The scottian female and the scottian male. Ooh La La

Alright. Listen up people. Time for a scottian post. After all I am a scott. As you may or may not have heard, we at the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) have been “experimenting” with bringing out our other aspects in order to try to experience the reality of the other two.* Well we scotts have the most difficulty doing this because we feel there is no need to change. Why even bother?

Anyway, I was talking with the Progenitor Clark the other day. Rather than discuss me and my clark-like aspect he asked me what I experienced when I observed another scott. This was my answer:

Hmmm… where to begin. Speaking from the scottian female aspect (reacting to a scottian male) there is an energy. Of course there is no mistaking the eyes. Intense. Darting back and forth, taking everything in, all the while wearing a grin that can’t be ignored. Limits are tested through a simple “ping pong game-like” conversation. Does one pull back? Admittedly I have to say, again speaking for myself, I do not. I will push it as far as I can.

Then there is the physical push and pull (pun? scotts? Ya think??!!!). Personal space is tested. Case in point: there is a manager where I work who is the epitome of a scottian male. One day while I was standing at the cash register he came in behind me to grab the drop box. As he was doing so he asked me if I had a problem with personal space (ha ha yeah right). Of course my answer was a laughing no. He said he just wanted to make sure because some people do. “Not me” I piped up with a big smile.

There is an unmistakable energy. The “tail-twitching” of the scottian female is not initially seen physically or overtly. She is more mindful. Playful. But, as would be expected, then comes the body language. I should probably stop here.

I should clarify that the “game” does not happen with every scottian male/scottian female interaction to the same degree. There is obviously a degree of attraction.**

This is my personal experience running into scotts of the male persuasion. As my manager at work (mentioned above) put it, prefacing a joke, “I can be inappropriate with you.” And that statement pretty much sums up the scottian female/scottian male interaction.

Of course I can’t dismiss the sexual aspect of this duo. We are inclined to make sexual innuendos/analogies out of just about everything. Now tell me that you wouldn’t want to be in my shoes. Betcha can’t. You don’t want to discuss or admit that you even think about sex out loud (yeah you clarks and rogers). Come on, let’s hear it. Once a mutual understanding is established (unspoken or otherwise) scotts revel in the inconsequential ability to be sexual. Verbally or otherwise. Either way, it’s fucking fun being a scott. We live for the moment in a world of stimulus-response. So why not get the most out of it?

* remember we all have some of each. It is the predominate characteristics that make us a clark, a scott or a roger.

**attraction being not only of the physical nature. The mind/thoughts/characteristics of all scottian males are the same. A scott is a scott is a scott.

Posted in Psychology | Tagged , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Recruiting New Employees and Personality Types

Need help recruiting new employees? Well, it would help if you knew their personality types right off the bat. No need for second interviews or second guessing. Why you ask? Because you have the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) to guide you.

With an understanding of each type you will easily be able to ascertain whether or not an applicant is suitable for the position you are trying to fill. Not only that, but how he or she will interact with others. There are many different traits that comprise each type.

What each type has in common (in terms of identification) are the eyes. They are the primary identifying characteristics for each of the three types. It has been said that “the eyes are the window to the soul” allowing us to look into a person. At the same time we are able to look out from inside of the person as well. They allow one to understand another person’s perception of reality.

Perception is the fundamental key to the Wakefield Doctrine. Once we can see the world “through the eyes” of another, behavior becomes understandable. Equipped with this knowledge, as well as the primary perception of reality of each of the three, you can’t miss when it comes to discerning whether or not an interviewee is a viable candidate for the job.

Need someone who works hard, is creative, has an appetite for knowledge and helps others unselfishly (almost to a fault)? Then a clark is your go to guy/gal. Clarks think.

Need a high-energy team leader? Someone who is self-confident? Gotta be a scott. Scotts act.

How about a tireless cog in the wheel that maintains and organizes the value of the company over the value of the individual? None other than a roger. Rogers feel.

Perhaps a video might be insightful for exemplifying each of the three types.

When looking to identify a scott, the eyes of a scott are unmistakable. The scott is always on the look out for threats/food. The expression “steely gaze” is appropriate to a scott. There is an alertness, an attentiveness, a focus that is always on guard. Look (in the scene) at the difference in the eyes between the scott and the roger.

