On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 08:46:31 Jim Elwell wrote: >Marcus: > >Unfortunately I do not have the time right now to address your lengthy >email point by point, so please forgive this brief response. > That's ok, Jim. I can understand that. Please carry on.
>Some of what you say may be true (e.g., what others think of Americans), >but it is also totally beside the point. > >What some German or some Frenchman or some Canadian (or a whole group of >them) think of the USA and the metric system has very, very little to do >with when and how the USA actually metricates. You do not have to like >that, and you can call us names if you want, but that is the reality. > ? First of all, it seems like you have misunderstood my intervention here. I was merely agreeing with John and others about people's perceptions of America. That, evidently, has not much to do with 'when and how the USA' would metricate. Nonetheless, I hope you will agree with us that attitude towards this issue should have some relevance, shouldn't it? In other words, if our perception of America is true to some extent, that would certainly help explain quite a bit about why you folks are dragging your feet so much on this issue. Therefore, let me just say that it's actually a combination of factors (yours included, of course - summarized by you then and here, again) that hinders progress in the US on this. If one cannot overcome this type of attitude ALSO, it would be very difficult to achieve our ultimate goal. Please, give it some thought, Jim, to this. In addition, "collective" benefits should be something that societies comprised of individuals should be mindful of. Actually, this is even the essence of Christianism (that we put other people's interests ahead of our own!). A too individualistic society like the one you seem to be describing (in regards to the American society) is a one that unfortunately cannot prosper completely. At some point one should think of others, too, my friend. And I'd like to think of metrication as one key fundamental cause that should be considered as such (for the good of all concerned!). Therefore, I also strongly believe that we should also focus on this aspect of metrication, in addition to its being undeniably far superior to anything else. Finally, please, do not put me in the chorus of people "calling you names"! I even said that textually in my message (please reread it again to verify that). I'm one of those (again I repeat!) who believes that personal attacks don't achieve much. I'd rather use other tactics. >And if you want to help the USA metricate, I suggest you start trying to >understand what motivates Americans, rather than just berating us for not >thinking like you do. ?? I honestly don't recall having "berated you (Americans)" in any way, Jim. The maximum I said was that unfortunately most of you were on the the bad side of this issue, of those defending an idiotic system, that was all! > Because we do NOT think like you and that is NOT >going to change. > Again, there is a lot more to "American thinking" than the "care for personal freedom", Jim. While I agree with you that we should indeed "remember" such characteristic of yours, we should also fight to make you see that there is more to life than "personal freedoms", like the good of the collective (a Christian principle!). And THAT is something I humbly believe is worth fighting for and to change, wouldn't you agree? ;-) I truly believe that we can have both in this case, achieve individual freedom while benefitting the collective in a nice balancing way. >Whether or not you agree with the reality (or even the philosophy), >Americans think of themselves as individuals. NOT as cogs in some >super-governmental system. And many of us get our dander up at the thought >of ANYONE telling us how to run our lives, except in very restricted >circumstances (e.g., public safety). > Yes... So we see. However, I dream of what I consider to be better values, values that are mirrored after my meek Saviour's! (Sorry, I did not intend this to become some religious discussion, but values are something that shape everyone of us, whether we're "religious" or not! It's in this spirit that I'm saying what I'm saying here). When it comes to "individualism", as you seem to have put it, I'd rather not stress that too much though. But that's me here. :-) >THAT IS THE REALITY OF MANY PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY!!! As I said, you do not >have to like it, you do not have to agree with it, but if you ignore it, >you will be far less effective (or even counterproductive) in helping us >metricate. > Hmm... Again, if this is truly a "reality" in the US, then we have a lot more to do than I thought. Honestly? I'm not sure there would be much future then. However, I beg to differ, i.e. I'm not convinced that your society is THAT "individualistic" like you portray it (but I might be wrong after all, and if you're right, I see, again, that there is considerable work that we must also do and therefore, must adjust my strategy). >Wizard's and Kilopascal's posts are perfect examples of lack of >understanding of Americans. If those were widely distributed, do you think >half of this country would wake up one morning and say, "Golly, we've been >terribly arrogant, and we really should switch today to a much nicer >measurement system." >... Good question, Jim. You do have a point. While that was not my position, necessarily, I think that the "collective" component of metrication should be emphasized. If the US prides itself on being "majorly Christian", then it should give this some thought. Anyway, true, let's not be adversarial here. >So I ask: are you non-Americans on this forum just to have some Americans >to berate, or are you here to actually help us metricate the USA? > Well... I don't think you'd have much to worry about this "non-American" here... :-) Regards, Marcus Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/
