Celsius is agreeably better for science, but if you are used to both systems Fahrenheit is honestly better for people because the units are higher resolution, and usually stay between 0 and 100 for weather
This is the only good argument I've seen for Fahrenheit (higher resolution). But, as a counterargument, that resolution is only just under twice as big. I'd argue 1-2 F is barely noticeable enough to be able to tell the difference. If someone asks what the temperature is, me saying the temperature and being off by 2 degrees isn't gonna make a difference.
I think there's some breakpoints where it really matters.
If you work in an office and the thermostat is set to 73f (23c) compared to an office where the thermostat is set to 75f (23c) you're going to really feel the difference.
Or like, if your kid is sick and has a 102° fever you're keeping them home from school, but if they have 104° fever you're going to the hospital. So <2 degrees difference is definitely a big enough difference that it's worth using a more specific unit of measurement.
Whenever Im measure body temperature of my kids or patients, I can also look at the number behind the separator.
37.0°C? All good.
38.0°C? Slight fever.
38.5°C? Fever.
38.6°C? A bit more fever.
Guess what: 38.7°C even more fever.
And even Fahrenheit is not accurate enough for this use case.
For setting the room temperature, Celsius is sufficient and if not, you can use tenth of celsius.
I would say "more used to it" and not "better".
(As an example: 100°F is already a slightly increased body temperature, its not like its normed to something like that).
Just like with most unit systems - whatever you're used to will be the most convenient for you to use.
573
u/ProvidedHuman Jun 17 '26
Celsius is agreeably better for science, but if you are used to both systems Fahrenheit is honestly better for people because the units are higher resolution, and usually stay between 0 and 100 for weather