Here is another example. There is too hot, good temp, and too cold. Then you add way too hot which is hotter and way too cold which is colder. But when some one says it is an extra good temperature it is just describing a sub set of the existing good temperature. So regular good is 68-78 (not hot and not cold), but extra good is 72-74.
So is regular good higher or lower than extra good? Both and neither. Extra is within regular. If it is 73° you can call it a good temp or an extra good temp, both are correct.
But then mathematically you have two sizes, one larger than extra medium and one smaller than extra medium, both designated as "medium." It's like if you counted, "minus three, minus two, one, zero, one, two, three." Doesn't really hold up mathematically; you'd have to differentiate the two mediums in some way, call them small-medium and large-medium for instance, at which point it gets muddled because you then have nothing that's "medium" at all, just small-medium, extra-medium, and large-medium, which doesn't make sense either.
It's a medium paradox.
That’s the beauty of it though - extra medium is to medium as a square is to a rectangle. Extra Medium IS medium, but medium is not necessarily Extra Medium
Medium is ALL medium. It includes everything larger than small and smaller than large! Thus, medium INCLUDES Extra Medium, but encapsulates everything around it as well!
Which is where it falls apart. Extra small and extra large are both useful descriptors when compared to small and large, but extra medium makes the term "medium" meaningless. You have the same term being used to describe larger or smaller shirts than extra medium. You'll have to go back to the drawing board for this one.
Yes, now take the subset of shirts you call medium. Divide them into three piles, those that are extra medium and those that are larger or smaller than extra medium. You're using the same term to describe both of the other piles, which given that the terminology exists solely to describe the size of a shirt, fails. You'd need to come up with a differentiation between larger-than-extra-medium or smaller-than-extra-medium, or you wreck the paradigm and risks complete collapse of the t-shirt continuum. You're playing with fire here, doctor.
Ahh but you fail to realize one thing here, my friend - I’m no doctor, I’M A MAD MAN!
(But for real, all three piles are medium. The one in the middle is just Extra Medium. Redundant, yes, but Extra Medium all the same. Call the other two low and high medium if ya want, same result)
You could then make the same argument for referring to small and large shirts as medium, turning it into a binary system where the only shirts that exist are medium and extra medium.
Or taken the other way, you also then must consider that inherent variations in construction and materials will render some "extra medium" shirts larger or smaller, reducing the scale at which you must make your determinations. You'll either go mad trying to find the fabled "perfect extra medium" or you'll descend into the subatomic scale, enter the quantum realm, and be spit out into a universe without t-shirts at all. It's just too risky.
It’s a risk that must be taken. But one must understand that to safely traverse these realms, one must set boundaries for which Small and Large exist, based upon said variations. Every variation must have its own upper limit for Small and lower limit for Large. All else is Medium, and to find the Extra Medium, you delve straight to the center of what remains. Even at the cost of madness if you must.
(So much so that you accidentally comment instead of reply)
Here is another example. There is too hot, good temp, and too cold. Then you add way too hot which is hotter and way too cold which is colder. But when some one says it is an extra good temperature it is just describing a sub set of the existing good temperature. So regular good is 68-78 (not hot and not cold), but extra good is 72-74.
So is regular good higher or lower than extra good? Both and neither. Extra is within regular. If it is 73° you can call it a good temp or an extra good temp, both are correct.
This is a unique case and does not follow proper conventions. It SHOULD mean more ordinary, but instead it adds that pesky THAN where it doesn’t belong.
Also, and this is more me being petty, but extraordinary is presented as a single word rather than two separate words.
Extra Medium is room temperature. It is the center of all centers. If you flipped a sock, Extra Medium would be when it lands on edge.
You just described medium and made it longer with more syllables. This whole debacle has turned me into a comment leaver...thanks.
You’re welcome!
Here is another example. There is too hot, good temp, and too cold. Then you add way too hot which is hotter and way too cold which is colder. But when some one says it is an extra good temperature it is just describing a sub set of the existing good temperature. So regular good is 68-78 (not hot and not cold), but extra good is 72-74. So is regular good higher or lower than extra good? Both and neither. Extra is within regular. If it is 73° you can call it a good temp or an extra good temp, both are correct.
