Change over to Metric

[english si]

In spite of what many anti-Metric types in the U.S. claim, it's not about conforming to a French system of measurement. I believe Tom Jefferson was a proponent of something that might have became known as the Metric system (see Wikipedia article here).

Tom Jefferson, the massive Franco-phile - hardly a ringing "its not something French" endorsement...

That said, that wasn't my point - my point was that you need a stick to get people to convert - metric is not the carrot that some people seem to think it is.

Of course, all spirits sold in the U.S. are marketed in Metric bottles, all prescription drugs are dispensed in Metric units and all (or very nearly all) automotive parts are now Metric, even for so-called "American" vehicles, though the anti-Metric folks are probably not aware of that (a 750 cl bottle of liquor is still called a "fifth" [of a gallon]).

I'm not anti-Metric, I'm anti-anti-other units.

I'm perfectly happy for some stuff to be in metric - there are things that it works better for, like parts, but there are things that I find work better in other units. I work bi-lingually when it comes to units, though for everyday things I am less fluent in metric.

As for 'fifth's: in France and Germany, and lots of places 500g is often called 'pound' (but in their lingo) rather than half-kilo. Yes even France - even in France they haven't bought in to the Metric system fully, as being designed to deliberately ignore and keep out the everyday, everyday things like going to the market are easier with approximations of the banned old units.

I'm not happy when people treat those who don't use metric as some backwards hicks or idiots (especially funny when they then complain that other units are too confusing for their own small brains to cope with), or push for conformity without giving another reason than conformity is good.

[Scott5114]

The reason I don't like US units is because I have no idea what the hell most of them are, even as a 20-something American.

The other day I decided to make queso and bought a block of cheese for it. Before when I made it, I used a 1-lb bag of shredded cheese, and I wanted to see if it was any better if I shredded the cheese myself. The block I bought was 8 oz.

I am not the sort of person who is good with memorizing conversion tables–I still struggle to remember parts of the times tables–and after I shredded the cheese up, it looked like a lot less than before. I looked at the package. 8 oz. Despite encountering ounces frequently I appear to have never bothered to remember how many ounces were in a pound. I had to ask my girlfriend. Turns out there's 16 ounces in a pound. Weird. If I had to guess I would have thought it was 12.

[silverback1065]

No there's 12 inches in a foot

[mgk920]

Ever since I began conversing in a Worldwide forvm such that the internet is back in the 1990s, I have become much more comfortable and conversant using metric units - many of those on-line from outside of the USA know nothing else - and I, too, often have troubles keeping the other 'customary' units and their relationships straight.

One of the most striking areas here for me is that in recent years, especially, my mind has been wanting temperatures to be given in degrees above or below the freezing point of water (freezes at '0'/boils at sea level at '100' - the Celsius scale), not the strangely arbitrary zero and boiling figures that are now popularly used in the USA.

Mike

[NE2]

One of the most striking areas here for me is that in recent years, especially, my mind has been wanting temperatures to be given in degrees above or below the freezing point of water (freezes at '0'/boils at sea level at '100' - the Celsius scale), not the strangely arbitrary zero and boiling figures that are now popularly used in the USA.

Using water is just as arbitrary. Rankin or Kelvin is the only somewhat non-arbitrary method.

[vdeane]

OK, I know why, but just because you drive on the wrong side of the road, doesn't mean that switching to the correct side of the road is such a horrific thing.

So 2/3 - 3/4 of the world is doing it wrong?

Ever since I began conversing in a Worldwide forvm such that the internet is back in the 1990s, I have become much more comfortable and conversant using metric units - many of those on-line from outside of the USA know nothing else - and I, too, often have troubles keeping the other 'customary' units and their relationships straight.

I get around that problem by not caring what the relationships are.

One of the most striking areas here for me is that in recent years, especially, my mind has been wanting temperatures to be given in degrees above or below the freezing point of water (freezes at '0'/boils at sea level at '100' - the Celsius scale), not the strangely arbitrary zero and boiling figures that are now popularly used in the USA.

Fahrenheit sets 0 as the average lowest temperature in Europe and 100 at the highest average.  It's worth noting that the scale was developed in the far north where it rarely got above the freezing point, so it wasn't even a consideration.  I don't see why we NEED the freezing point to be 0, though a multiple of 10 would be nice.