In the above movie scene Will knows what is important and his eyes never leave Stewart.
Stewart, on the other hand,  is “bobbing and weaving.” He knows he is outmatched. He knows that he is the prey in a predator/prey situation. And even though the ultimate outcome is never in doubt, rogers are not passive (at least not entirely). Let us consider the question: when we realize that we are being threatened, how do we respond?

Here the roger (Stewart) knows he is in trouble, so he goes to his strengths.
Though (as a roger) Stewart is a food group for the scottian Will, he puts up a fight the only way that makes sense. He tries to socialize. Thus the “herd” mentality of rogers. The cogs…

Listen to what he says: “I love you”

(Jesus Christ, he did say that.)

To all of you in human resources take a cruise through the Doctrine if you want an effective method of hiring.

To anyone who has always wanted to know why people say and do the things they do, the Doctrine has the answers you have been looking for. It’ll all make sense.

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Understanding Your Personality Type and Self-improvement

Funny thing (funny as in weird for a scott) in my last post. I was a frickin’ clark! And what’s scarier is that at the time I didn’t realize it until I had just about finished the post. You see, we at the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) have been doing an “experiment,” if you will, on harnessing our other 2 aspects. I know you know what I mean by “other 2”. WHAT??? You don’t? OK. I’ll explain it since obviously I have to for some of you who may not have been following the Doctrine. Which, by the way, is your loss. The Wakefield Doctrine is predicated upon the idea that everyone experiences the world/reality differently from one of from three overlapping but distinctive perspectives. Oh hell, I’m not gonna re-write the “About page.” Go over here and then come back. If you don’t, none of this post will make any sense to you.

OK. Now that we have that cleared up… This so-called experiment is all about self-improvement and understanding of others. The Doctrine is a tool which can be used to improve your life. Be open minded and you will discover new things about yourself and others that you never knew and apply them. And because the Doctrine is about 3 personality types (and remember, we all some of each) it enables you to be in the world of the other two. It is not about replacing what you already know about yourself but rather enhancing it. Check out this video out and you’ll understand why.

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Chatting on Facebook? With the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) you can determine which of the three personality types you are “talking” with

With the advent of so many social media sites available on the internet perhaps you may not have noticed that most of us live in a “virtual reality.” Facebook is probably the most heavily used social media. We get in touch with long-lost friends. We meet new ones. One of the more particular aspects of this is that we talk to/with people in a way that most likely would not occur in a non-virtual manner. That is to say we can “chat” with no consequences.

Equipped with the knowledge of the personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine you will be able to determine “who” you are communicating with. That is to say you can determine one’s personality type through “non-verbal” communication. And by doing so be aware of whether you are chatting and sharing things with a  clark or a scott or a roger.

Keeping in mind that we all have some aspects of each of the three personality types (clarks, scotts and rogers) what’s interesting about this is that it allows the other 2 types to come to the table in a way that would not normally be seen.

Clarks: they characteristically live in their heads (yeah, I know. Weird shit)
You are chatting with a clark if

  • you feel like you’re chatting with yourself
  • they seem to anticipate what you are about to say
  • the other person isn’t making sense to you, yet there is something… familiar about the strange
  • the person you are chatting with seems a bit tentative but starts to become more at ease. Once they seem to relax they relax faster than you were expecting

Scotts: characteristically the seemingly social ones, the “life of the party” but not specifically sole purpose of being social – go read this for an explanation.
You are chatting with a scott if

  • you feel the energy coming out of your screen is alive and bouncing all over, but long pauses (when they are trying to do the same thing with 3 other people)
  • the other person is very witty and gregarious, faster to assume familiarity
  • you feel like you’re the sole focus of the other person, but it seems like they totally drop the thread when they go to other conversations
  • this person is “pushing the envelope” so to speak. *Sexual innuendo is always just below the surface and with the slightest encouragement it totally springs out.

