Millimetres and the Mind: Measuring a Royal Pain

[spider]

I am 73 years old, schooled in Imperial units obviously, and am quite uncomfortable expressing anything in metric but am resigned to the fact that Metric makes sense and will ultimately prevail as it should.

A couple of years ago I asked my 3 grandchildren how far they had to walk to school, the answer was half a mile. These kids worked everyday at school in metric and understood the system but lived their real lives in Imperial with the exception of the weather.

 

[BobBob]

Sure, but this is because they are surrounded by older people who still use imperial measures in everyday language for historical reasons.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I don't think there's anything wrong with using Imperial measurements in casual conversation -- it doesn't devalue or discredit or use of the Metric system officially any more than me saying something is "four car-lengths away", "as big as two football fields" or "twice the height of the CN Tower." It's just a kind of slang.

I'm glad we adopted the Metric System as a country, though. Check out this map of countries that have not:

 

[Hipster Duck]

I am 73 years old, schooled in Imperial units obviously, and am quite uncomfortable expressing anything in metric but am resigned to the fact that Metric makes sense and will ultimately prevail as it should.

A couple of years ago I asked my 3 grandchildren how far they had to walk to school, the answer was half a mile. These kids worked everyday at school in metric and understood the system but lived their real lives in Imperial with the exception of the weather.

"Eight hundred meters" is quite a mouthful, so I don't fault your grandkids for saying half a mile. If imperial has its benefits, it's that it's more accessible both in speech (mile, foot, pound, etc. are one syllable), and that its base units are a little more familiar and human-scaled. For example, 6 feet is a good indicator for a reasonably tall man, whereas only a fraction of men ever grow to 2 meters in height. Similarly a small woman can easily weigh 100 lbs while a relatively sturdy guy can weigh 200 lbs and many adults can say that they weigh somewhere in between. Meanwhile, 50 kg is a bit more than most short women would be willing to admit they weight, and beyond 100 kg most people are obese. Losing 10 kg on a diet doesn't have quite the same ring as 20 lbs.

One of the reasons why I think celsius caught on both formally and informally is that the temperature at which water freezes is so readily apparent to Canadians. Even senior citizens who were in adulthood before metricization seem to have gladly adopted celsisus in regular speech. This is the one area where imperial units suffer from metric's problem of being just outside familiar boundaries: 100 F is a temperature Canadians only experience once every couple of years on a scorching summer day, and 0 F, while experienced at least yearly in Toronto, is downright frigid.

 

[golodhendil]

"Eight hundred meters" is quite a mouthful, so I don't fault your grandkids for saying half a mile. If imperial has its benefits, it's that it's more accessible both in speech (mile, foot, pound, etc. are one syllable), and that its base units are a little more familiar and human-scaled. For example, 6 feet is a good indicator for a reasonably tall man, whereas only a fraction of men ever grow to 2 meters in height. Similarly a small woman can easily weigh 100 lbs while a relatively sturdy guy can weigh 200 lbs and many adults can say that they weigh somewhere in between. Meanwhile, 50 kg is a bit more than most short women would be willing to admit they weight, and beyond 100 kg most people are obese. Losing 10 kg on a diet doesn't have quite the same ring as 20 lbs.

Again with this whole "easier to say" and familiarity nonsense. Something is as easy to say as we are used to saying it. Since it's almost certain that those kids' "half a mile" is an approximation, it is just as easy to say "half a km / half a kilo" or "one km", and certainly easier to say than "550 yard" or "0.6 miles". Similarly, that's nothing that makes "40" or "80" any more difficult to say than "50" or "100", and if you insist, I would argue that it's easier to say "I weigh 60 kg" than "I weigh 130 pounds" (there, 4 syllables vs 5-7, if you're into counting syllables). And for height, I fail to see how saying "160 (one sixty)" or "170" is any more difficult than saying "five-foot-three" or "five-foot-seven", or even "five-foot-five" if you have to round.