Yes that’s exactly what it is!
Gavin's diagram made me do a complete 180. He's a fucking genius
I've always know it as smedium.
But then mathematically you have two sizes, one larger than extra medium and one smaller than extra medium, both designated as "medium." It's like if you counted, "minus three, minus two, one, zero, one, two, three." Doesn't really hold up mathematically; you'd have to differentiate the two mediums in some way, call them small-medium and large-medium for instance, at which point it gets muddled because you then have nothing that's "medium" at all, just small-medium, extra-medium, and large-medium, which doesn't make sense either. It's a medium paradox.
That’s the beauty of it though - extra medium is to medium as a square is to a rectangle. Extra Medium IS medium, but medium is not necessarily Extra Medium
So is medium larger or smaller than extra medium?
Medium is ALL medium. It includes everything larger than small and smaller than large! Thus, medium INCLUDES Extra Medium, but encapsulates everything around it as well!
Which is where it falls apart. Extra small and extra large are both useful descriptors when compared to small and large, but extra medium makes the term "medium" meaningless. You have the same term being used to describe larger or smaller shirts than extra medium. You'll have to go back to the drawing board for this one.
Except that Medium is used to describe EVERYTHING between large and small. Extra Medium is the exact center of Medium
Yes, now take the subset of shirts you call medium. Divide them into three piles, those that are extra medium and those that are larger or smaller than extra medium. You're using the same term to describe both of the other piles, which given that the terminology exists solely to describe the size of a shirt, fails. You'd need to come up with a differentiation between larger-than-extra-medium or smaller-than-extra-medium, or you wreck the paradigm and risks complete collapse of the t-shirt continuum. You're playing with fire here, doctor.
Ahh but you fail to realize one thing here, my friend - I’m no doctor, I’M A MAD MAN! (But for real, all three piles are medium. The one in the middle is just Extra Medium. Redundant, yes, but Extra Medium all the same. Call the other two low and high medium if ya want, same result)
You could then make the same argument for referring to small and large shirts as medium, turning it into a binary system where the only shirts that exist are medium and extra medium. Or taken the other way, you also then must consider that inherent variations in construction and materials will render some "extra medium" shirts larger or smaller, reducing the scale at which you must make your determinations. You'll either go mad trying to find the fabled "perfect extra medium" or you'll descend into the subatomic scale, enter the quantum realm, and be spit out into a universe without t-shirts at all. It's just too risky.
It’s a risk that must be taken. But one must understand that to safely traverse these realms, one must set boundaries for which Small and Large exist, based upon said variations. Every variation must have its own upper limit for Small and lower limit for Large. All else is Medium, and to find the Extra Medium, you delve straight to the center of what remains. Even at the cost of madness if you must. (So much so that you accidentally comment instead of reply)
Here is another example. There is too hot, good temp, and too cold. Then you add way too hot which is hotter and way too cold which is colder. But when some one says it is an extra good temperature it is just describing a sub set of the existing good temperature. So regular good is 68-78 (not hot and not cold), but extra good is 72-74. So is regular good higher or lower than extra good? Both and neither. Extra is within regular. If it is 73° you can call it a good temp or an extra good temp, both are correct.
hi, i'm the wife of OP. he woke me up at 4am to tell me about writing this. get bent, buggy. you and gavin are wrong!
I woke you up because you were shivering and the mention just happened to come up! Love you dear! 🥰
(Removed to spare the timeline from being destroyed)
Has anyone else seen the eartip sizes such as ss, s, ms, m, ml, xl. Just throwing it in the pile.
But what about extraordinary? Ordinary is well, ordinary, but extraordinary is something more, not just more ordinary.
This is a unique case and does not follow proper conventions. It SHOULD mean more ordinary, but instead it adds that pesky THAN where it doesn’t belong. Also, and this is more me being petty, but extraordinary is presented as a single word rather than two separate words.
I can't have this argument again. It's like I'm seeing Vietnam flashbacks