Rogers: characteristically associate with others like themselves. Herd mentality. You are chatting with a roger if

  • you are having a pleasant conversation.
  • they remember your interests from previous encounters
  • you feel like you are being tolerated, yet there is a sense of joining a group of people who have similar interests

Now that you know who’s at the end of the other keyboard you can a) run away, b) stay and play or c) relax comfortably where you are.

Hell you can even play mind games if you want to knowing which personality type the other person is. If so, you are most likely evoking your mischievous scottian aspect…

Damn if we scotts don’t love to have a good time. Consequences? No such thing for us. It’s great being a scott!! No work. All play.

Shit. I gotta go. I’m feeling way too clark-like.

*scottian video? Hell yes.

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

No more guessing (if you know the 3 personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine)

In a relationship? Trying to read his/her mind? Not sure where it’s going?

If you were aware of the personalities (clarks, scotts and rogers) there would be no second guessing. With an understanding of each characteristic type you will be able to fully understand why he/she is acting the way they are.

The Wakefield Doctrine will set you free! It is the characteristic behavior and perception of reality which makes you a clark, a scott or a roger. And though we all have some of each it is predominance of qualities of one over the other that constitutes individual behavior. And by understanding this behavior you will be able to see the world through the eyes of others.

  • clarks think
  • scotts act
  • rogers feel

Now that you know what the Doctrine can do for you, you don’t have to second guess yourself. If you’re in a relationship, for example, you don’t need to be a mind reader to understand what your partner is thinking.  Or what his/her intentions are. No more doubt. And though the result may not be what you wished for at least you are not blindly going forward without a road map. Yeah, that’s what the Wakefield Doctrine is. A road map. How fucking cool is that?

So take a spin around the worlds of the guy with his head in the sky, the one who is certain and chases little red balls and the historian. They can be found in the next town over. Then drive back here and tell me whether or not this is helping you deal with your relationship. Hell, try to tell me it hasn’t changed your life for the better. I know you won’t be able to.

Go on…. Start up the car. And don’t forget to wear your seatbelt. It may be a bumpy road at first, but don’t worry. You can’t break it. You’ll find your way around (with your trusty road map of course).

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

clarks, scotts and rogers. What’s with the names of the 3 personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine?

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarksscotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

The three  ways of perceiving the world are referred to as clarksscotts and rogers. We all begin life with the potential of all three types. At some point we become predominantly one.

The Wakefield Doctrine is based on the premise that  behavior is a response to  perception of the world. That we choose how to perceive the world means that we acquire a characteristic way of seeing the world which leads to characteristic behavior.

We become clarksscotts or rogers.

OK. Enough. Where the hell did these names come from? No type A, B and C. No 1, 2 or 3. Nope. Just clarks, scotts and rogers. (Jesus, if I have to type those names again….. )

So here’s the dirt. Frickin’ hysterical. You couldn’t make this shit up. But it’s absolutely, 100% true.

Once upon a time, in a land not very far from Clark’s house… there were three atypical college friends who engaged in many of the atypical activities of their day. They went to school; they played guitars at ear-splitting volumes in dorm rooms, and sneered derisively at those who objected; one drank too, too much; one not at all, but subsisted on Oreos and Coke. One became a Baptist with a capital ” B”. They played in rock bands, worked all sorts of jobs, one got married way too soon. They all wrestled with the Issues Of Their Day, with varying degrees of resolve and/or success.  And in spite of all the atypical ups and downs, they managed to form a very unique bond. And , to their surprise, the bond has lasted much longer than any one of them might have thought. Longer than some marriages, jobs, bands, or Baptist dogma. And after many hours of conversation about just about everything turned into years and decades of same, there came to be what was, and is now, referred to as … the Wakefield Doctrine.

Psychology and psychiatry texts  make constant reference to type A/B/C personalities and their interactions. We are somewhat along those same lines. For us, those references have evolved into our Wakefield Doctrine, which we have found to be much more palatable. To err may be human, but to create a categorization system that explains all of human behavior in a somewhat cryptic nutshell is absolutely divine. And, we have noticed along the way, a heck of a lot of fun. In an “improvisational academia” sort of way, we gleefully invent terms as we go along to describe conditions and situations that may not have existed previously. And yet, our system also works perfectly well when taken perfectly and totally seriously.