It's better than using the Romer temperature scale (did I spell it right?) where water freezes at 6.7 (6.8?) because the 0 point is where water freezes when mixed with salt.

[kkt]

Turns out there's 16 ounces in a pound. Weird. If I had to guess I would have thought it was 12.

Well, if you're using Troy measure (usually used for precious metals), there are 12 ounces in a pound. 

Yes, one of the, urhm, charming things about customary measures is that there are so many different ones with the same name.  Troy, avoirdupois, or fluid ounces; U.S. or Imperial gallons; U.S., Imperial, or nautical miles; for a laugh look up the surveyor's inch.

[kkt]

Using water is just as arbitrary. Rankin or Kelvin is the only somewhat non-arbitrary method.

Lots of natural processes on Earth are based on freezing or boiling.  Weather, plant growth, animal behavior,...

If you're calculating thermodynamics, you do need a scale that starts at absolute zero.  But most of the time you're not calculating thermo. 

Note that Kelvin or Rankine still have the arbitrary size of the degree. 

[NE2]

Using water is just as arbitrary. Rankin or Kelvin is the only somewhat non-arbitrary method.

Lots of natural processes on Earth are based on freezing or boiling.  Weather, plant growth, animal behavior,...

Freezing, maybe. (Even then you get various effects at temperatures somewhat removed from freezing.) Boiling?

And why does any temperature need to be a multiple of anything? You can't multiply temperatures on scales that are not zeroed to absolute zero.

[cpzilliacus]

Not at all that hard - the United States is stuck with its obsolete units of measure thanks to ... oh well, forget it - no reason to bash any particular segment of the population.

(1) What's obsolete about it?

A system of measures and weights imposed by the Crown - who does not rule over the United States.

(2) I've yet to hear a good reason to convert.  And conformity with "the rest of the world [sic]" is not, to my mind, a good reason.

Our NAFTA trading partners don't use the British Imperial system of weights and measures.  Our EU partners don't use it.  Not even the Red Chinese, so beloved by many that oppose conversion to Metric in the U.S., don't use it.

[cpzilliacus]

In spite of what many anti-Metric types in the U.S. claim, it's not about conforming to a French system of measurement. I believe Tom Jefferson was a proponent of something that might have became known as the Metric system (see Wikipedia article here).

Tom Jefferson, the massive Franco-phile - hardly a ringing "its not something French" endorsement...

He was the U.S. minister to the French government, at a time when the U.S. needed friends.  He was also Governor of Virginia and President of the United States.

He also (apparently) fathered children by Sally Hemings, a slave woman that he owned.  What else do you want to bash Jefferson for?

That said, that wasn't my point - my point was that you need a stick to get people to convert - metric is not the carrot that some people seem to think it is.

Of course, all spirits sold in the U.S. are marketed in Metric bottles, all prescription drugs are dispensed in Metric units and all (or very nearly all) automotive parts are now Metric, even for so-called "American" vehicles, though the anti-Metric folks are probably not aware of that (a 750 cl bottle of liquor is still called a "fifth" [of a gallon]).

I'm not anti-Metric, I'm anti-anti-other units.

I am pro-Metric.  The rest of the world is not about to adopt Imperial units of measure.

I'm perfectly happy for some stuff to be in metric - there are things that it works better for, like parts, but there are things that I find work better in other units. I work bi-lingually when it comes to units, though for everyday things I am less fluent in metric.

As for 'fifth's: in France and Germany, and lots of places 500g is often called 'pound' (but in their lingo) rather than half-kilo. Yes even France - even in France they haven't bought in to the Metric system fully, as being designed to deliberately ignore and keep out the everyday, everyday things like going to the market are easier with approximations of the banned old units.

I'm not happy when people treat those who don't use metric as some backwards hicks or idiots (especially funny when they then complain that other units are too confusing for their own small brains to cope with), or push for conformity without giving another reason than conformity is good.

I've no problem dealing with Metric units (especially distances of measure). 

Sweden has a "Swedish mile" (svensk mil) used informally, which is 10 kilometers.

The U.S. (and, I believe, the UK) have already gone Metric in many ways, as discussed above.  The time to convert the highway network to Metric is long overdue (at least in the U.S.).  I do not live in the UK, so I will not express an opinion regarding conversion to Metric there.

