PT114 · S1 · Q10 Bernard: For which language, and

Even though we no longer have to worry about typebars crashing into each other, we're still using that keyboard layout (that was originally designed to slow down people's typing speed) because ... nowadays we use computers, and they got their keyboard layout from the one we had from typewriters. Bernard would be like, "Of course I realize that computers are using the same keyboard layout as typewriters did. That's my whole point. Since computers don't have mechanical typebars, we don't have to worry about limiting people's typing speed, so we'd be crazy to keep using a keyboard layout that slows people down. There must be some other reason, Cora, why they originally designed the QWERTY layout the way they did that continues to be an advantage worth preserving in word-processing computer keyboards." If you think of this like a Paradox question, the tension we had in our minds was Given that ... we don't need to slow people's typing down any more, because the technological limitations of typewriters don't exist on electronic keyboards, Why is it that ... we still have the same keyboard layout? The correct answer actually answered this question. It gave us a previously unestablished reason why we would keep the slower layout even though we don't have to worry about the mechanical problem of typing too fast. This incorrect answer choice is just Explaining the Background. It's giving more details on why the technological limitations have vanished (we've moved over to computers / word-processors now). But we need an answer to tell us why they kept the slower layout, not that they kept the slower layout.

This answer starts to have a logical counter — "We kept the old layout because you can actually still go really fast with it (it doesn't limit typing speed that much)", but then it undermines the force of that by saying "although it is hard to get good enough to be fast while using this traditional layout". Bernard would still be asking, "why, then, would we intentionally keep a design that slows you down, unless you train long enough to be fast at it?"

If we thought we'd be asking people to use both QWERTY and some more modern, speed-conducive layout in their lives (the new one alongside the old one), then this answer provides a reason not to switch to the new layout. But why do we need to save the original one at all, or assume that people would need to learn use a second one alongside the old one? In a world where people just switch from the old layout to the new layout, this answer helps Bernard's case. Bernard would still be asking, "Why haven't we switched to the second, faster layout, given that a person who learned the old one can readily learn to use the new one instead?"

Too Weak: it is possible Unclear Impact It's not clear whether any of these new "choose your layout" keyboards actually exist. This only tells us it's possible to construct them. If they do exist, does anyone have or use them? The gist of the conversation is that the world is still, in general, using the traditional QWERTY layout, and Bernard can't understand why we'd still be using a layout that (Cora claims) was designed to slow us down.