Metric conversion: purely secular, or are there Biblical principles?

[Olddad]

As readers would know, virtually the whole world uses the Metric System. Even in the United States it is used in science and industry, and other weights and measures are defined in terms of metric measures.

Here is how one person argued:


"The key argument for using SI [the modern Metric system] is that it is fair to all concerned. This has been a demand placed on all measuring methods from the beginning of recorded history.

"For example, in the King James version of the Bible there is the instruction:

"'Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have ... ' (Leviticus 19:36).

"As the book of Leviticus is one of the earlier books of the Bible, we can assume that these demands for honest weights and measures have been around for [thousands of] years."

The question then arises, what is the more just system of weights and measures? Is it the traditional system from England, which is now only used in the United States, Liberia and Burma, or is it the metric system, which is dominant everywhere else?

Does it involve maters of principle, or is it something that falls squarely in the secular sphere, where people can have differing opinions?

I write this from Australia, where most of the metric conversion was completed more than 30 years ago, and where the use of metrics is no issue at all. Could Christians in the United States take metric conversion in their stride, as Australian Christians did, or would it present problems to them?

[tango]

I think from a theological perspective it doesn't matter what weights and measures you use, as long as they are fair.

If you ask me to sell you 100g of beans and I give you 90g but charge you for 100g I have abused your trust. Whether we describe the quantity of beans in metric units, imperial units, ancient units or whatever is immaterial.

I remember reading how some unscrupulous traders would have two sets of weights, which they would use depending on whether they were buying or selling. Their 100g weight for buying would have been, say, 105g while the weight for selling would have been 95g. So each time they buy and sell 100g of produce they ended up with 10g for themselves. (Obviously the precise numbers might differ, but you get the picture).

What the Law is telling us is to buy and sell a fair measure, however you choose to describe it.

[HisLeast]

Fair measures as in measures not designed to cheat.

1 KG is exactly equal to 12.5 ZOOBERS (a measurement of my own invention). If you're buying doodads from me by weight, and my scale says 26 ZOOBERS and a proven honest scale says 2 KGS, then I'm obviously trying to cheat you.

The law is talking about not cheating anyone, not what specific measurement system to adopt.

[Olddad]

I am glad to see that the choice of weights and measures presents no problem to the first two people who responded to my question. This is important because the metric system is increasingly used, especially in medicine. If the metric system gains ground slowly, there will be a greater chance of confusion between the two systems. We dealt with that in Australia by having a relatively quick change-over in the 1970s so the issue was soon behind us. However, the United States will run into problems if the change-over is protracted, or if the two systems are used concurrently. Look at this link: http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/01/news/mn-17288

[tango]

There's no reason why multiple systems shouldn't be in use at the same time. Here in the UK we buy petrol by the litre but measure fuel economy in miles per gallon. We buy beer by the pint in pubs but bananas by weight.

As long as the buyer and seller agree on the quantity being bought and sold, and the amount traded is the amount agreed, everything is fair. How you describe the quantity doesn't really matter.

[Olddad]

In Australia we buy petrol by the litre and measure fuel economy by the number of litres per 100 kilometres. To buy petrol by the litre and measure fuel economy in miles per gallon is very confusing. However, there are more serious problems with multiple weights, such as mix-ups with medicine by using two different measures, or when there are signs only in feet on low bridges and drivers crash into them because they have come from the Continent and were expecting signs in metres. It seems that Britain will have to metricate its road signs simply as a safety measure.

[tango]

It only causes confusion when communications fail. If you're asked for six ounces of something, missed the "ounces" and provide six grammes there are going to be problems.

It's not really confusing to buy petrol in litres and measure economy in miles per gallon. Personally I find "l/100km" fuel economy figures to be utterly meaningless because it takes longer to figure out expected ranges. I know my car has a 60 litre tank, which is roughly 13-4 UK gallons. If I average 30mpg I know I should expect 400 miles or so from a tank.

Working the other way if I work with 10 litres per 100 km I've got more calculations to work with, and even then there's the risk of confusion because my odometer is measured in miles.