The basic premise is that there are three fundamental personality types; and much can be known and discovered about oneself ( and any other aspect of life ) by learning to identify your own basic type; how to identify the types of others; and then consider all the ramifications of the interactions. In short…this explains everything, but only from a point of view that holds human dynamics as the prime component. (from About the Wakefield Doctrine)

So there you have it. And what were the guys names? What??!! Whaddya mean you don’t know?? Oh, you’re just kidding (yeah right). All together now: clark, scott and roger! Very good.

Despite what may be a seemingly informal, unscientific reference to the 3 personality types that constitute the Wakefield Doctrine, the “system” is the same as any other personality type theory. You’ve got your 9 Eannegram Types (yes 9. count ’em) M.B.T.I.  (ok, how about 9 letters?) blah blah blah…

We here at the Doctrine find our categorizations more relatable, more palatable. Who wants to be refered to as a type FING (pun intended) when they can be a scott for example (the fun ones).

For our new readers I’ll give you a description of each type below. If you REALLY want to know the shit on each type I strongly recommend that you go directly to the Doctrine for a full explanation of each type  CLARKS   SCOTTS   ROGERS

clark is the person you have to make an effort to notice. In high school the clark is not clearly of one group or another. Not popular, not a jock, not a geek, not a hippie not one of those who seem to always be standing next to their cars in the student parking lot. In a workplace environment same thing happens, the clark is seen in any setting but is not a part of any of the normally identifiable groups. The thing about clarks is that they will be seen at one time or another in all of these groups! Not as a member, but apparently a part of whatever the particular situation is; clarks will be found in association with the ‘leader/alpha’ of whatever clique or social group. But only in a ‘situational’ sense, definitely not a member of that group.

scott is the person you can’t not notice. In high school the scott is the class clown or leading hoodlum or the captain of the sports team or the head cheerleader. The scott is popular, the entertainer, the joke teller. In a workplace environment they are also the leaders, but limited by the extent of organizational complexity, white collar or blue collar the scott will lead as a pack leader. Scotts are not good managers, they require a great deal of freedom and latitude. A scott might be a CEO or an owner, but only if it is ‘all his’. Truly an example of a ‘cult of personality’.

rogers are the masses. The people who make up the circle around a high school fight, the people who know what you did last weekend and tell the other people at the office. In a workplace environment rogers are the middle managers or that person in charge of supplies that has always been there and insists that they follow the rules (always refers to it as ‘I call this the bible’ lowercase).  Rogers are the members of the cheerleader’s squad, the football team. Rogers are the crowd, the mob, the congregation, anywhere there are people with a common interest, most of the members will be rogers. They form the social fabric in every society.

So, hopefully your curiosity is piqued. Look around the site, look around where ever you are and you will find them. Explore. Have fun.


Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

The modern day Enneagram 9 Personality Type Theory: The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

Welcome to the Theory of 3 Personality Types. You are reading this because you are interested in personality types and human behavior.

I’m sure that you are aware of the host of personality type theories littering the digital countryside like the MBTI, Enneagram 9, Type A and B, Big Five…

After you read today’s post you will see how clearly and undoubtedly it is that the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is an extremely valid, useful tool in understanding human behavior and personality types. Not only that but you will see that given today’s modern world that the Wakefield Doctrine is very helpful and useful as opposed to those other dust-covered subjective-based and observation-based theories.

But more to the point, the Wakefield Doctrine is, in fact, the modern-day version of the Enneagram 9 Theory of Personality.

The following excerpts are taken from an article titled “A Guide to Understanding Yourself and the People Around You” in Natural Society written by Margaret Cochran, Ph.D. The 9 Enneagram Types being the subject.

Have you ever looked at the people you know and work with and wondered why they behave the way they do? Why one person would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it, and another person would argue the importance of having a shirt at all? Why would yet another type of person be chronically over-committed, habitually complain about it and yet persist in cramming still more things into their already-overflowing calendar? What do these very different kinds of people want and how can they be reached? The answer to these questions can be found by using a 9-point system called the Enneagram.

I have to say right off of the bat, the title of the article alone is what caught my eye. I would’ve sworn I was reading the Doctrine!

