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

Consider today’s post as a Essay Question. We have a sense of the question that serves as the raison d’être of our little pop-quiz, unfortunately we do not, at this writing, quite remember the actual, sensible Answer.

So, in a sense, the Reader is the teacher, this grey Monday morning.

(Hint and encouragement: It was realized at the near-beginning of this blog that two types of Readers would frequent our little corner of the blogosphere. clarks, scotts-with-a-strong-secondary-clarklike-aspect and rogers-with-a-strong-secondary-clarklike-aspect. We used to say that if you came here more than one-and-a-half times then, if your predominant worldview wasn’t that of the Outsider, your secondary aspect was totally that of a clark.)

The reason is not important. Even as we typed our little encouragement, we remembered that, following Mimi’s comment last week, we resolved to discuss secondary and tertiary aspects, their character and nature in the practical application of the Wakefield Doctrine.

However, sometime between now and then… (oh, man! ‘between now and then’ it’s a lead-pipe cinch that among the clarks (and those cursed with a strong secondary clark) there was a sudden thrill, the rippling of the abdominals at the thought that we’d go examine ’em, the implications of that little expression.) But, sorry, today’s the theme is set.

What is the greatest weakness of each of the predominant worldviews?

This is Open Book. There is a time limit. The time limit is the measure of your determination*.

Remember:

• the Wakefield Doctrine is for you, not them
• you cannot get the Doctrine wrong (any more than you can ‘get’ the relationships in your life ‘wrong’)
• we all have the potential to relate to the world around us and the people who make it up as do all three
• the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine are fun for everyone (i.e. there is absolutely no applying the perspective of the Doctrine to others with the intent to laugh, at least not without the un-coerced participation of the other (if’n they’re in the room with us, of course lol).

Pick up your Number 2 pencils.

• Remember! Compare and Contrast

Start

In keeping with our own barely-repressed, highly redacted, if not edited memories of classes during tests, we will make comments to no one in particular, engage in short conversation-sounding interaction with some and generally be distracting.

There will be blatant hints.

clarks (thinking Lizzie and Cynthia (neé Cyndi)) not only ‘got’ the Doctrine, they immediately began to extrapolate the principles>

Hint(s): What is the opposite of a strength? How does the individual relate themselves to that opposite. What action might/might not be effective? How would one feel, forced to accept it? What’s a predominant worldview to think? What’s the greatest existential threat perceived by the three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine?

* ‘determination’ we do not mean (your) determination to be right, to get the Right Answer** It simply offers a slightly objective measure of where you are in the learning process and, by that, meant to give us a sense of (or if) where we need to focus our attention

** ok, rogers get a little leeway in this regard but their Answers must be coherent to a set of standards available to any of the others engaging in today’s exercise

The post Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “where exactly is it written that a pop-quiz on a Monday morning is ‘unfair’? first appeared on the Wakefield Doctrine.