If you're travelling in another country you really need to be prepared for that country's ways. The fact their signs are in feet rather than metres must pale into relative insignificance compared to a whole new set of traffic regulations.

[HisLeast]

As it pertains to the passage in Leviticus, I don't think a society with two measurement standards is doing anything wrong per say, confusing as it is sometimes. I was born and raised in Canada, which is also officially "metric". We grow up in school being taught to measure in centimeters and meters, buy juice and gas by the litre, measure speed by kilometer per hour, etc etc. But walk into any tradeschool or workshop and you'll be lost without inches, feet, and yards.

The important part is that the parties involved in the transaction know how they are measuring and that the measures are fair (that is to say accurate).

I can totally appreciate wanting a single standard to avoid confusion. That's just not what the passage is talking about, in my opinion. To illustrate, lets say I sell a product called ZooberJuice, and I sell it by the UK Gallon. You, being more used to metric call me up and ask to buy exactly 5 liters of ZooberJuice. I hand you 1 UK Gallon and tell you its the same thing. At this point I'm in the wrong because I'm cheating you of 10% of your order. The measure wasn't FAIR because it wasn't ACCURATE.

[mcgyver]

I would agree with the other answers here:

Levitical law is concerned with equity and fairness more that the type of measurement used.

And of course the principle is honesty in one's dealings.

[markinro]

I am glad to see that the choice of weights and measures presents no problem to the first two people who responded to my question. This is important because the metric system is increasingly used, especially in medicine. If the metric system gains ground slowly, there will be a greater chance of confusion between the two systems. We dealt with that in Australia by having a relatively quick change-over in the 1970s so the issue was soon behind us. However, the United States will run into problems if the change-over is protracted, or if the two systems are used concurrently. Look at this link: http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/01/news/mn-17288

I remember learning metric back in the early 70's. The result was a blended system which I think have been far more costly then a complete conversion to metric. I remember vacationing overseas and using metric. It wasn't a big issue because english units were not even listed. I think the US should just switch over but unfortunately in the states we have these guys called lobbyists - all they do is gum up the works.

[watchinginawe]

Metric conversion: purely secular, or are there Biblical principles?
...
"The key argument for using SI [the modern Metric system] is that it is fair to all concerned. This has been a demand placed on all measuring methods from the beginning of recorded history.
...
"As the book of Leviticus is one of the earlier books of the Bible, we can assume that these demands for honest weights and measures have been around for [thousands of] years."I don't mind the argument of fairness presented by the author you quoted as a Biblical principle. I think their point is to demonstrate for how long commerce has had defined measures and that these measures are subject to abuse in the market place. :hmm: I remember seeing in a movie (so this is not exactly factual) how the standards referenced in the Bible were tested at the time of trade. So for example the buyer would put his standard measure on the balance and the merchant would put their standard measure on the balance and then the transaction measured afterward. The two people trading would obviously have to be in agreement with what the standards of measure were in that case.

With that said, I am not much persuaded by the limited portion of the author's argument for or against metric conversion. But it is interesting.

God Bless!

[Olddad]

First of all I would like to thank everyone for their comments. As I see it, everyone was concerned with fairness and the system of weights and measures was a secondary concern. I was interested to note that when I mentioned efficiency - either the loss of the space shuttle on Mars or medical mix-ups between metric and non metric measures, no-one took up this issue.

In actual fact I think that this is understandable. the New Testament says to render to Caesar that which is Caesar's, so I guess that people simply concluded that matters of efficiency pertain to Caesar.

That is fine by me. My concern was that some Americans might fear that the Metric System is some kind of sinister plot. Let us hope for everyone's welfare that this unlikely to happen

[DaniHansen]

I hail from Europe (Germany) and the metric system is so, so much easier to deal with cause it's base 10, not base 12. I find the American system old and outdated (sorry guys, that's just my opinion coming from someone who had to learn it the other way around).

