CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Well it is already adopted by the technical fields, military, industry, and the school system. For two basic reasons
1.) Easier to use, easier to program, easy to read and understand.
2.) Is the world standard, and is demanded to be used by anything that wishes to be international.
Another thing is that it was decided by the supreme court that the states are the ones to decide if to switch... none have, although they can at their discretion.
But is it easy to pay for? No. Costs result in higher taxes, resulting in firing, resulting in selling your house for some money, resulting in spending the money for survival, resulting in selling your belongings, resulting in using all of it, resulting in not being able to afford food, resulting in starvation and sufferance, resulting in your body eating yourself inside out, going all the way up to your required organs, resulting in you losing them, but you can't survive without the primary organs, resulting in death. That is the order of the "metric system crisis".
Yep... one of the last three countries to not switch to SI, sad isn't it?
They/We were offered to be the 2nd country on it after France adopted it, but they/we declined due to
1.) 'Tradition'
2.) Expensive to switch at the time... with limited countries accepting it.
How ever they/we are on the way, Liters are used far more commonly than gallons (Thanks, humorously enough, mostly to soda companies only using metric for containers). Similar to the UK in the 60's and 50's, the school system uses it for educational use. Sadly the USA has had that happening for 3 decades now, in the school system. The military uses it and nothing else (except in non-professional occasions rarer).
And as I stated earlier, it is up to each individual state to adopt it on their own willing, because the USA is a federal government (Smaller sections that make up a whole) rather than a Unitary government (one section split into smaller sections) like the UK.
So when are you guys going to switch to Kelvin rather than Celsius? I find it more useful.
Aye, it is expensive to switch... But moreso for companies, not the government. Think of the number of jobs companies will have to add for the project?
No, I have more sense than imagination, but I have plenty of both.
I invented a system based upon multiples of twelve. It works very well for my cooking practices.
Ah, so the mathematical perfection that is the metric system should be ignored because you find it easier to cook using multiples of 12. Part of the beauty of the metric system is the easy conversion of decimals, so it could easily be adapted to this.
I have no preference; neither is particularly easier to deal with than the other, when you consider the time it takes to work out common denominators I.E. x/333.5 - x+2/453 = 6/7.
It is a far more recognized system used the world over. For international commerce or pursuits such as science it is already needed. Thus it seems rational to include it in other areas and there would be less need to convert and it eases any international process.
The metric system is clearly the way to go. While there will be significant pain during the conversion process, we can't wait! Every generation that is brought up on a system other than the metric system will find it difficult to change, but that too shall pass.
Let's do it now! And let's remove all of the duplicate work and confusion.
Well I say that the world should be one and the U.S. can help this cause by using the Metric System. And we should share disputes and other opinions with different perspectives.So if we get everything here (Earth) to be peaceful we can concentrate on space travel.(This is just my opinion.)
I would go with the metric system. Base tens are easier to than base twelves. Almost all other industrialized countries in the world use the metric system. I don't see why we shouldn't either.
The US is idiotic for continuing to use THEIR system. What is the point in converting the entire world to something only one single nation does? How about this time, USA, you jump on the band wagon with THE REST of the world and you will realize how beautiful and fulfilling life can really be with the metric system in place. :)
Yes, please. I've been living in the United States for years now and I still don't use the American system of measure anyways. I just don't understand why they have to make it so complicated. A base of ten is much easier, logical, and universal.
The metric system is much more simplified and easy than the US customary system, it would take a while to embed into the norm, but it would be a wise decision. Considering that the metric system is a series of tens, if we grew used to it we could easily make it regular and these ideas are ignoring the fact that the rest of the world uses the metric system. This makes it a smart economic decision as well, because it makes it easier to trade anything that needs specific measurements.
It's really not that hard to switch to the Metric system. Yes, people will be upset at first, but it isn't hard to learn. It will be easy to learn if you completely forget about the Customary System. The biggest thing is that people are worried about conversions. If you forget about the Customary system then you won't have to worry about converting. For example; you don't have to know that 5° Celsius is 41° Fahrenheit. I could go on but it seems pointless...
Just except for the fact that you didn't consider the price to change signs, measurements entirely, and it isn't low. Changing to the metric system is something I agree isn't hard, but it is definitely going to cost a lot for the government. Resulting in higher taxes, which nobody wants to pay, businesses start firing people, and it doesn't end well.