Those are the questions that people have been striving to answer in order to understand the people around them. And the Wakefield Doctrine has the answer to all of them.

Rather than having to understand/combine 9 characteristic traits, the Wakefield Doctrine is predicated upon just three overlapping distinctive perspectives. It also proposes that our personalities are but a result of our perception, of our habitual responses to the world. The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that this characteristic perception of reality can be grouped into three distinct types, called for reasons stated elsewhere, clarks, scotts and rogers.

Oh yeah, can‘t forget this. The Doctrine will change your entire view of yourself and everyone around you. It is not only a tool for understanding human behavior but also gives you the ability to actually predict how a person will react in any given situation. How frickin’ cool is that?

Again, from the referenced article:

To determine your Enneagram type, you simply need to read the descriptions of each one and select the number that best describes you and your behavioral style.

It is important to understand, as you explore this system, that we each possess all of the nine types of Enneagram energy within us. However, there is one “home point” in which we spend the majority of our “psychological time.”

Damn that familiarity again. Exactly the same as the Doctrine. We all have some of each but it is the predominance of one over the other that determines which of the three we are and our respective  perceptions of reality.

For the purpose of this post we’ll concentrate on clarks, as they have the most Enneagram numbers.

Clarks are “Ones” according to the Enneagram. They are the perfectionists, the givers, the romantics, the observers, the doubters and the dreamers. After you read the following I’ll explain why the Enneagram is so unnecessarily confusing as opposed to the Doctrine which is very specific.

Let’s begin at the beginning with point one, “The Perfectionist.”

“Ones” have extremely high expectations and very specific ideas and ideals about what’s right and what’s not. And with such exacting standards, they are not at all shy about telling those around them that they are “doing it wrong.” Perfectionists have a powerful internal critic, and as hard as they can be on us it’s nothing compared to the demands they make of themselves.

Ones have wings of “Nine – The Mediator” and “Two – The Giver.” As a result, Ones want to help others do it right, and at the same time they may find they have difficulty letting go of unused objects, prioritizing tasks and knowing exactly who they are. The “heart point” of One is “Seven, The Dreamer,” so when they interact with someone or something that is important to them they want to have fun. The “stress point” of One is “Four – The Romantic,” so when a One is unhappy, they are intensely, dramatically and over the top unhappy.

Really??!! Why are there so many strings and connections to determine a person’s personality type? Totally unnecessary.

Now go to the Wakefield Doctrine and have a quick read about the clarks. One personality type with all of the above referenced characteristics.

Come on people! Why does there have to be a number which connects to a bunch of others? It’s ridiculous.

Now go read the pages about the scotts and rogers as well and you will have to come to the same conclusion.

We are predominantly one of three, not 4 of 9 or 2 of 9. And the exercise above proves it. The Wakefield Doctrine is, in fact, more plausible than the Enneagram. What??!!!! Yes, it’s true. The Wakefield Doctrine is the modern-day Enneagram 9 updated to the 21st century. If the creators of the Enneagram 9 were still here today they would, no doubt, change/simplify their theory.

So what the hell is wrong with all of you people who follow the Enneagram ? What the hell are you thinking? That you need to have letters and numbers to know what type of person you are?! I mean, seriously, that’s just a crock of shit. And I know that you know deep down inside that you’re more than that. So stop confusing yourselves for Christ’s sake and get with the program.

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

A Tour of the Three Personality Types of the Wakefield Doctrine

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

If this is your first visit to the Doctrine, we are happy to see some new faces. You will find this an interesting ‘place’ and in all likelihood you will like it here for one of three reasons:

1. There is no such thing as boring new information

2. There’s some kick-ass music videos and that AKH and this glenn guy they really seem alright.

3. There is a tradition here that goes back at least 35 years. How bad can it be?

So let’s get you some (nearly free) hats (for your damn heads) and show you around. Better yet, let’s get our rogers and our scotts to join us on this here tour. Yeah, we will show you the museum and the archives and we will show you how we have fun here. And be sure to remind us to tell you about Wakefield. That’s right! There is a real Wakefield! Saturday night is the night we drive through Wakefield in the real world during our Saturday Night Wakefield Doctrine Live Call-in. 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#)

