a "theory of personality" that is useful and fun!

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

FAQ Page

Since the advent of the digital age, has there been anything more presumed-to-be-valuable than the FAQ page?

The topic of this Hub is use and misuse of FAQs. 

the Wakefield Doctrine FAQ:

Why the name "Wakefield Doctrine"?

While the 'theory of clarks, scotts and rogers' has been around since the early '80s, the term Wakefield Doctrine did not come into use until 2009. One of the early proponents of the Doctrine is emplaoyed as a health and human services professional, and at one meeting in 2009 the question was posed, 'what will it take to get this "persoanlity theory" out into the field'? The answer was , 'when it has a name that doesn't sound like it came out of a dorm room in during the 1970s'. Hence the name: the Wakefield Doctrine.

Hey! I thought FAQs were short, clever question/answers?

Obviously you thought wrong.

I have read your blog and all these hubs, and I get the idea. Sometimes I am what you call a roger , but then in other situations I am a scott . I guess your theory does not apply to me.

Actually what you describe is covered in the theory. We all have the 'elements' of all 3 personality types, what makes us a clark or a scott or a roger is a preponderance of one of the three. It is this 'preponderance' that describes the world that the individual is experiencing.

What?

The 3 ways of experiencing the world...clarks see the world with themselves as loners, scotts see the world as would a predatory, pack animal and rogers experience reality as a social, herd member type person. You never lose the potential of the other two, but the world itself reflects (your) dominant quality.

Oh kay...

The Wakefield Doctrine is quite simple. We experience (our individual) realities that rises from one of three basic premises (the last faq). All the 'personality theory' stuff we talk about is just describing what is the only reasonable behavior from a person in a situation, given these three premiseses.

How can I be sure that I have it right?!

You can't.....clark

But...

Would you care to phrase that in the form of a question? Here it is: if you use the descriptions of the 3 personality types and identify a person as one of the three, clark or scott or roger ...doesn't matter which. The 'secondary' descriptions of that person will be apparent to you...no interpretation no adjusting the personality type along an axis or a scale of any damn thing. Just:

• clarks will be other-worldly, preferring the inside of their heads to the reality in front of them
• scotts will be aggressive in any and all aspects of interpersonal exchange
• rogers will be friendly and social and exclusionary and they will gossip but they will comprise the majority of the people in any setting, social, academic, workplace
• once you spot a type, the rest will be easy
• which of the three you are will be a backwards function of your learning this (and that concept: "backwards functionality "? you guessed it! another hub entirely)