Americans must ask themselves: Do we like the King - or science?? If they say "science", then they are wrong, because they still use the King's system of measurement (Imperial), and refuse to adopt the scientific system that the rest of the planet is using. Well, except Liberia and [the Union of] Myanmar (formerly "Burma").
whom we fought a war to rid ourselves from - and we even changed the driving side of the carriage to have nothing to do with him!
Talking with an anti-metric American is like talking to an anti-Mac® snob - they think others should get like the rest of the planet ... and use Windows. To them, I [calmly] say "Why don't you get like the rest of the planet and use metric??" Although they say they hate metric, I explain why and how America is already using metric (SI):
America uses metric??
The USA already uses metric! When telling me "the metric system is CRAP", I tested a former colleague with some questions. His answers were the usual ones:Food Labels
Q: What size engine does your car have in it?
A: 2.4 (that's LITERS!)
Q: What about your motorcycle?
A: It's a 750 (that's cc - Cubic CENTIMETERS!)
Q: How much Carbs did you ingest yesterday?
A: 10 grams (that's GRAMS!)
Q: What is the typical dose of aspirin?
A: 100 mg (that's MilliGRAMS!)
Q: How far was that Walk for Cancer? (or any run/walk in the USA - Professional OR amateur)
A: 7k (KILOMETERS)
Q: Wow - that's a great stereo, Dude! What's the efficiency of that speaker?
A: "97 dB @ 1 watt at 1 meter" [Dude] (that's METER)
Q: How much Cocaine did they seize in the last drug raid?
A: "5 Kilos"! (that's KILOGRAMS!)
I asked him what temperature water begins to boil and he didn't know, but [incorrectly] guessed "195" (an engine thermostat). I have a hunch that he would have known (100) if he would have been used to metric, where water freezes at 0 and boils at 100.
Let's not forget that ALL Professional cameras are 35mm (MILLIMETERS)
Super-8 film? 8 MILLIMETERS
HI-8 tape? 8 MILLIMETERS
The tires on your car are: 205/75 R15 (205 is MILLIMETERS! the 75 is % and the 15 is inches)
That 9mm Pistol pistol [illegally] in your glove box? That's 9 MILLIMETERS
All US food content is in MILLIGRAMS
All USA prescriptions are in MILLIGRAMS
Wine is sold in LITERS
Mountaineer gear is all in mm (MILLIMETERS)
If you are a Mechanic, your micrometer is 1/millionth of a METER, not INCH. Also (mentioned above), ALL tire sizes in the USA use mm (millimeters) for the middle tire size.
Fabric is all sold in cc and square meters.
The dimensions of NiCad, NiMH, Alkaline and Lithium batteries are measured in millimeters. (Dimensions of SLA (Sealed Lead Acid) batteries are measured in inches.)
Oh, and let's not forget the biggest one: The big, baaaaaad US MILITARY is completely Metric. Go ahead - check it out - ask any Service person.
I just have to add: Look up the US definition of "Calorie" - you'll find that it's: "The quantity of thermal energy required to raise one gram of water 1°C at 15°C." That's GRAMS and Celsius.
Also, see the list [below] of metric/SI derivatives.
Do you have Super 8 Film other examples to add??
So you see - the USA uses the metric system! You now see many uses of the metric system in modern-day America. Now, let's all make the move to metric time and metric calendar!! Let's join the force to make it time for America to go Metric!
---> It is noteworthy to add that the USA signed a treaty - promising that they would be COMPLETELY metric by 1985. One of over 3,000 treaties that America signed, yet didn't live up to. Now, America is holding-up the WORLD with it's Imperial"feet & inches", while the rest of the planet is metric.
the treaty was the Metric Conversion Act of 1975, calling for voluntary conversion. (A 10-year deadline was included in the original bill, but the USA keeps amending it for themselves.)
Although the use of metric measurement standards in the United States has been authorized by law since 1866 (Act of July 28, 1866), this Nation today is the only industrially developed nation which has not established a national policy of committing itself and taking steps to facilitate conversion to the metric system.
It is also noteworthy to add: Americans changed the driving side of the coach (horse & buggy) to the LEFT side - to rebel against England's RIGHT-side driver. Funny - they didn't rebel against the king's unit of measure!!! (Fahrenheit - invented in 1714. Let's see - water freezes at 0 and boils at 100. Nooooooooo - water freezes at 32, and boils at 212 ... that's MUCH easier!) Lest we forget that FEET and INCHES was invented in 2575 BC, later updated in 1303. And lastly, BTU is British Thermal Units. (Metric is kilogram-calories or kilogram-meters) you may ask: "WHY do we use BRITISH thermal units in modern-day America?" Good question. Let me know when you find out. Although many people will ask "What IS a KGC (kilogram-calorie) or a KGM (kilogram-meter)??!" I usually reply: "What IS a BTU??" they can NEVER give me the proper definition (they have no CLUE!), so that's when I ask them "So WHY do you insist on using BTUs - rather than metric??"