Oh and look who just showed up. Here’s Ms. AKH. Just in time to welcome our new visitors and give them a tour around the Doctrine. (I hope she stays on her best behavior. No F-bombs and such)

OK everyone, please line up and let’s all try to stay together so no one misses anything. (This is gonna suck. I can’t believe I let Clark talk me into this. At least I don’t have to worry about losing all of the those fuckin’ rogers. Wish I could…) Before we begin, I’ll give you a bit of background. The Wakefield Doctrine has been established for 35 years and it is built upon the premise that everyone experiences the world/reality differently from one of three overlapping but distinctive perspectives. The three groups (clarks, scotts and rogers) represent three distinct characteristic perceptions of reality and are classified as such by their habitual  responses to the world. It is important to note that all people possess the characteristics of clarks, scotts and rogers but that it is the predominance of qualities from one (over the other two) that makes us who we are. No one is entirely clarklike or scottian or rogerian.

First I’d like to address the statement by Clark referring to myself and a certain glenn, that we “really seem alright” (being scotts that is. Fuck you Clark.) There seems to be an initial preconceived notion by new visitors that scotts are the least desirable of the three, thus causing most newbies to shy away from the notion that they may very well be predominately affiliated with the scotts as such. (fine with me. more prey) But we’ll get to that later (they have no idea what they’re missing. Poor bastards. They’ll see…) The truth is there is no good or bad about any of the three. It is simply a matter of their perceptions of the world and their characteristic responses.

So let’s start off by learning to understand the three personality types. (God help me I sound like a damn roger.) If you’ll refer to the 3 sections in the upper right-hand corner on the Doctrine home page (CLARKS  SCOTTS ROGERS). Here is where you will quickly be able to learn in-depth about each of the three. Perhaps you are already beginning to think of some of the people that you know as you peruse these sections. And that, in a nutshell, is the whole purpose of the Doctrine. That is to say, once you can differentiate the three you will find yourself saying “oh….so that’s why he acts the way he does. He’s such a (clark/scott/roger-take your pick).” That, folks, is the beauty of the Wakefield Doctrine.  You can finally understand and have the answer to the age-old question “why do people do the things they do?“ And further, by understanding this, you will actually be able to predict their behavior in any given situation. (We scotts love this. Gives us the edge. Perfect for hunting own our prey. Fuck yeah…) How cool is that? To finally understand everyone around you. Friends, family, spouses, bosses, ANYONE!! Thus lending itself as a useful and fun tool.

OK. Now let’s take a look at some of the more explanatory, if you will, posts. That is to say, the ones which our new readers can immediately relate to and gain more understanding of the three types.

don’t tell me, show me these types   (love this one)

look no further! we have the answer you are searching for, provided of course, that the question you have is: How I can understand the behavior of others and better understand myself through a system comprised of only three personality types?

the Wakefield Doctrine goes to the football game! 3 funny yet identifiable examples of the three personality types (clarks, scotts and rogers) of the Wakefield Doctrine attending a sports event. 

These are just a couple to get your feet wet. There are also some great hubs on hubpages  by the renowned Progenitor of this whole damn thing. Just search the Wakefield Doctrine in hubs and you will see all of them. Hell, we’re starting to show up everywhere (facebook, hubpages, stumbleupon, posterous, tumblr, google buzz, blogged, blogcatalog and scribd just to name a few).

And that concludes our tour for this evening.* We’ll be here for you 24/7 for your enjoyment, comments, questions, whatever. See you over there at the Wakefield Doctrine.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot about the videos! You’ll find them in every post. Nope, can’t have a post without a video. Your reward for reading.

Now if you’ll follow me into the drawing room I have a special guest as you’ve never seen him before.

*(Ah… Ian to calm me down inside. Thank God. I don’t know how much longer I could’ve gone on in a civilized manner. Fuck that. Was starting to crawl out of my frickin’ skin. Next time I’ll leave it up to Clark. Nah, that might be a little bit tricky for our newbies. Guess it’ll have to be a fuckin’ roger. Hmmmm. Not sure about that either. They’d probably fall asleep on him. No. We’ll leave it to the Progenitor Clark. Afterall, it is his baby.)
Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

If you’re a scott (the most outrageous and fun personality type of the three) you’ll leave a comment damnit. Come on. I dare you.

