• 8 Posts
  • 135 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 27th, 2024

help-circle


  • Ich bin Psychotherapeutin. Wenn jemand in ambulanter Therapie nicht kommt fehlen mir halt einfach ~100€ in dem Monat. In der Psychotherapie werden deshalb häufig Ausfallhonorare vereinbart, um diesen Ausfall zumindest teilweise zu kompensieren.

    Manche Ausfalle kann man patientenseitig nicht verhindern, dafür habe ich das größte Verständnis. Eine gute Lösung gibt es nicht, da ambulante Gesundheitsdienstleistungen immer auf Honorarbasis funktionieren.

    Aber medizinische Praxen haben dafür seit langem eine eigene Lösung gefunden: Überbuchen. Jeder Termin wird knapp kalkuliert, der Nachfolgetermin dann leicht verschoben, um die durchschnittlich ja jeden Tag eintretenden Ausfälle gar nicht zu bemerken. Deswegen warten wir im Wartezimmer teilweise über eine Stunde.

    Das heißt ich hab schon Verständnis für Praxen, die jetzt auch bei medizinischen Terminen nach Ausfallhonoraren fragen - aber wenn das kommt, dann gibt es keine Rechtfertigung für diese Wartezeiten mehr. Im Moment geht den ärztlichen Niedergelassenen kein Geld verloren, die Patient:innen zahlen den Ausfall bereits, in Wartezeit.

    Wenn die Ausfallhonorare kommen und wir immer noch stundenlang warten müssen, dann nehmen die Praxen mehr Geld ein, als sie realistischerweise an dem Tag verdient haben könnten. Und das muss echt nicht sein.





  • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzBurning Up
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    ok, so you genuinely think, that people who use celsius cannot experience the sensation of “hot” and “cold” without a number referencing the temperature directly in front of them? Specifically that of the celsius system?

    No and that’s not what I claimed. What I’m saying is that if you tell someone accustomed to Celcius “it’s 42F° outside, oh by the way fahrenheit goes from 0=really cold to 100=really hot”, they have no idea about the actual weather. The points of 0 and 100 Fahrenheit are way to arbitrary to be understood without having experienced them.

    “Really cold” and “really hot” are completely subjective. They depend on the climate you’re used to and come down to personal preference even. Your “really cold” might be my “pleasantly chilly”. And even if I knew what 0F° and 100F° were in C° I’d have no idea how that relates to the (probably much more common) values between them. Percentages of subjective temperature tell me nothing. 20F° would basically have to be 20% warmer than “really cold”, right? Intuitively I would have guessed somewhere around 7°C (nice autumn morning), turns out 20F° is still way below the freezing point. The idea of 0F° and 100F° does not, in fact, help me interpret these values “with no prior understanding”.

    It’s simply not an intuitive frame of reference - except if you have at one point learned what the numbers mean. And at this point it’s exactly as useful als Celcius.


  • and this is generally the case. I’m sure if you were to sample the opinion of people randomly, this is roughly what you would get back.

    Only if you asked people accustomed to Fahrenheit. People who aren’t used to it cannot use it without prior understanding at all. To think otherwise just proves your confirmation bias again.

    I may have said that it was an intuitive feature of fahrenheit, and it is, and so is the 0-100 scale of water freezing/boiling in celsius, but that’s irrelevant aside from the fact that it’s intuitive

    Then what should “intuitive” even mean if not “intuitive to use”? Because it certainly isn’t that.


  • Originally you replied to me, replying to someone else claiming fahrenheit was “a 0-100 scale of how hot it is outside” and required “no prior understanding to use it as such”. This was never about Celsius being intuitive or not, it was about Fahrenheit. If you didn’t disagree with me there, your replies to me were pointless. Since then you seem to be arguing against a straw man.

    I never claimed Celcius to be intuitive, in fact I claimed the opposite - neither scale is intuitive. Therefore Fahrenheit and Celcius are equally useful in measuring the weather and the idea of Fahrenheit being especially suitable is incorrect, based on the confirmation bias of those who are already used to it. That’s the only argument I’m making here.






  • “Fahrenheit isn’t more intuitive” doesn’t not mean “Celcius is more intuitive”. You’re mistaken if you think that’s what’s being argued here.

    Neither one is intuitive. Intuition isn’t a useful metric here anyway. After all we could ask: Which one is more intuitive - kilometers or miles? Kilograms or pounds? Do we have to change how me measure time (base 12) to a base 10 as well, would that be more intuitive?

    Answer is no. All those units have to be learned and filled with experience anyway. Nobody can interpret temperature scales intuitively, neither Fahrenheit nor Celsius.

    Fahrenheit simply has no advantage over Celcius. And it doesn’t have to. Some people are used to it, so keep using it by all means. Don’t argue that it’s superior and we’re all good.






  • Mrs_deWinter@feddit.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzBurning Up
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    If you somehow knew nothing about each temperature unit, but you did know base 10, I feel like Fahrenheit would be more intuitive.

    Would it though? Because it’s not like people who didn’t grew up with Fahrenheit can just intuitively use and interpret it. Maybe base ten is “more intuitive”, but I’d argue not to any meaningful degree. Both scales have to be explained, experienced, and tied to personal reference points.