One of the reasons why I think celsius caught on both formally and informally is that the temperature at which water freezes is so readily apparent to Canadians. Even senior citizens who were in adulthood before metricization seem to have gladly adopted celsisus in regular speech. This is the one area where imperial units suffer from metric's problem of being just outside familiar boundaries: 100 F is a temperature Canadians only experience once every couple of years on a scorching summer day, and 0 F, while experienced at least yearly in Toronto, is downright frigid.

Guess what, Americans use the same argument you're using to say it's "so much easier/more familiar" to say it's a 60/70-degree day rather than 15 or 20, which is, of course, nonsense.

If using the metric system in everyday life is any less intuitive or easy as using imperial or any of the other traditional systems, then the minds and mouths of Europeans and Asians who grew up using the metric system must be utterly convoluted and jumbled.

 

[Hipster Duck]

Guess what, Americans use the same argument you're using to say it's "so much easier/more familiar" to say it's a 60/70-degree day rather than 15 or 20, which is, of course, nonsense.

Guess what, Americans never metricized. They are probably not likely to make a choice if they haven't been exposed to two systems like Canadians have.

If using the metric system in everyday life is any less intuitive or easy as using imperial or any of the other traditional systems, then the minds and mouths of Europeans and Asians who grew up using the metric system must be utterly convoluted and jumbled.

Again, those countries never experienced dual systems so they will not make informal choices on which system to use in what situation.

 

[golodhendil]

Guess what, Americans never metricized. They are probably not likely to make a choice if they haven't been exposed to two systems like Canadians have.

The Americans I am talking about here are scientists who use the metric system exclusively for 1/2 to 2/3 of everyday, so they have most certainly been exposed to the metric system and describing temp in C. You can then argue that if everyone else in the wider society doesn't use it why should they, but of course they also don't do it during conversations among scientists ourselves who are clearly metric-literate. Perhaps you'll then say they were brought up using the imperial system, which brings us back to my original point, that it's all a matter of what people are used to and nothing about the inherent "intuitiveness" or "ease-of-use" or "human-scaledness" of the systems.

Again, those countries never experienced dual systems so they will not make informal choices on which system to use in what situation.

Your point was that the imperial system is inherently easier to use and more intuitive, so the fact that those countries use the metric system now means that their peoples' minds and mouths must be operating less-than-optimally in order to make use of the metric system (I wasn't saying anything about choice). Besides, unless those countries made a complete change overnight, switching instantaneously and completely from imperial/traditional to metric at 12:00 am on a certain day, then they were bound to have a period of overlap. In fact, places like Japan and Hong Kong had/have a period when they simultaneously used three systems of traditional Japanese/Chinese, imperial, and metric. Granted, perhaps our minds are already jumbled by our usage of multiple writing systems (Japanese) or languages (HKers) on a daily basis.

 

[Hipster Duck]

The Americans I am talking about here are scientists who use the metric system exclusively for 1/2 to 2/3 of everyday, so they have most certainly been exposed to the metric system and describing temp in C. You can then argue that if everyone else in the wider society doesn't use it why should they, but of course they also don't do it during conversations among scientists ourselves who are clearly metric-literate. Perhaps you'll then say they were brought up using the imperial system, which brings us back to my original point, that it's all a matter of what people are used to and nothing about the inherent "intuitiveness" or "ease-of-use" or "human-scaledness" of the systems.

Why would they use metric if colloquial/familial and non academic formal use is all imperial? I live in the US, too, and I am more well-versed in metric (being originally Canadian) than imperial measurements, but if I made idle chit chat to the cashier and said "boy, it sure is hot today. Gotta hate that 32 degree smog" she would probably stare blankly at me.

Your point was that the imperial system is inherently easier to use and more intuitive

My point was that people schooled in two systems, will fall back on the one that is more intuitive for them to use based on their surroundings and what they can conceptualize, at least for everyday informal use.

so the fact that those countries use the metric system now means that their peoples' minds and mouths must be operating less-than-optimally in order to make use of the metric system (I wasn't saying anything about choice).

First of all, their minds aren't operating sub-optimally, because working with non-intuitive units doesn't impair your cognitive functions. Secondly, it is completely about the ability to choose. Americans don't have any exposure to metric and in Europe people don't have exposure to non-SI. This is the same as speaking a complicated language as your mother tongue. You might not perceive that Japanese has a crazy amount of honourifics or that German has insane verb conjugations, if you learned how to speak it from the time that you were a toddler you will be fluent and won't consider its inherent difficulties.