We know why you are reluctant to Comment

August 31, 2010 Byclarkscottroger

Ok people here’s the deal. If you want to read the entire post from the

Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)be my guest. Where’s the link? Right at the beginning up above there nimrod. In big blue letters. Geez… Or if you prefer I’ll give you the cliff notes version. (I gotta remember to start off nice).

We have quite a following here at the Doctrine. How do we know this? Because we can see you all visiting that’s why. So the big question: What the fuck is so hard about leaving a comment or two. You know you want to or you wouldn’t still be re-visiting. I mean what the hell?

Oh, you’re afraid you’ll sound stupid. Well here’s a thought Mr./Mrs/Ms. Stupid. Since you’ve been following us for so long now you must be at least somewhat comfortable with our theory. Aren’t you curious if you have decided correctly which of the three you are? Remember, we all have each of the three in us. It is the predominance of that determines who you are.

Look, when I first started reading the Doctrine and learning about the three types I thought I was a roger. After a few comments and questions I was enlightened to the fact that I was a scott. It all made sense. And let me tell you, scotts are the fuckin’ bomb. But I digress.

So come on. Stop agonizing over knowing “who” you are. If you’re not sure write a comment or question and we’ll be glad to oblige. And if, at this point, you feel comfortable with this personality type theory we’ve got going on then certainly it wouldn’t hurt to share you opinion.

Enough pleasantries. Get out a fuckin’ pen and piece of paper. Jot down all of the things you’d like to know more about or questions you have. Just do it. This isn’t a damn quiz.

We can even give you more insight to the clarks, scotts and rogers by having a gander at their stuff. Go ahead on over to the emotional one and that oh so eclectic thinker and come back and tell me who is a clark, who’s a scott (duh-you‘re reading the scotts blog ding-dong) and who is a roger. I could scream at you until my face turns blue. But these links will be surprisingly helpful in determining who’s who.

So get your asses over there, come back and let me know your findings. Shit, you might even qualify for a hat (for your damn head). We’re even working on t-shirts. How cool would that be? Now get along and come back. No, you don’t have to have “credentials.” Which brings me to another benefit of the Doctrine. But that’s another post entirely. Watch for it in the coming days. OK, off you go.

Oh yeah, one more thing. See those comments below? How difficult can it be? Shit you could probably top ‘em. So let’s get with the fucking program.

We want to hear from you is all. The good, the bad, the ugly (of course as it pertains to the Doctrine knuckleheads).  So just leave a frickin’ comment over at the Doctrine.


Comments

AKH says:

August 31, 2010 at 11:18 am

Welcome Germany! I see that you have just “arrived.” Let’s hear what you have to say. Really. What is it that keeps drawing you back here? We would love to hear a comment from you. Don’t be shy, just write what’s going through your head at the moment as you read the Wakefield Doctrine. Love it, hate it, just curious? By the way, how the heck did you find us?

AKH says:

August 31, 2010 at 11:49 am

Bonjour la France! Qu’est-ce qui arrive ? Joli vous voir de nouveau. Que haveth vous pour dire ?

AKH says:

August 31, 2010 at 11:55 am

Oh yeah, and we can’t forget about you Studley (the UK). We are happy to see that you are a somewhat regular reader too (no, of course we’re not spying on you – take a look on the right at “Live Feed”.) But regrettably we have yet to hear from you. What’s going on across the pond? And I promise Glenn won’t say anything obnoxious about the name Studley. He’s just being a typical in your face, let’s make a joke at someone else’s expense, scottian self. Right Glenn? Play nice.

Downspring#1 says:

August 31, 2010 at 9:01 pm

An example of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers from your timeshare days would/could be instructional. Perhaps begin with the resident scott(s).  (I find them easiest to identify.)

AKH says:

September 3, 2010 at 1:10 pm

(…now lets try to remember this right…)(…the note from AKH was totally explicit {no scott there, huh?} {{lol}}….anyway supposed  to move one of these to another spot…(damn! think this supposed to go here..)