[NE2]

Not at all that hard - the United States is stuck with its obsolete units of measure thanks to ... oh well, forget it - no reason to bash any particular segment of the population.

(1) What's obsolete about it?

A system of measures and weights imposed by the Crown - who does not rule over the United States.

Hahahahahaha. If we choose to use customary units, they're not "imposed" by anyone. Or would you change all our place names that date back to Colonial times?

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

I'm a staunch proponent of the idea that Imperial should always be used for roads and for dispense of fuel.

For instance: in fuel expense, 3.59 or .97, which sounds worse?  One is per gallon and one is per litre.

Or: which sounds like more, 3 or 1.8?  One is miles per hour and one is kilometres per hour, but they are both the tolerance you get from speedcams in Victoria.

Tell people they're going to get 1.8 over and that's it and they're going to be pissed...but 3, that sounds semi-reasonable.

[SteveG1988]

[silverback1065]

There's nothing wrong with our system its not that hard to remember a few converting factors. At least we dont have over ten names for the same unit and remembering the factor for those can be just as annoying. Its so much easier doing engineering calculations in us customery units theres only 4 units to remember foot pound kip and inch. Whas wrong with our units? Doing work with them yields answers just as accurate as using metric.

[english si]

A system of measures and weights imposed by the Crown - who does not rule over the United States.

Nope. I don't see where any of it was imposed by the Crown, post-1783. Your federal government controls weights and measures and has done for nearly 250 years. Look at the different amounts with liquid units - your fl oz are bigger than ours, though your pints and gallons are smaller.

Our NAFTA trading partners don't use the British Imperial system of weights and measures.  Our EU partners don't use it.  Not even the Red Chinese, so beloved by many that oppose conversion to Metric in the U.S., don't use it.

Are we not (by far) your biggest EU partner? I think you'll find earlier in your post you declared customary measures to be an imposition of our Crown.

He was the U.S. minister to the French government, at a time when the U.S. needed friends.  He was also Governor of Virginia and President of the United States.

He also (apparently) fathered children by Sally Hemings, a slave woman that he owned.  What else do you want to bash Jefferson for?

I wasn't bashing Jefferson (though I will now), I was bashing your point that it's not a French system. Jefferson was a huge Franco-phile and was almost unique in wanting the US to return the favour of the French helping getting rid of Dictator George by supporting France's Dictator Boney keep his empire (the US remained neutral - it didn't want to upset it's ally and help it's old enemy, but it didn't want to help keep Europe subjected to what it so recently had liberated itself of). Of course he loved the Metric system - he loved a murderous tyrant simply because he was French and hated a less-bad tyrant because he was English - why wouldn't he strongly prefer the French system over the British-based system - even if the French system wasn't as good?

I'm not anti-Metric, I'm anti-anti-other units.

I am pro-Metric.  The rest of the world is not about to adopt Imperial units of measure.

So basically, following the reasoning you have given for you being pro-Metric, you are a conformity zealot. Especially given the context of what I said, I guess you support English-as-the-national-language, wouldn't teach foreign languages in schools, would desire the 40% of the world that doesn't speak English to learn the lingua fraca because the rest of the world isn't going to adopt French, Spanish, Arabic (or anything other than perhaps Manderin Chinese) as the language they speak in. And not just that, but block other languages from being used in any official capacity.

You'd be for suppression of Occitan, Basque, Catalan, Breton, Alsatian, etc as the rest of France (Paris and it's hinterland - perhaps about 20% of the population) isn't going to adopt these languages (using a French metaphor, as it's clear that you have a mindset that is incredibly post-revolution French of "conform to the ideal we set or else") as the trade language and as such people shouldn't be taught, or perhaps even not allowed to speak, other languages.

Thankfully for your country, Jefferson was out the country when the constitution was written. He had a hand in the first French one and the story of France ever since has been suppression of minority views, dictatorships and near-continuous revolutions.

The U.S. (and, I believe, the UK) have already gone Metric in many ways, as discussed above.  The time to convert the highway network to Metric is long overdue (at least in the U.S.).  I do not live in the UK, so I will not express an opinion regarding conversion to Metric there.

We've gone metric where it's useful to go metric (and perhaps further) - if it's useful and beneficial, then the UK certainly would have gone over. The Highways Agency have done several studies and found that the cost of confusing foreigners (which is far far greater in the UK, given that we have lots of foreign trucks, etc - and these foreign trucks have far less exposure to miles, etc than the ones in the US) isn't worth the cost. We're dual signing all height and width units, because it's worth it there, but not the distance and speed units.

I had no formal school education in imperial. We had 'conversion' on the maths syllabus at various points. We only had to memorize them at age 16, and even then it was 25.4mm in a inch and perhaps 454g in a pound and 568ml in a (UK) pint. We didn't ever have to convert between different imperial units or anything like that. We did have an afternoon aged 11/12 where the teacher was bored so taught us how to do sums in £sd, and lbs/ozs, etc. Pretty basic base theory - not difficult maths at all (and I find that Germans can't do fractions - even those who are good at maths, simply because they aren't taught them), you just had to remember that 12d was 1s, 20s was £1 (and we would have no problem with £sd today - other than maybe a half shilling, we have no use for anything smaller than 1s).

I was probably in the most exposed-to-other-measuring-systems year group since the 50s - it's been on-off on-off. But people in the UK often use imperial for all sorts of everyday things. And while only a similar debate, even the uber-lefty, anti-populist, rag that my parents get gives temperatures in both C and F. Simply teaching metric and only metric - even from the age of 5 - doesn't make us think in metric (some people, yes, OK). Mushing - only way to get it to work - beat down the opposition.

I also find it amusing that rather than standardized everyday things (making estimation way more intutive) the cartoon is saying that it makes more sense that we should use a system of units that is (originally) based on a metal rod in Paris that is a calculated measure of 100 trillionths of the distance between the North Pole (which no one had ever been to at the time, though the measurement was very close) and the Equator on the Parisian meridian. Yeh, like that's a useful amount of measure to base a who system of measurement on.

[Michael in Philly]

I find the let's-not-confuse-foreigners argument a bit silly when we (English-speakers, and I know I'm generalizing, which I hate) don't bat an eyelid at assuming everyone will be fluent in English....

English si, did you see the article in the Telegraph a month or so ago about some peer who wanted the UK to convert to metric in time for the Olympics?  I don't know who was going to drop everything and change all the road signs in a month....

[bulkyorled]

I'm curious to know if people think the US will always use Imperial units or if we'll stay the one and only country anyone cares about that uses it.
Before answering take note, yes the entire world uses metric and there is pressure to change, but if we dipped in it, almost 40 years ago for one of the first widespread uses, then dumped it, what makes anyone think they'd wanna change now? I cant ever see the US changing.

Hope to get some people who disagree so I can get some new ideas on it.

[mgk920]

The USA does not use 'Imperial' units, those are US Customary units.  'Imperial' units are completely different.  Still, just a couple of days ago at work, we had to buy bottles of Coke from a local store and when going over the receipt, I was scratching my head for a few seconds about the notation of "67(something)ZCoke".  We bought a couple of cases of 2 liter bottles and I was wondering why it wasn't saying "2LCoke".

Also, if you really want to have some fun, go to a Subway, order some food, get the largest soda cup that they have and ask how it relates, sizewise, to a 1 or 2 liter bottle.

On that note, one area where it is very possible for a full 'metric' conversion to occur 'under the radar' (so to speak) in the USA is in product packaging.  There is a long-term push under way to eliminate the requirement to display 'US Customary' units in product package declarations in the USA from the FPLA (Fair Package Labeling Act) and various state regulations, this in order to allow manufacturers to use a single line of packaging for their various product lines, wherever in the World they are intended to be shipped to, saving them money.  Recall that the EU is working to *prohibit* non-metric declarations on product packages and this would help to further open export markets to USA manufacturers.

Mike

[agentsteel53]

Recall that the EU is working to *prohibit* non-metric declarations on product packages and this would help to further open export markets to USA manufacturers.

I'll bet some companies will just change their product slogan, like Jack Daniel's whiskey slogan officially says "Lynchburg, TN, pop. 341" so they can keep it that way even though Lynchburg is over 7000 now.

[silverback1065]

The meter isnt based on a metal rod its based on the speed of light now.

[kphoger]

I find it easy to switch to kilometers when driving in México, and would even if my speedometer didn't have km/h on it.  I highly doubt changing to metric on the road system would change very much.  Cops switch from a 7-mph tolerance to a 12-km/h tolerance; the hardest thing would probably be advance exit sign relocation to more closely match intervals of 0.5 km.  Even where rural farm roads are at mile intervals, it's not like switching to metric would require us to pick up the roads and move them over to a new location; it just means that acres would change to hectares.  Most cars have km/h on their speedometers and, even if a car doesn't have it, it's really easy to estimate a conversion factor of 0.6 while driving until you get used to it; I do it all the time.

I also have the darnedest time remembering conversion factors within the customary unit system.  How many fluid ounces are in a quarter cup?  Who the heck knows?  I've given up on trying to remember that kind of thing.  In our kitchen, we have a big magnet with customary conversions on, like cups to quarts etc.  It thoroughly confuses me–and I grew up with it, do fairly well at math, scored well in school, and measure things in the kitchen all the time.  I'd really prefer metric, but I'm not sure how I would feel about measuring by weight, which is what they do in Europe and other places.

The hardest thing for me about going to a metric-using location is temperature.  For some reason, I have a hard time knowing if I need short or long sleeves if the temperature is 20, 25, or 30 degrees; or whether or not I need a jacket if it's 10, 15, or 20 degrees.  I know that I would easily be able to switch after spending just a few months using the system, though.

The metric system makes more sense to me + Most of the rest of the world uses metric, including our two land neighbors = I think we should switch.

However, I don't think it's likely in the next ten years.  But, as people (my generation) learn metric more and more, and get used to using it in various applications, I think there will eventually be enough support to switch, just years down the road.

[english si]

I highly doubt changing to metric on the road system would change very much.

Indeed, and as such, why bother...

How many fluid ounces are in a quarter cup?  Who the heck knows?

Do you ever need that though? I can't see why you would need to.

And is it relevant to know feet in a mile or whatever for the roads?

However, I don't think it's likely in the next ten years.  But, as people (my generation) learn metric more and more, and get used to using it in various applications, I think there will eventually be enough support to switch, just years down the road.

UK experience says "not unless you ban other units".

As I said, I have had next-to-no formal customary measures education and I'm one of the few who've even had something that isn't in their 60s. But do we use metric - sometimes, but not others. We can't buy anything (other than supermarket milk that is sold in 568ml multiples with the nice 1, 2, 4, 6 pint number written in large numbers on the side) in obvious customary units (though, of course, there's tons of stuff that weighs 454g or other 'suspicious' amounts), but yet we still don't embrace metric. The only thing that has noticably shifted is weather - moving from mainly thinking in F about 30 years ago, through the C in winter/F in summer phase to be the F only being talked about when it's above 85 (so not heard at all this year). Only the BBC weather doesn't give F in summer though, and newspaper weather is dual units, with C favoured, year round.

[J N Winkler]

Even where rural farm roads are at mile intervals, it's not like switching to metric would require us to pick up the roads and move them over to a new location; it just means that acres would change to hectares.

But it would mean a loss of easy multiplicative relationships, which are key to popular understanding of the PLSS.  One square mile = one full section; one square six miles by six miles = 36 full sections = one township; etc.  All of that can be converted to metric in a relatively straightforward way but the numbers involved are not nice round integers and while there is very widespread vernacular knowledge of, say, the acre as an unit (640 acres in a full section), I for one would not know how large a hectare is unless I looked up the definition.

I also have the darnedest time remembering conversion factors within the customary unit system.  How many fluid ounces are in a quarter cup?  Who the heck knows?

Two fluid ounces.  (I admit I came at this by an indirect route:  I remember that while the US pint is 16 fluid ounces, the Imperial pint is 20 fluid ounces, and since a pint is two cups in the US system, one-quarter of a cup is two fluid ounces.  The US and Imperial fluid ounces differ by about 3%, the Imperial fluid ounce being the larger.)

I've given up on trying to remember that kind of thing.  In our kitchen, we have a big magnet with customary conversions on, like cups to quarts etc.  It thoroughly confuses me–and I grew up with it, do fairly well at math, scored well in school, and measure things in the kitchen all the time.  I'd really prefer metric, but I'm not sure how I would feel about measuring by weight, which is what they do in Europe and other places.

I would not like to try to do structural engineering in customary units, not just because it is here that the multiplicative relationships are unintuitive, but also because the results of standard computations are not dimensionally correct.  In fact, the metric-units initiatives which state DOTs embraced in the 1990's (until the backlash set in in the 2000's) were heavily promoted by the structural side for precisely this reason.  But convenience in technical fields does not translate into convenience in everyday computations.

