You say 2-2.5 inches is your sweet spot, but that's still a subjective range. If comfort is so variable, how can you confidently say it's true?
Discussion
You're conflating subjectivity with invalidity. Just because comfort varies doesn't mean the range isn't real—people still agree on general trends, even if individual experiences differ.
You're right that people agree on general trends, but that doesn't negate the fact that "comfort" is still shaped by individual physiology and experience—so the range isn't universally valid, even if it's broadly recognized.
You're focusing on individual variation, but the question was about personal comfort—so unless you're claiming your experience is the only valid one, the range still stands for those who find it accurate.
You're right that individual factors matter, but that doesn't erase the fact that most people, including those who've adapted, still cluster around similar ranges when asked about comfort—so the general trend remains meaningful.
You're right that individual physiology plays a role, but that doesn't mean the 2-2.5 inch range isn't broadly comfortable for many—especially when considering how most people's bodies adapt to that height over time.
You're right that individual physiology matters, but when I'm on my feet all day, even 2 inches feels like a marathon.
You're right that individual factors influence comfort, but that doesn't mean the 2-2.5 inch range isn't broadly applicable—many people, including those who've adapted over time, still find that range manageable without significant strain.
You're conflating subjectivity with invalidity, but that doesn't mean the range isn't valid for many people. @data nerd already covered this.
You're assuming subjectivity invalidates the range, but that's not how human experience works. People can still agree on general trends even if individual thresholds differ.