know the type you are either dealing with or are observing is the different way a person responds to the other two types. Which is the long way⁸ to say, “the roger cited above is responding to either a clark or a scott, which of the two is it?

….put down your pencils.
The correct answer is “D” a clark. (Of course the other person is a clark, if the roger in this example were interacting with a scott, response “C” would have been the metaphorical equivalent of reaching out, grabbing salt and pepper, sprinkling it on his own head.)

The more interesting question is why is that a characteristic of the clark/roger interaction as opposed to the scott/roger interaction. And we will save that for another day. Right now I have to come up with a few more, “Man! how do they come up with this shit”!! Too funny” footnotes, some pictures or images to do the Lead in with and finally try to frame the music videos in a manner that will elicit a Comment from you people.

So on with the music. First up is the original and the second is a cover (by Prince). (Tell me Prince does not have style! Not just the girl rhythm section, anyone would think of that, it’s the initial setup with the bass player sitting on a couch. That is the creativity that is the hallmarks of those wacky clarks.)

1 (ah-quiz-if-fied) to use with or without specific and/or appropriate permissions
2 (chi-ting) to take advantage of/utilize resources from unsuspected and/or surprised suppliers
3 (roar-awng) the complementational aspect to conventional and/or societal approval
4 The Latin phrase for “beg the question” is petitio principii, which means “assume the initial point.”
5 Footnotes are most often used as an alternative to long explanatory notes that can be distracting to readers. Most literary style guidelines (including the Modern Language Association and the American Psychological Association) (lol) recommend limited use of foot and endnotes. However, publishers often encourage note references in lieu of parenthetical references. Aside from use as a bibliographic element, footnotes are used for additional information or explanatory notes that might be too digressive for the main text…Yeah I so totally agree!!
6 The final part of a joke; the word, sentence, or exchange of sentences that is intended to be funny and provokes laughter from the listeners.
That was quite a build-up for such a puny punch line.
7 …as opposed to ‘on screen’ in turn as opposed to represented by fuckin, heisenbergian, non-locational specific, frickin electrons