1.) Tradition, many people are used to the system and know how to use it with enough efficiency to get a spacecraft to orbit mars. It is unneeded as the US does all it needs to do with the system already in place.
2.) Cost, It would cost lots of money to completely convert the US to metric, signs would have to be replaced, traffic systems converted to the new setup, numbers would have to be replaced on weather stations, kittens to be adopted, and also reeducating some of those who would need it.
3.) If the US tries hard enough, and stays on this system long enough, we just might convert the entire world to our system.
4.) If they switch, then the US loses to the FRENCH!
1: Tradition does not equal best. Slavery was a tradition, not a good one
2: Other nations have done this and not been bankrupted, it might even be an investment as you do not need to convert units in business or it may increase efficiency.
3: America is a hold-out, most countries i can think of converted AWAY from imperial.
Tradition is perpetuated through intellectual inertia and indoctrination. The same is true of religion. For example, the traditional way of making nails was for a blacksmith to pour the cast and then to hammer out the head and point, one nail at a time. This way was ridiculously inefficient; the most powerful nation in the world made its nails by hand. The invention of the assembly line and the division of labour famously sped up the process, the back of a twenty pound note will tell you as much, saying "The division of labour in pin manufacturing, and the great increase in the quantity of work that results". We British have thousands of years more tradition than you Americans, but we are not so averse to change.
It's larger, and has a bigger population; therefore costs more money to convert.
The larger population raises more tax income, which would cover the cost. Your argument is like declaring the maintenance of a U.S road network to be impossible.
Yes, but they can convert back.
That would be a ridiculous move. I can tell you that the metric system is far more convenient than the imperial in terms of mathematics and physics. 1 Newton = 1kg at a velocity of 1m/s. 1 kg = 1000g. 1 km= 1000m. 1 litre of water = 1kg. And so on and so forth. Celsius is superior to Fahrenheit, too.
If they switch, then the US loses to the FRENCH!
It is physically impossible to lose to the French.
It would be nearly impossible to make a good case for it.
Just playing devil's advocate here, because I'm bored and want a challenge.
With standardisation comes a lack of colour, in this case using nano/kilo/centi/mega etc. are merely extensions of a counting prefix system. They have no flair.
With the US Customary System you may ask for a jigger of water, a dram of oil, a hogshead of beer. The dry measures are equally interesting, as I may request a peck or a barrel of something.
Secondly, at least being familiar with these words helps in understanding some cultural conventions and colloquial language, for example demanding a pint, or hiding in a hogshead (I read an old book once where the protagonist hid in a hogshead to evade some people and I didn't really understand what that meant until I looked into it later).
Peter Piper picked 8.8L of pickled peppers,
8.8L of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked;
If Peter Piper picked 8.8L of pickled peppers,
Where's the 8.8L of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked?
Thirdly, how can we honestly call any system of measurement better than the other? Kids need to learn nano, micro, milli, centi, deci, deca, hecto, kilo, mega, etc. In the US system they learn teaspoon, tablespoon, ounce, cup, pint, quart, gallon, etc. In either case we rely upon ultimately arbitrary definitions of mass, fluids and lengths. In the CGS system, the units are defined relative to physical constants but the way in which we relate them is arbitrary, as for example there is no natural "second" only a quantity of time which feels sufficiently long to deem as that.
With standardisation comes a lack of colour... They have no flair.
That is a matter of opinion. I find production lines to be beautiful, as well as Perfectly arranged, identical pens. Aside from that, measurement and mathematics are not designed to be vivid realisations of human artistic genius; they are designed to be functional. Any progress towards this goal should in this context be lauded as a significant achievement.
Secondly, at least being familiar with these words helps in understanding some cultural conventions and colloquial language
England has used the metric system in education, engineering and a host of other practices for decades. We have none of us forgotten what a pint is (comprehend that beer is a significant part of our culture).
Peter Piper picked 8.8L of pickled peppers,
8.8L of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked;
If Peter Piper picked 8.8L of pickled peppers,
Where's the 8.8L of pickled peppers Peter Piper picked?