(Better make it look on purpose!…)

If you would all help Ms AKH welcome a new Reader! Ms AKH? Take it from here…

I’m excited to announce that we have a new reader/follower to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of …) Let’s give CY a nice warm welcome! She is the newest self-proclaimed clark.
We look forward to hearing from you CY!



Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

don’t tell me, show me these types

May 1, 2010  By clarkscottroger  Comment

Still not sure? If this site is to be anything it will be a mirror and we all know what people do with mirrors.…they look.

They look to see if the mirror shows what they think it should show…
They look to see if what we think we are shows…

But before we get too metaphysical, even though a clark will avoid the image in the mirror and a scott will be startled and bark at it and a roger will stop and stay, let us agree to try to stay on topic.

For starters, we will find images of clarks, scotts and rogers from the real world. In the first case a video clip.

Following is an example of both a clark and a scott, acting characteristically. Can you tell which is which? (Hint: clark will show himself by his words, scott by his actions.)

This one little 2 minute video clip speaks volumes. If (after watching this clip), you still don’t know what we mean by: scottian and clarklike personalities, then this blog might be a bit beyond your reach. (Hey, there are tons of  ’tell me what kind of animal I would be!!‘ websites out there. Have fun).

In the above clip, the scottian personality may seem easy (and obvious) to understand, while it is almost irresistibly tempting to over-simplify; the useful information of this example is not about Nicky attacking the guy with the pen. Rather consider the clark in this clip and the relationship between the two characters.

(Deniro’s character) Ace says it all in the (voiceover) line, ‘While I was still trying to figure out why…Nicky hit him…’

The easy part: scotts react with action, usually in the form of overwhelming force. Clarks think, the character says it, he was still thinking and the threat had been eliminated. It is not about the clark being unable to act, it is about the perceptual bias.

Clarks think, scotts act, rogers feel.

The hard part: the relationship of the two characters here, there is an inter-dependency, symbiotic to use a rogerian phrase. One needs the other, one complements the other.

Perfect.

Now let us consider rogers: following is a clip from the movie ‘Wolf” that shows us an interaction between a scott and a roger:

So click on the  link below (Wolf- “I’m Gonna Get You, Stewart“) that will take you to a scene from the movie ‘Wolf’.   (Quick back story: Will (Jack Nicholson) is an established editor in a publishing house that is about to get sold and Stewart (James Spader) is a young, ambitious editor who convinces the owner of the company that the way of the future is to get rid of the old and let the young be in charge. (This is a classic scenario for conflict between roger and a scott).

(“All right, class, settle down. Scott get back in your seat, leave the food alone.”)  Besides showing the way a roger might (attempt) to defend himself from a scott, this video clip is a very good illustration of the eyes (of the scott).

When looking to identify a scott, the person’s eyes will do. The eyes (of a scott) are unmistakable. The scott (being a predator) is always ‘on the look out’ for threats/food.
The expression ‘steely gaze’ is appropriate to a scott. There is an alertness, an attentiveness, a focus that is always on guard. Look (in the scene) at the difference in the eyes between the scott and the roger.

In the above movie scene, Will knows what is important and his eyes never leave Stewart.
Stewart on the other hand  is ‘bobbing and weaving’, he knows he is outmatched. He knows he is the prey in a predator/prey situation. And even though the ultimate outcome is never in doubt, rogers are not passive. (At least not entirely). Lets us consider the question: when we realise that we are being threaten, how do we respond?
Here the roger (Stewart) knows he is in trouble, so he goes to his strengths.

Though, as a roger, Stewart is a food group for the scottian Will, he puts up a fight the only way that makes sense, he tries to socialize.

Listen to what he says:  ‘I love you’
(Jesus Christ, he did say that.) Because that is the world that the roger lives in, a world grounded in, frame in, established in : emotion.

At the same time watch Stewart’s  eyes, he knows he is in trouble and is desperate to find a way out.  You can see the calculation that is going on in his head as the situation leaves his control.

There is no fight in fight fo flight for Stewart. He will run if he can, but the best he can do is try to appeal to Will’s social side.
Good luck with that


clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: 1) to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three…but mostly one

Posted in Personality Types, Psychology, Relationships | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments