lemm.ee

0 points

2 months ago

“Fahrenheit isn’t more intuitive” doesn’t not mean “Celcius is more intuitive”. You’re mistaken if you think that’s what’s being argued here.

i mean, fundamentally that’s what that statement would have to mean, unless you’re referring to a rock being more intuitive or something.

Why would you mention that fahrenheit isn’t as intuitive as celsius, if celsius wasn’t objectively more intuitive? Also why did you use a triple negative?

Neither one is intuitive. Intuition isn’t a useful metric here anyway. After all we could ask: Which one is more intuitive - kilometers or miles? Kilograms or pounds? Do we have to change how me measure time (base 12) to a base 10 as well, would that be more intuitive?

ultimately yeah, neither system is more intuitive than the other. Celsius has a nice use case in science and research, but that’s about it. fahrenheit isn’t really used anywhere outside of weather, and cooking, where it also doesn’t really matter, and no cooking is not “water based chemistry” as someone tried to propose.

also technically time isn’t really in base 12. one year is 12 months, is 31-30 days, is 24 hours, is 60 minutes, is 60 seconds, is then broken into tenths, hundreths, and thousandths of a second from there, etc… It’s not quite one specific system, just a hodgepodge of multiple different structures.

Fahrenheit simply has no advantage over Celcius. And it doesn’t have to. Some people are used to it, so keep using it by all means. Don’t argue that it’s superior and we’re all good.

exactly! I’m not arguing that fahrenheit is better, i’m just trying to get europeans to think it isn’t the single most useless system in the world because they spent 12 seconds thinking about things and got confused when they didn’t spend and more time on it.

I think a lot of people in this thread are just being objectively stupid, and not quite realizing it, and thus saying silly things that don’t make any sense. Europeans seem to do this a lot whenever the US customary unit system comes up in discussion, and i don’t understand why.

report

[ - ]

Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org

1 point

2 months ago

i mean, fundamentally that’s what that statement would have to mean, unless you’re referring to a rock being more intuitive or something.

ultimately yeah, neither system is more intuitive than the other.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

hey man, i didn’t make the claim. i’m just came here to complain about celsius users not thinking about things. If you can find an example of me saying fahrenheit is more intuitive, i’ll have to eat my words.

report

[ - ]

Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org

1 point

2 months ago

Originally you replied to me, replying to someone else claiming fahrenheit was “a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”. This was never about Celsius being intuitive or not, it was about Fahrenheit. If you didn’t disagree with me there, your replies to me were pointless. Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.

I never claimed Celcius to be intuitive, in fact I claimed the opposite - neither scale is intuitive. Therefore Fahrenheit and Celcius are equally useful in measuring the weather and the idea of Fahrenheit being especially suitable is incorrect, based on the confirmation bias of those who are already used to it. That’s the only argument I’m making here.

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

“a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”.

and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back. I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive, and that point of contextual relevance you might as well mention that plants are green, and that the sky is blue.

Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.

possibly, but i’m mostly complaining about the collective response here, not the particular responses in this thread in particular. Which is also quite long so i don’t even really recall what has been said here to be specifically accurate.

report

[ - ]

Mrs_deWinter@feddit.org

1 point

2 months ago

and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back.

Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.

I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive

Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.

ok, so you genuinely think, that people who use celsius cannot experience the sensation of “hot” and “cold” without a number referencing the temperature directly in front of them? Specifically that of the celsius system?

I understand the point you’re trying to make, but it’s irrelevant and doesn’t matter. If you were to put someone into a room at either 0 or 100 degrees fahrenheit (without telling them the temperature of the room), from a climate relatively similar to the US, they would either say “it’s really cold” or “it’s really hot” even if they’re not directly from a similar climate, it would still be relatively inline with these expectations.

this is what we mean when we say “really hot” and “really cold” the human body has an innate response to the temperatures that it experiences. Classifying it accurately is hard. But in this case it doesn’t need to be, it’s a heuristic.

Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.

think of a hammer, an intuitive feature of a hammer is pretty obvious, there is only one realistic way to use it. You can’t grab it by the hand and do much with it. The head itself is shaped and specifically designed for a certain type of use case, and the handle is pretty clearly built for holding onto.

going further, an intuitive feature of a rock is the ability to move/throw it. There are certain thing that are so fundamental to the human experience, there isn’t much in the way of conceptualization there.

intuition is simply the ability to naturally reason without external influence. For example, being able to place your foot where it needs to be so you don’t fall down a cliff. And intuitive system would be one that is innately familiar to the user, which obviously nothing is. But systems can have intuitive features or design elements however.

report