Humour aside, are you seriously suggesting that the maintenance of tongue-twisters is a legitimate reason not to adopt the metric system?
Thirdly, how can we honestly call any system of measurement better than the other?
Simple; the way each measurement corresponds to another (I am joined in this opinion by both of my mathematics teachers, who I daresay are smarter than either of us). For example, 1 litre of water weighs approximately 1kg, 1kg travelling at 1ms^-1^ is equal to one Newton of force, 10mm = 1cm, 100cm = 1m, 1000m = 1km. Note 10 to 1, 10 to 2 and 10 to 3 (powers). Thus 1 litre of water being thrown into the air with a velocity of 1ms^-1^ forward has roughly 1N of force associated with it. 1, 1/1, 1. Do slugs, pounds and feet work out so nicely?
Kids need to learn nano, micro, milli, centi, deci, deca, hecto, kilo, mega, etc.
But these can be applied to the measurement of anything, be it area, weight (or mass, as we understand it), distance etcetera (they all denote a power of 10). The Imperial system has a separate ratio for almost everything.
In the CGS system, the units are defined relative to physical constants but the way in which we relate them is arbitrary, as for example there is no natural "second" only a quantity of time which feels sufficiently long to deem as that.
Time is the same in the imperial system, so I don't see how this helps you. In fact, it seems that every measurement in the imperial system is arbitrary (a foot being the average length of a human foot, an inch being - apparently - about the length from the tip of your thumb to the first joint).
I hope that you will not bring cost and organisation into this. The Irish managed it for God's sake.
That is a matter of opinion. I find production lines to be beautiful, as well as Perfectly arranged, identical pens. Aside from that, measurement and mathematics are not designed to be vivid realisations of human artistic genius; they are designed to be functional. Any progress towards this goal should in this context be lauded as a significant achievement.
I'm surprised that you, someone who lauds the English language's ability to express ideas with creativity and pizazz, would support utilitarianism here.
England has used the metric system in education, engineering and a host of other practices for decades. We have none of us forgotten what a pint is (comprehend that beer is a significant part of our culture).
Do you know what a grain is? A hogshead? A jigger? There are many more.
These have fallen out of use.
Humour aside, are you seriously suggesting that the maintenance of tongue-twisters is a legitimate reason not to adopt the metric system?
No, merely that the US system has linguistic merit in addition to functionality.
Simple; the way each measurement corresponds to another (I am joined in this opinion by both of my mathematics teachers, who I daresay are smarter than either of us).
Are you telling me that you would find it daunting to learn a system which doesn't intuitively correspond to itself? I should think this could be an interesting challenge.
Do slugs, pounds and feet work out so nicely?
No, but isn't that just one more of life's little challenges?
The Imperial system has a separate ratio for almost everything.
True, but the metric system has a separate choice of constants for each base unit, because they don't exist except as convenience items to us. Metric merely conceals this arbitrariness with regular divisions but both are systems with units based on what seemed right as a measure. The regular divisions don't hide this.
Time is the same in the imperial system, so I don't see how this helps you.
I'm merely arguing that units are arbitrary. The only truly objective units are, apparently, Plank units since they descend from the universal constants in an objective manner that could be deduced anywhere else in the universe.
I hope that you will not bring cost and organisation into this. The Irish managed it for God's sake.
I almost wanted to, but realised it was a dumb argument, even for Devil's advocate.
I'm surprised that you, someone who lauds the English language's ability to express ideas with creativity and pizazz, would support utilitarianism here.
"I have found that all ugly things are made by those who strive to make something beautiful, and that all beautiful things are made by those who strive to make something useful".
-Oscar Wilde
Do you know what a grain is? A hogshead? A jigger? There are many more.
A hogshead is a large cask, but the others I neither know nor care to know. What is the point if I understand the metric system?
These have fallen out of use.
Would you measure something in cubits in defiance of these newfangled inches?
No, merely that the US system has linguistic merit in addition to functionality.
I think Newtons, Litres and Metres sound fine. And who doesn't like saying Nanosecond?
Are you telling me that you would find it daunting to learn a system which doesn't intuitively correspond to itself?
I'm saying that such a system is the product of a poorly thought out and poorly coordinated attempt to standardise measurement. The people who invented the Imperial system would have gladly dropped it in favour of the metric system; the latter is what they were aiming for.
No, but isn't that just one more of life's little challenges?