I should mention that I'm a fan of metric, fluent in metric and use it everywhere possible. I cannot imagine converting between units in imperial, and I shake my head at how Americans were able to build nuclear bombs and the Hoover dam with feet and inch measurements and the slide rule. I dock marks off the students I teach when they don't use SI in a paper.

Still, I've always wondered why a country like Canada which has had full exposure to metric in all public schools since the late 1970s (so parents of children currently learning metric learned metric themselves) has this bizarre smorgasbord of metric and imperial measurements. Why is it that ten year olds on the schoolyard know their weight in pounds while octogenarians who were in their late forties when Trudeau unveiled metricization talk about the weather in degrees C? If you're not doing scientific calculations or converting between units; if you're merely just using measurements for everyday informal use, you are bound to pick the one that is the most intuitive, whether that is metric or imperial.

 

[waterloowarrior]

Other countries had different types of measurement before metric was introduced... now 100-200 years later they are not used anymore. Give it time (although as long as the US still uses imperial things will be slow to change)

 

[golodhendil]

Why would they use metric if colloquial/familial and non academic formal use is all imperial? I live in the US, too, and I am more well-versed in metric (being originally Canadian) than imperial measurements, but if I made idle chit chat to the cashier and said "boy, it sure is hot today. Gotta hate that 32 degree smog" she would probably stare blankly at me.

Of course, when I am just talking to people on the street or cashiers, I will only talk in terms that they understand. Just like how I have to force myself to say "soda" because their stares will be equally blank when I say "pop". But so far when I talk to my colleagues, I still insist on using metric even in casual conversation and they can do the conversion. But that's just me, and perhaps I will give up sooner or later in frustration.

My point was that people schooled in two systems, will fall back on the one that is more intuitive for them to use based on their surroundings and what they can conceptualize, at least for everyday informal use.

Fair enough.

First of all, their minds aren't operating sub-optimally, because working with non-intuitive units doesn't impair your cognitive functions. Secondly, it is completely about the ability to choose. Americans don't have any exposure to metric and in Europe people don't have exposure to non-SI. This is the same as speaking a complicated language as your mother tongue. You might not perceive that Japanese has a crazy amount of honourifics or that German has insane verb conjugations, if you learned how to speak it from the time that you were a toddler you will be fluent and won't consider its inherent difficulties.

The jumbled-mind thing was a joke, because I obviously don't think it is true. In any case, the Japan and HK examples were simply to point out that there are countries that were/are also undergoing the non-metric to metric transition and have multiple systems used simultaneously. Of course the people there are making their choices, I have not been denying that. My "I wasn't saying anything about choice" part was simply referring to the fact that my jumbled-mind joke had nothing to do with choice but the inherent nature of the systems.

I should mention that I'm a fan of metric, fluent in metric and use it everywhere possible. I cannot imagine converting between units in imperial, and I shake my head at how Americans were able to build nuclear bombs and the Hoover dam with feet and inch measurements and the slide rule. I dock marks off the students I teach when they don't use SI in a paper.

I am equally dumbfounded by the many ironies of American society. But with regards to all the technological feat, I am pretty sure it is because of a rigorous and exclusive application of the metric system in the scientific context. When they do slip up, you get multibillion dollar space probes crashing and burning and years of work flushed down the drain.

Still, I've always wondered why a country like Canada which has had full exposure to metric in all public schools since the late 1970s (so parents of children currently learning metric learned metric themselves) has this bizarre smorgasbord of metric and imperial measurements. Why is it that ten year olds on the schoolyard know their weight in pounds while octogenarians who were in their late forties when Trudeau unveiled metricization talk about the weather in degrees C? If you're not doing scientific calculations or converting between units; if you're merely just using measurements for everyday informal use, you are bound to pick the one that is the most intuitive, whether that is metric or imperial.

As waterloowarrior said, it will take time. Most other countries took well over half a century for a complete switch, and with such a stubborn but influential neighbour next to us, a couple of decades is nothing.