"Archaic" meaning old but still shit. "Archaic" is not synonymous with just old, but rather old and out-of-date.
The metric system was never in-date. It's aim was to transcend 'in-date'.
The metric system is older, yes, but compared to imperial measurements, metric is much more relevant
I really don't see how 100 trillionths of the (incorrectly calculated - and obviously never measured until satellites) distance between the north pole and the equator via Paris has any relevance to anything.
But that was the point of the metric system: to be divorced from real-world considerations and as arbitrary as possible. OK, now a metre is the distance a very specific type of light travels in an almost unmeasurable unit of time, rather than a rod in Paris based off calculations of a meaningless nature, but the point was that the units were meant to be totally irrelevant to anything.
in a progressive society.
</facepalm>
As an aside - the Revolutionary France that created the metric system is one of the best arguments against a 'progressive' society. The wheel of revolution kept turning and turning, leaving destruction and death in its wake as they hunt for progress (and even today, people are risking death to escape France and into a 'backward' country that uses miles on road signs). The metric system wasn't invented to give a nice systematic system, but to burn all bridges with the past, with culture and tasks and to try and transcend into glorious Reason. Metric time measurement died after the Reign of Terror as it was too blatantly incompatible with everyday life - the other stuff is bearable, but similarly designed to try and mould the universe to us, rather than us to the universe.
A measurement system whereby everything has to reference 5280 feet doesn't make a lot of sense to me, especially since 1/4 of a mile is still referencing 5280 feet, just 1/2 of it, of which no one knows.
1/2 a mile is referencing half a mile. And, unlike the 100 trillionths of the distance between north pole and equator on the Paris meridian, the customary system isn't tied to miles, or feet - it's tied to nothing in particular (though obviously has undergone standardisation).
At least 1/2 of a kilometer is 500 meters (the key here is that you can easily reduce the unit to another whole number).
which, actually, is perfectly easy to do with miles, if you use yards. 1/16 of a mile = 110yds :. 1/2 a mile = 880yds. Thirds are difficult in both - fractions are good here! Though, of course, the reason that customary has many different units with odd conversion ratios is that the idea was that for a given task you used one or two distance units and stuck with it. It doesn't matter if you didn't know that there are 80 chains in a mile - unless you are measuring railways! And you'd never need to know that there are 5 chains in a furlong, unless you were converting a rail marshalling yard into a horse racing circuit!
All things considered, would you guys support a movement towards metric units on our highways? Everything I'm reading above seems to indicate a strong preference for imperial units.
I'm open to either, but change for the sake of change or 'progess' is a shitty reason.
In North America the mile is an important tool for navigating highways due to the grid systems, and fractions common - mrsman's good example of knowing how important a road is by whether it has a whole number or a fraction on the sign shows that.
People prefer what they're used to.
Indeed.
In everyday life, I don't consider the metric system to be superior or inferior to the imperial system, but I prefer imperial because that's what I encounter all the time.
True - I'm bilingual when it comes to units as I encounter both quite a bit (though imperial tends to be hidden in metric units - eg 5cmx10cm wood in lengths that are expressed as multiples of 300mm - rather than 2-by-4 in lengths that are in feet).
I've noticed a gradual metrication of the UK - and have given the temperature as the best example before (and do so again, below). But it's been through the genuinely liberal and progressive of gradual change, rather than the coercion and banning that everyone else used to get there.
Converting the United States to metric would be a huge undertaking for almost no practical benefit, and would rightly face massive public resistance.
Indeed. The other hold out - the UK, was less aggressive than it's former Dominions (Canada, Australia) in metrication and caved in to resistance - allowing dual units and stuff like that. Gradually the UK is becoming more metric and imperial measures are fading out, but far from totally and full conversion will never happen (though it's only road signs and draft beer/cider that is officially imperial).
Then, maybe about a decade later, my thinking started to evolve, and I ended up doing almost a complete 180. Yes, in the beautiful metric system, 1 cubic centimeter, if filled with water, contains exactly 1 milliliter, and it takes exactly one calorie to raise that water (which weighs one gram) one degree celsius.
So what?
Oh, it matters to those who like things neat and tidy, but it matters not one jot outside the OCD world. The litre of water weighing a kilo has some use, though the US's fluid measures cover that (better than the UK's) rather well, with a pint weighing a pound rather than needing the mnemonic "a pint of water weighs a pound and a quarter" that the UK's 20oz pint brings. Calories aren't used, except kcal on food packaging (alongside kJ) - and heating up a litre of water 1C is an inconceivable and unrelateable quantum of energy when it comes to "I'm putting this in my body", but then a Joule is also an irrelevant equation - there's no reason why it couldn't be in ergs. They are just numbers that you compare to other numbers. Which brings us on to the ultimate comparison thing - temperature:
0°F is ridiculously cold and 100°F is ridiculously hot.
Fahrenheit was, while weird, designed (later than Celsius) to be perfect for the weather - most of Germany, the UK, etc stayed within that 0-100 scale, so little use for three digit numbers, and even less for the, far more annoying, negative numbers.
And the finer grain of scale gave more accuracy without needing to leave integers behind.
Gradually (and probably in part to a media that thinks a bit like jake that metric is hip and progressive) the UK has moved from Fahrenheit, to a dual system with both F and C with Celsius being given increasing prominence over time in winter but Fahrenheit still ruling summer*, to where Fahrenheit only comes out in summer but still gets a roughly equal footing when it does, to one where Fahrenheit has disappeared outside detailed forecasts and footnotes.
*'Celsiheit' - because '32 degrees' sounds neither hot nor cold, and 0 or 90 is much better!
I think it’s no coincidence that some metric units that have caught on in the US, like the two-liter bottle of soda
Though there's little reason why that isn't half-a-gallon. In the UK, supermarket own-brand milk, bought at supermarkets (rather than convenience stores - where they moved to metric to help hide the higher price per ml) are multiples of pints - sold in ml, but with big numbers with no units to get around the law on metric-first. With milk, there's clearly a demand for pints, rather than 500ml multiples, else the supermarkets wouldn't go to the trouble, but it's a strange thing that people care.