Let's not complicate things internationally for the sake of gratifying our need to prove our own intellectual superiority. Look at this. Two of the three countries not using the metric system are impoverished backwaters. Does this not make you feel a little... outnumbered, to say the least?
The regular divisions don't hide this.
Highlighting a "flaw" that is more severe in the system you are defending does nothing to help your argument.
I'm merely arguing that units are arbitrary.
Not at all. 1kg was conceived as the mass of 1l of water at 4 degrees Celsius, a metre was 1/10,000,000 of the distance from the north pole to the equator. Both of these are, on Earth, constants. As we are on Earth, it is entirely sufficient. You could just as easily argue that all of mathematics should be scrapped because you think one should actually be three. I do, however, oppose the decimalisation of angles; it is too late now.
A hogshead is a large cask, but the others I neither know nor care to know. What is the point if I understand the metric system?
I guess because huck would have trouble hiding in a kilo as opposed to a hogshead.
I mean, I simply enjoy these terms and I'm sure many others do.
Would you measure something in cubits in defiance of these newfangled inches?
Actually...
I prefer the apothecaries' system, which is old, compared to our modern weight system. So I guess the answer is, yes, I prefer older systems to newfangled ones, consarnit.
I think Newtons, Litres and Metres sound fine. And who doesn't like saying Nanosecond?
I think they're a little bland.
I'm saying that such a system is the product of a poorly thought out and poorly coordinated attempt to standardise measurement. The people who invented the Imperial system would have gladly dropped it in favour of the metric system; the latter is what they were aiming for.
Good point, but it can't be overstated that now we have a wonderfully eccentric system for it.
Let's not complicate things internationally for the sake of gratifying our need to prove our own intellectual superiority. Look at this. Two of the three countries not using the metric system are impoverished backwaters. Does this not make you feel a little... outnumbered, to say the least?
Maybe we're just visionaries who can't and won't conform with the dull masses? Imagine if everyone expected you to act normally because you're just about one in a million for intellect, would you conform?
Highlighting a "flaw" that is more severe in the system you are defending does nothing to help your argument.
I was merely pointing out that the US system doesn't pretend to not be arbitrary.
Not at all. 1kg was conceived as the mass of 1l of water at 4 degrees Celsius, a metre was 1/10,000,000 of the distance from the north pole to the equator. Both of these are, on Earth, constants. As we are on Earth, it is entirely sufficient. You could just as easily argue that all of mathematics should be scrapped because you think one should actually be three. I do, however, oppose the decimalisation of angles; it is too late now.
All arbitrary standards. For example, a kilogram could have been the mass of 1L of 27C Hydragyrum. A Metre could be the distance of 10^-10 the distance of the Earth to Sol (averaged out over a year at 1-day intervals). We chose something that felt appropriate to our senses (a kilo/litre of water feels weighty enough) and built off of that. It could just have easily been that a gram is the mass of a cubic millimeter of Plumbum at 27C, and a kilogram is one thousand times that mass.
I prefer the apothecaries' system, which is old, compared to our modern weight system. So I guess the answer is, yes, I prefer older systems to newfangled ones, consarnit.
No reason for an entire nation to use it.
I think they're a little bland.
I disagree.
Good point, but it can't be overstated that now we have a wonderfully eccentric system for it.
Yes, and the hot-air balloon is a novel way of flying. This does not preclude the use of jet aircraft.
Maybe we're just visionaries who can't and won't conform with the dull masses?
The dull masses didn't invent the metric system. It was invented by visionaries.
Imagine if everyone expected you to act normally because you're just about one in a million for intellect, would you conform?
I would die before I would conform with the common ruck! But the common ruck has so little understanding of mathematics as entirely precludes their use as a figurehead for an allegedly dull system of measurement.
I was merely pointing out that the US system doesn't pretend to not be arbitrary.
Alright, you may have the moral high ground, but that does not provide an artillery base.
a kilogram could have been the mass of 1L of 27C Hydragyrum... a gram is the mass of a cubic millimeter of Plumbum at 27C.
The trouble is that mercury and lead aren't so tasty as water.
We chose something that felt appropriate to our senses
We being the recipient, how could one of our most important intakes be deemed arbitrary?
Yes, and the hot-air balloon is a novel way of flying. This does not preclude the use of jet aircraft.
You might not be aware of this but in the US both are used alongside each other. So it's like using the Jet and Hot-air balloon in the same airport.
The dull masses didn't invent the metric system. It was invented by visionaries.
