Hey, a scott is talking!

Yeah, I’m talking to you… and thats Ms. AKH to you

Who the hell did you think it was?


Glad to see that we have some new followers.  (About frickin time!)
Happy to report that we’re on Posterous, Hub Pages, Stumble upon, Blogger, Facebook, Yahoo Contributor Associated Content, Tumblr and Twitter to name a few. And it should come as no surprise, (except to you clarks, who sometimes seem surprised that the damn sun rose, again),  that we’ve had a tremendous increase in readership here at the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers ).  I’d like to formally thank our new readers for hopping on board. To our numerous visitors: keep on coming. The light bulb will go off. Promise. And once you get the Doctrine I know that you’ll be quite pleasantly surprised at how truly useful it is.

Been figuring out “who/which of the three types” those people  around you are?  Makes sense now, doesn’t it?  Guess what? That’s the whole point of the Wakefield Doctrine. To better understand ourselves and those people in our lives around us, at home and work and school, you know, in life. A  new perception of reality. Kind of fun, eh?

All of the pleasantries aside, I still don’t understand why you people are so reluctant to leave a damn comment. Stop looking around. You know I’m talking to you. By now you certainly must have grasped at least some, if not all of the theory of the 3 personality types (clarks, scotts and rogers) of the Wakefield Doctrine or you wouldn’t be coming back.
Yeah I know, maybe you’re afraid of sounding like an idiot. The Doctrine takes pride in the fact that we do not judge. How the hell do you think I got here? It may be intimidating at first but get over it. You’re completely anonymous. We don’t need a real name for the submission of a comment. Yo clarks, you can do it from the safety of your closet. Rogers you’ll be safe in those little herd-group things that you call your circle-of-friends (as if, lol). And scotts? Well I’ll just say this –  you might hold back initially. Or not. Hell, you can scream at us if you want to. Afterall, it has been said of scotts: ”I scream, therefore I am.”

Wait a minute… You clarks and rogers  are scared of the frickin’ scotts aren’t you? Gimme a f***ing break… you’re anonymous, remember?
So get your asses over to the Wakefield Doctrine and leave us a comment or ask a question. Once you make that first “contact” you’ll be relieved from all of the stress that commenting has been bothering you with. After that it’s a walk in the park.

What?  Oh, yeah  this link here will take you to the wildly popular Post that ran in February.

!!  Call the Doctrine   Live-Phone Blog  !!

Now you can call the Doctrine and your Questions will be answered…from Wakefield!!  Fun!! Informative!!! You will be a better Person for it!

Saturday Nights 8:00 to 8:45 pm EST   Dial:  1-218-339-0422   Enter Passcode: 512103#

  1. Downspring#1 says:

    scotts “appear” to understand clarks but in actuality do not.  Not really.
    Yes, there is an affinity between clarks and scotts but it is more a recognition/acknowledgement of/by the clark to the scott
    as opposed to the scott to the clark.

    rogers are sometimes more genuine in their “I just don’t get it, but whatever” attitude towards clarks.

    It is continuous learning, the Wakefield Doctrine.  Understanding interpersonal relationships has the potential to reveal/teach us about ourselves and…..those scotts and rogers…..

  2. AKH says:

    I agree that there is a kinship between clarks and scotts. In terms of who acknowledges whom it is important to keep in mind the difference between the two. Clarks think, scotts act. Scotts are not necessarily prone to the acknowledgement of others. They are too focused on themselves.

    It has been my experience (on those Saturday night forays with 2 scotts and a clark) that if a clark is “stuck” between 2 or more scotts, the scotts tend to bring out the scottian side of the clarks. It is actually very amusing to watch.

  3. clarkscottrogerclarkscottroger says:

    …oh! there you are…saw the Comment come in, did not look over here in your corner first…lol

    I would suggest that scotts find clarks interesting simply because a) scotts don’t understand what we are , not food like a roger, not competition like another scott and b) you sense that it might not quite be safe to ignore us (or as much fun).

    The ‘more scottian‘ thing is some of what you suggest, but also adaptation, i.e. clarks will adapt to their surroundings which means, in the company of rogers, we would tend to become more rogerian.

    And, then of course there is the basic idea, we all have the three potentials, so a scott will cause not only a person’s scottian potential to resonate, but their rogerian and clarklike sides to respond.

  4. Downspring#1 says:

    All true statements sir.  The implication here is that clarks, being the chameleons of the 3, are the only ones to “resonate” to any degree.
    scotts are about dominance, rogers about assimilation and clarks evolution…..

This entry was posted in Personality Types, Psychology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s