Firstly, I would like to know how many people here believe it is actually possible for society to transition from the base-ten counting system to a base-twelve counting system. Do you believe it is really possible to create a movement influential enough to make such a transition possible? Or is this, really, more of a pipe-dream?

is it feasible? One must remember that Change is, in and of itself, a Negative, in the great work and expense it requires and in how it ruptures history and disconnects us from the Past. Thus, in order for any change to be acceptable, the benefits the end result is projected to bring must outweigh the destruction wrought by the change itself. Even then, it is a gamble. And even then, people might not go along with it. They might not be willing to "go over the hump" for whatever returns are on the other side. This is one reason why Esperanto and other such "universal language" attempts failed.

Lastly, and most importantly, is this project, as whole, beneficial. I strongly, strongly, strongly believe in the inherent superiority of that which evolves organically in society over that which is "pre-planned" based on some airy, intellectual theory. I strongly believe in the Natural, the Traditional, and the Organic over the deliberately engineered and implemented. This is the second big reason why Esperanto failed, in my opinion. For one this, engineering and implementing a change created destruction, chaos, and rupture--at least in the short term. Secondly, I also believe that engineered, micro-planned things are almost always inferior to that which evolves organically out of the natural flows of Human Society. Many, perhaps, think this hogwash, but I am strongly convinced of this concept.

Thus, a deliberate change in such an ancient and embedded aspect of our civilization as our counting system must have strong justification, to outweigh these negatives. I accept that it might be more mathematically convenient, due to factoring. But the question is this: Is it more natural to the human Psyche? If not, no argument based on "scientific efficiency" would justify it me, as science has gotten along just fine with base-ten. I would rather the scientists, capitalists and engineers (they are, after all, trained at this stuff) have to deal with the "inefficiency" of 3.333333 and so forth, than our civilization, as a whole, have to deal with a counting system that is not natural to the human mind.
And the evidence seems to show that the base-ten system is the most natural system for the human mind, as most culture (admittedly not all) have, often independently developed base-ten counting systems on their own. I understand that this is likely due to the fact that we have ten fingers on which we tend to count. Thus, it seems that the base-ten system is inherent in our very Anatomy! Admittedly, that is a physical trait, not a psychological one. But I feel such aspects of our Being tend to be intimately connected. Even speaking from the standpoint of evolutionary theory, after countless millennia of counting on our ten fingers, may we not have evolved brains more "in tune" with counting by tens than with counting by twelves. And, in any case, is it not useful to be able to count round numbers on ones fingers, which can't be done in a base-twelve system?

I suppose the 64,000 dollar question, for me, is: What is more natural to the Human Psyche, the Number Ten or the Number Twelve?

One more thing I forgot to add: what mechanisms would you propose to use to implement this change? I hope not through enforced government mandate. To me such enforcement and micromanaging would be unjust even if the overall superiority of the Twelve system could be proven. Rather you must convince the populace to voluntarily accept this change of their own free wills. To me that is very, very, very important.

Thank you and blessings,

-J.J.

JJ,

I don't believe a society should be coerced to change a la government mandate. The systeme internationale (metric) didn't exactly go over very well in the USA, although some industries use converted customary measure in manufacturing.

We are familiar with human societies coping with less than optimal situations. There are cities at far northern latitudes, where the temperatures are extremely cold, something that isn't optimal for the human's initial natural (tropical) adaptation. People can live at high altitudes, and have acclimated. So it isn't necessarily true that just because mankind uses a less than optimal base that dozenal advocacy is unwarranted.

I believe dozenal is the optimal base for humanity. It is a natural "round number". The dozen is easily divisible by simple ratios, into fractions familar to the common man for millenia. The multiples of a dozen crop up most often in the commonest simple calculations. So dozenal's greater efficiency isn't just some engineer striving for a smoother glide. I think the efficiency and ease of use is an enabling mechanism. Fractions and computation become easier for those who use dozenal.

Dozenal differs from "Centrally planned" concepts like high-rise public housing, the esperanto or interlingua movements, communism, etc. in that it is not "planned". Dozenal is a method of numeration related to decimal in its position-based notation. The only difference is that the numeration system uses 2x2x3 rather than 2x5 for its base. Adjunct to this difference are systems of measure and quantification, and nature of symbols and nomenclature, that are or would be socially conceived. The most successful method of conceiving these adjunct properties would be that society develops them "organically".