Well, I kinda set myself up for that one. But in compromise, I'll call them dull visionaries, because anyone could make a system that uses multiples of ten.
I would die before I would conform with the common ruck! But the common ruck has so little understanding of mathematics as entirely precludes their use as a figurehead for an allegedly dull system of measurement.
Well, in this argument you are one of them fighting for a popular system. A system popular with the "common ruck."
Alright, you may have the moral high ground, but that does not provide an artillery base.
If the metric system wanted some semblance of objectivity it would simply base itself on Planck units.
The trouble is that mercury and lead aren't so tasty as water.
I hear Plumbum(II) acetate is to die for.
However, the point is that water was an arbitrary standard.
We being the recipient, how could one of our most important intakes be deemed arbitrary?
Why not saline? Why not oxygen? Why not cellulose? Sucrose?
How about we base a Kilogram on the mass of a litre of Phenylalanine, at 27C?
But which would you use to travel transatlantically?
Myself or most people?
I would use US standards and just convert between it, out of spite.
Most people would learn metric when traveling.
If that were true then it would have been used first.
Sometimes the simplest solutions take longer to be found.
Since when has objectivity been a necessary thing? If you were so averse to the bland and boring then you would know that art comes from subjectivity.
You misunderstand. I want units that aren't so arbitrary, but I also want unit names that have colour to them.
As a solution, its density is inconsistent.
For humans not so much, all we want is a solution isotonic to blood. This means 9g NaCl to 1L H2O.
Not heavy enough to make a practical standard.
Obviously we pressurise it until it is liquid.
Seems a bit... random.
Fine, a specific polysaccharide.
Maybe nobody was willing to get close enough to molten sugar to make the measurements.
But candy makers were?
Seems odd that cooks would be more brave than scientists.
Water's easier to obtain pure. I see your point, but it seems a moot one, given that the origins of the kilogram are quite irrelevant.
It's relevant to the discussion to how arbitrary the mass of a kilogram is. How can you call a kilogram better than a US pound when, ignoring the fluff about sub and superunits, what actually constitutes both is entirely based on what felt weighty enough to a couple of presently dead people?
Why not simply divide the US pound by multiples of ten? Have something like the millipound, centipound, decipound, etc. Just rename the prefixes to something like "grain/dram/jigger" etc.
I would use US standards and just convert between it, out of spite.
I meant the jet or the balloon.
Sometimes the simplest solutions take longer to be found.
True.
I want units that aren't so arbitrary, but I also want unit names that have colour to them.
So your basic argument against the metric system is that its names are boring?
Obviously we pressurise it until it is liquid.
Ah yes, in the eighteenth century.
It's relevant to the discussion to how arbitrary the mass of a kilogram is. How can you call a kilogram better than a US pound when, ignoring the fluff about sub and superunits, what actually constitutes both is entirely based on what felt weighty enough to a couple of presently dead people?
The issue is not in the values, but how they relate to each other.
Why not simply divide the US pound by multiples of ten?
So your basic argument against the metric system is that its names are boring?
And that its measures are arbitrary.
The issue is not in the values, but how they relate to each other.
The issue is also about whether the US should adopt the metric way of unit associations. At best you can make the argument that the metric system has more convenient demarcation, since both are ultimately tied to arbitrary choices.
first off."slavery" wasn't a tradition.. how can you even compare that to math?
second..why should we change to suit your needs? maybe you should adapt to meet ours.
Third..America isn't a hold out.. we are an independent country..we don't need to fall to our knees to be like every other country..most o these country's have maybe 8 million people living there America has 8 million in some states..it would be a disaster to switch to the metric system.. they teach that system to us in school.. and frankly it sucks
The spacecraft to orbit mars thing was complete irony, it's about a craft that Crashed into mars due to the US customary system being used rather than the metric that the hardware required.
maybe we should switch to the Euro while we are at it..nothing is wrong with the US standard..you are just going to make Americans more lazy.. i saw that comment where someone said "it s eaiser" screw that.. maybe the rest of the world should learn a harder way to do math?
Because we are a beautiful and bountiful country, we must preserve our feeling of special-ness by utilizing a complicated and not-at-all-silly measurement system. Really, who needs logic when you have Bush?
Why should we switch? Jut because other countries have? There really is no point besides cooperation with other countries. Our system works just fine and it would be tooo costly to fully convert anyways.
if something isnt broken dont fix it porsanly to me the things that make the metric system bad is a littel out weighted by the things that make it good