But it can be a bear to get public opinion swayed from "this is how we've always done it" to "but it's MUCH easier this way and especially with today's global markets". The medical community has already caught on to it and we use it there on a regular basis. Once people are sufficiently used to having their meds dispensed that way, then the rest of it will probably follow. Although I rarely see metric being used in cooking recipes where everything is still done by teaspoons etc. I can let it slide there though (for now anyway). But yea, it's not going to change anytime soon. But as long as there's consistency and accountability ... that's what matters. :D

[Olddad]

First of all Danny, thanks for your post. My wife, who came to Australia just before the metric changeover had to learn the old system, too. Then she had to change back again!

My experience was different. My first exposure to the metric system was in New Zealand. They had started their metric changeover before us, something I didn't know when I went over there for the Christmas holidays. That is summer in this hemisphere, and when they quoted the maximum temperature for the day for Christchurch, 18 degrees, I had no idea what it meant. Well, for an Australian from Sydney, it meant a very cool day for summer!

About a year later, on the 1st of September, they changed our temperatures from Fahrenheit to Celsius. Just like that! I used to joke that we didn't know if we were hot or cold for about two years, but after a while we got used to Celsius temperatures. Now, no-one would bother converting back and forth to check what the temperature really was. In fact, people under 40 have never known anything different.

Other changes were hardly noticeable. Who cares if most good are packed or sold in pounds or kilos, or if liquids are sold in pints, fluid ounces or litres? Milk bottles went from the British pint (568ml) to 600ml and you could hardly see the difference in the shape of the bottle. Certainly prices per kilo are more than twice those of prices per pound, and the price of petrol per litre was 4.54 times the price per British gallon, but prices go up, anyway, so it wasn't a big deal.

Then came the big scary one: miles to kilometres and mph to km/h. All the road signs were changed over in July 1974. We had to learn the new speeds, and the new signs, and there were stickers for our speedometers to mark the spots where the new speed limits were set (which, of course, were very close to the old speed limits, only a little faster).

On the first day of the change I took my old mother out to see the new sign on the Warringah Freeway, just on the north side of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. We travelled over the bridge and headed north. There it was, a big sign with a large, squat number 80 in a red circle.

"There it is! There it is!" I cried.

Mum's eyesight was failing. She had not long given up driving. She squinted at the sign and, from the sound of her voice, she had screwed up her face, too.

"B.O.!" she exclaimed.

Crestfallen, I drove her home.

We got used to coping with MPH speeds on the dashboard and km/h speeds on the road. In time, of course, that car was sold and replaced with a later model that had a metric speedo. Now, of course, the metric conversion is an old memory.

[teddyv]

As an aside, if you want to read about confusion during the changeover between Imperial to metric check out the story of the "Gimli Glider" an Air Canada 767-200 that ran out of fuel because of incorrect calculation of the fuel weight. Fortunately the skill of the pilot allowed them to divert and land with no power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

[Olddad]

While it's true that a change to the metric system can cause confusion, readers can rest assured that Australia and New Zealand managed this change without danger. After all, fuel gauges on cars are not affected by the system of measurement, so the problem of gauging fuel doesn't apply to road transport in the same way it may apply to aircraft.

There are a multitude of problems with conversion from one system to another. Even the American system of weights and the Imperial system has traps for the unwary. For instance, older Australians and many Britons have no idea of their weight in pounds. Weights are expressed in stones, with 14 pounds to each stone. Also the United States short ton is 2000 pounds while the British long ton is 2240 pounds and the pint and the gallon are different. We now have the situation where many English-speaking countries use the metric system and even when they don't, their system of weights and measures are significantly different from the one familiar to Americans in several measures.

The obvious way to reduce confusion would be for all to change to the metric system. As people on this blog have made it clear, this would be a purely technical matter, not involving any religious principles unless people tried to defraud others. As one who lived through such a change I can assure you that it really isn't that bad.

[tango]

This isn't really a discussion of our faith any more, so I'll move the thread into Kicking Back where we can discuss it in as much depth as people want.

In Kicking Back anyone can reply to anyone else, no need to focus exclusively on the OP.