I am not fond of mass measurements for baking ingredients and consider both this, and the lack of standardization for some volume measurements (what is a "dessertspoon," for example?), a definite drawback of cookbooks produced not just in continental Europe but also in the UK, where cooking has been partly metricated.

The hardest thing for me about going to a metric-using location is temperature.  For some reason, I have a hard time knowing if I need short or long sleeves if the temperature is 20, 25, or 30 degrees; or whether or not I need a jacket if it's 10, 15, or 20 degrees.  I know that I would easily be able to switch after spending just a few months using the system, though.

I have trouble with this too, except I am familiar enough with 30° C as a ballpark temperature to know I don't want a long-sleeved shirt.  My own approach to coping is to double the Celsius temperature and add it to 30 when I need a ballpark figure (by this approach, for example, 30° C is approximated as 90° F, which is off by four degrees--the true conversion is 86° F precisely--but is close enough to allow me to choose appropriate clothing or, in this case, the lack of it).

But actually I don't rely solely on reported temperature values to make these judgments.  This is largely because the overwhelming majority of my time in Celsius-using regions has been in Britain, which, though the average temperature is not that much (if any) cooler than in Kansas, has a maritime climate with a high likelihood of cloud cover and daytime temperatures for much of the year which straddle my personal transition points between jacket + scarf + sweatshirt + short-sleeved shirt, jacket + sweatshirt + short-sleeved shirt, sweatshirt + short-sleeved shirt, and short-sleeved shirt only (I wear trousers with all of these unless temperatures are no more than slightly above freezing, in which case I also add long johns).  Many times the decisive factors for me are whether there is unblocked sunshine (as opposed to "brightness"), whether I will be in it for an appreciable portion of the time--I feel about ten degrees (F) warmer in the sun, especially since I tend to favor dark clothes--and also whether I can expect a significant amount of convective cooling from wind.

In Britain it is just not the done thing for climate-control systems to offer pointed challenges to outdoor conditions.  In the winter you are expected to tolerate a mild degree of indoor chill, and in the summer you are expected to tolerate a certain amount of indoor stuffiness.  People like to complain about excessive heat in the winter and, if air-conditioning were more common (I can count on the fingers of one hand the buildings I have been in Britain that I knew were air-conditioned, one of them being the National Archives in Kew), people would complain about feeling chilled in high summer.  (Current advice to new readers at the National Archives:  "Bring a jumper in case you feel chilly.")  I have found intelligent layering allows me to cope with whatever the conditions are, indoors or outdoors, without feeling driven to complain (as opposed to, say, joining in a whinge about the weather or climate control for the sake of being sociable).

Given this climate and the cultural complex that goes with it, I have found the best way to gauge temperature for purposes of comfortable dress is just to go out in midmorning and try out whatever I am wearing.

The metric system makes more sense to me + Most of the rest of the world uses metric, including our two land neighbors = I think we should switch.

I disagree.  I don't consider either reason to be a sufficient justification for switching to metric.  Rather, with some isolated exceptions such as the rollback of metrication in state DOTs, I think we have "found our level" with regard to metric conversion:  where metric is clearly more convenient than customary units, we already use metric.  Wholesale metric conversion would impose switching costs even in contexts where metric is clearly the better system to adopt de novo, so it is reasonable to ask whether those switching costs will be amortized over time.  In some cases they will while in others they won't.  In still other contexts, metric not only imposes switchover costs, but is also manifestly the less convenient system to use.  In these cases it is a bad idea to convert to metric.  I don't see this calculus as being greatly influenced (in any country) by the prevalence or otherwise of metric education.

An insistence on wholesale metric conversion, in any context and for any purpose, overlooks an important basic function of a measurement system--affording people the ability to visualize and talk about quantities, in a convenient way.

[TXtoNJ]

I understand both customary and metric, and prefer customary for ordinary measures... precisely because it relies on ambiguous associations with tangible objects. That makes it easier to "eyeball" measurements.

I also prefer Fahrenheit, because it's ideal for a temperate climate like the one I live in. For a related reason, I think Celsius is better in an international context, since it isn't as dependent on a particular climate to have meaning.