I believe that one should use dozenal whenever practical, that the individual employs it "organically". Through practical everyday use, applications of dozenal should arise that, because these applications are advantageous in the marketplace, the dozenal process can be supported in society by its own merit. Let the marketplace decide what dozenal applications make sense. Forcing people by edict to use a technique, however superior, will not be popular or supported with any real gusto. It will only alienate people from the technique and the people who forced them into it.

There are plenty of de facto dozenal processes at work in society, mostly vestigial. These exist in the way we keep track of hours and in the arrangement and grouping of items to be bundled in manufacturing and shipping and sales, for instance. There is plenty of discussion about the merits on this site. I think the salesman and the manufacturer recognize the merits of groupings by the dozen or divisions into dozens. All the dozenal advocate is saying is that things could be easier and simpler if we only used a base that makes this grouping less difficult to envision and manipulate.

An example of a process in a different base that has found application in society comes through the use of hexadecimal. Computers use binary processes because of the nature of electronic switches. Hexadecimal is ideal for the compression of binary digits (bits) into more manageable notation. The computer mechanism itself, as conceived today, has no need for anything other than binary; hexadecimal aids human programmers. The reason people use hex is because it is a handy way to compress bits and envision their patterns. People can manipulate the bits in terms of bytes (two hex digits) easier (you'd have to talk to a programmer about this). The compression process via hex is so handy that even graphic designers, creative professionals that operate in a completely different mindset, have become familiar with hex. This is because the primary way of encoding 3 channel 24 bit color on the web is through RRGGBB or hex notation. I don't think graphic designers actually compute with hex; they only use hex to the extent it helps them with their job. Anyone forcing hexadecimal on the entire population would be met with opposition, confusion, and contempt from plenty of people. The market has identified a feasible application of hex in a niche and supports it.

At the large scale, I, and other dozenal enthusiasts, believe that perhaps "organically", society may evolve to become more dozenal. But a hard line putsch of decimal is simply not the right way to go. Enthusiasm for the dozenal system does not argue with adoption of the dozenal system "of one's own free will." The "mechanisms" used to implement the "change" should indeed be practical processes that prove themselves in the marketplace, and not Big Brother.

DominusVobiscum,

I can't but agree with all of your sentiments.

I believe I have posed the same question in another thread. Yes, I do believe such a system could be introduced, if and possibly only if, there can be shown a significant economic reason for its use.

Quite right! The use of traditional measures, many of which had the dozen as their basis despite the introduction of a decimal based number system after these measures were already in place, vindicates your opinion. Traditional units are examples that of measures that "evolves organically in society" as opposed to something like the metric system which was "deliberately engineered and implemented".

Absolutely! Thats why despite a ten based number system the use of dozen based units remained in use for over two thousand years. Obviously the dozen based units were of no use to the people using them and so readily gave them up for decimal measures. Of course, the metric system was designed by scientists and engineers for their own purposes which were more important than the needs of the carpenter, baker, seamstress, builder, cooper, brewer and the myriad of other craftsmen and women.

Exactly. Of course they were no civilizations that counted on the separate sections or 'phalanges' of each finger to count in twelves (there are twelve phalanges on the four fingers of each hand). And of course the Romans were completely ridiculous to use a set of fractions based on twelfths as they were of greater use than fractions based on ten. Hmm, I wonder where we got 12 inches to the foot and 12 ounces in a Troy pound. So I suppose that there is no relevance to 12 men on a jury, 12 tribes of Isreal, that Jersusalem in Revelations is 12,000 by 12,000 by 12,000 stadia with twelve gates and twelve angels and the names of the twelve tribes, and with twelve foundations with the names of the twelve apostles on each foundation, and the walls were 144 cubits thick "by man's measurement", and-- oh forget it, there isn't any real significance to twelve anywhere.

PS The following quote is from your next post.

Good for you, to force the adoption would be outrageous!!! . You obviously think that systems such as the metric system should not be foisted upon populations by mandate of the government which is the case in every single country that now is forced to use this system. Not one government has given their citizens the opportunity of a referendum for the adoption or rejection of the metric system.

We couldn't even contemplate doing the same as governments around the world have already done in mandating the use of the metric system without the consent of their citizens. As pointed out before, no government in the world has given its citizens a referendum on the acceptance of the metric system. We shouldn't do the same with a duodecimal based system. After all, this is very like an historical event where a government imposed taxation without representation upon its colonial citizens. It's enough to start a war of independence!!!!

Oh, I think decimal will remain our primary way of numeration, but I also think dozenal could be a very nice niche player, like binary.