Thought about quadra Ts

[somavision]

Alpha NT: What could work?
Beta ST: Making it work
Gamma NT: Seeing how things that do work, could be used most effectively.
Delta ST: Making best use of what has been shown to work effectively.

Apologies if this is either nonsensical, or so obvious that it's been raised a million times.

[somavision]

It makes sense to me.

Ah good, I'm trying to be more analytical in my thinking about socionics.

[Absurd]

Makes sense to me as well.

[Logos]

Alpha NT: What could work?
Beta ST: Making it work
Gamma NT: Seeing how things that do work, could be used most effectively.
Delta ST: Making best use of what has been shown to work effectively.

Apologies if this is either nonsensical, or so obvious that it's been raised a million times.

If you wanted it to be more parallel in structure:

Alpha NT: What could work?
Beta ST: What does work?
Gamma NT: What works best?
Delta ST: What has worked?

[Azeroffs]

If you wanted it to be more parallel in structure:

Alpha NT: Would could work?
Beta ST: What does work?
Gamma NT: What works best?
Delta ST: What has worked?

I like this, but I'd change gamma and delta to "What would work best?" and "What has worked best?" respectively.

[Logos]

I like this, but I'd change gamma and delta to "What would work best?" and "What has worked best?" respectively.

I prefer "What works best?" for Gamma as it conveys a more dynamic sense of work. Gamma opts for dimension of work that is less speculative (i.e., would) for a method that simply "works best." While for Delta "What has worked?" conveys the conservative sense of preservation through the past tense. Deltas are usually less concerned about what has worked best, but what has worked at all, attaining a sufficient level of work.

[WVBRY]

If you wanted it to be more parallel in structure:

Alpha NT: Would could work?
Beta ST: What does work?
Gamma NT: What works best?
Delta ST: What has worked?

You alpha, you make it seem like all the quadras are asking questions. The original formulation was better for the last three quadras.

[Logos]

You alpha, you make it seem like all the quadras are asking questions. The original formulation was better for the last three quadras.

Who doesn't ask questions? As I said, I adjusted it to create a more parallel structure.

[WVBRY]

Who doesn't ask questions? As I said, I adjusted it to create a more parallel structure.

Everyone asks questions but in this conext it seems like beta sts woeld just do what works rather than ask what does, mainly because they already know what works.

And what do you mean by "a more parrallel structure"?

[silverchris9]

You alpha, you make it seem like all the quadras are asking questions. The original formulation was better for the last three quadras.

So perhaps:

Alpha: What could work?
Beta: (I'll) make it work (designers ~Tim Gunn)
Gamma: (I'll) make it work better
Delta: "If it ain't broke..."

OR "Well, since that works already" OR "Whatever works." OR "Since we know this works..." OR "What worked before?"

I'm sorry, I don't have a good one for delta that's nice a parallel.

[Logos]

Everyone asks questions but in this conext it seems like beta sts woeld just do what works rather than ask what does, mainly because they already know what works.

I am not implying that they all spend time asking questions. An SLE, for example, would not be spending too much time pondering "what does work?" but it will be the question they will try to address through what they do.

And what do you mean by "a more parrallel structure"?

How it is formatted. Each one was constructed using the interrogative, three words, and a conjugation of "work." And each conveys in their simplicity three different approaches to the matter of work.

[Aiss]

The original list has an advantage in pointing out a significant difference between democratic and aristocratic thinkers - ST and NT - that is, NTs asking or searching for solution, STs jumping to its application. (Stereotypically, as all talk of quadra progression comes down to that.) So, to make it more symmetrical for orderly folks who complain:

Alpha NT: What could work?
Beta ST: Making it work.
Gamma NT: What would work best?
Delta ST: Making best use of what has been shown to work effectively.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[silverchris9]

My try:

Alpha NT: I need to determine something that will work.
Beta ST: I need to determine the thing that will work.
Gamma NT: I need to find the thing that will work.
Delta ST: I need to find something that will work.

(more correct was to say "determine ... would" instead of "will" and "what" instead of "the thing", but like I put it is satisfactory I think and it lets the reader focus on determine vs find and something vs the thing)

That's actually not bad, imo.

[redbaron]

Alpha NT: What could work?
Beta ST: Making it work.
Gamma NT: What would work best?
Delta ST: Making best use of what has been shown to work effectively.

these are my favorite because I like how the NTs are questions and the STs aren't.

[717495]

My try:

Alpha NT: I need to determine something that will work.
Beta ST: I need to determine the thing that will work.
Gamma NT: I need to find the thing that will work.
Delta ST: I need to find something that will work.

(more correct was to say "determine ... would" instead of "will" and "what" instead of "the thing", but like I put it is satisfactory I think and it lets the reader focus on determine vs find and something vs the thing)

Hey I don't really follow your Socionics, but wouldn't the decisive quadras be "something" and judicious be "the thing." Usually decisives will settle on just anything faster so long as it works, so they can move on, where as judicious will spend more time to get it right, and maybe never find the truly right thing. Just my impression of these terms.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[717495]

No I can't acknowledge something that doesn't make sense. It's a little hard for me, some people are better at it.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request