Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Comrade P.]

Lolololololll, look at the kid trying to be insightful. So cute!

;P

Pretty much this. Minus the winky face.

[Harry Baldman]

As a guy pushing 21: you'll be legally an adult. Most people won't be consider you one until you're like 25-27.

But congrats on getting to the legal benchmark, it's important nonetheless.

Welcome to the marvelous world of second-guessing your adulthood for approximately the next decade based on arbitrary and unclear criteria!

[Sirus]

Tomatoes are a fruit because seeds, rip. Also my favorite fruit, my daughter grows great and tasty somewhat sweet and firm ones I can just eat slices of all day.

Are peppers fruit then? They have seeds.

Squashes, too.

[Reelya]

Peapods and beans are also fruit. So is wheat grain.

[Rose]

Peppers are fruit, yes. They're related to tomatoes, even.

[Culise]

Basically, there are two definitions of fruit: a botanical and a culinary one.  Nuts and vegetables are much the same.  As such, a tomato is a (botanical) fruit: a seed-bearing structure formed from the ovary after flowering.  It is also a (culinary) vegetable due to its use in cooking and under tax purposes.  It also also is comprised of (botanical) vegetable matter.  There's a similar rant some people make about nuts in the opposite direction: cashews, almonds, pecans, and walnuts aren't true nuts in a botanical sense, though they're all the seeds from fruit.  Yes, a walnut and its shell is indeed a fruit, as is an almond and its shell.

However, as fun as it is to say "tomato is not a fruit" by misusing one definition to apply to the wrong context then screech about how science is "doing it wrong", to go back to how this argument started in the first place, it's really not Happy, now, is it?
^{Besides, why not point out that "fruit" originally meant *all* products of the soil, including vegetables, nuts, and corns...err, grains? Anyone who uses it only to refer to sweet or sour fleshy, seed-containing plant matter edible raw is obviously using it wrong.}

[Yoink]

Forget tomatoes and watermelon, you guys are the best fruits <3

[martinuzz]

I guess the pumpkin soup I just made was technically a fruit soup as well.

[Reelya]

If you had bread with the soup, then you had fruit soup with fruit bread, which sounds kinda horrible.

[overseer05-15]

I am Froot

[scriver]

Basically, there are two definitions of fruit: a botanical and a culinary one.  Nuts and vegetables are much the same.  As such, a tomato is a (botanical) fruit: a seed-bearing structure formed from the ovary after flowering.  It is also a (culinary) vegetable due to its use in cooking and under tax purposes.  It also also is comprised of (botanical) vegetable matter.  There's a similar rant some people make about nuts in the opposite direction: cashews, almonds, pecans, and walnuts aren't true nuts in a botanical sense, though they're all the seeds from fruit.  Yes, a walnut and its shell is indeed a fruit, as is an almond and its shell.

However, as fun as it is to say "tomato is not a fruit" by misusing one definition to apply to the wrong context then screech about how science is "doing it wrong", to go back to how this argument started in the first place, it's really not Happy, now, is it?
^{Besides, why not point out that "fruit" originally meant *all* products of the soil, including vegetables, nuts, and corns...err, grains? Anyone who uses it only to refer to sweet or sour fleshy, seed-containing plant matter edible raw is obviously using it wrong.}

It's not culinary, it's sociological, cultural, and aboriginal - science has appropriated a word which already had a meaning and a proper and meaningful usage and then arrogantly declared the said definition "wrong"

Also it does make me Happy!

[Culise]

EDIT: Actually, no.  I am not letting myself get dragged into this kind of stupid argument because you decided to piss in everyone's cornflakes to make yourself feel happy, especially while you decide to accuse everyone else of doing what you did to start this entire thing.  It'd be a boring world if we were all the same, but if your happiness comes from proving other people wrong, and worse, doing so by willfully blinding yourself?  You do as you wish, but I'm not going to eat those cornflakes.

[Arx]

You seem to be taking this quite a lot more seriously than Scriver. Particularly given they opened by declaring their definition of a fruit arbitrary. I don't think they're aiming to piss in anyone's cornflakes, just poke a bit of fun at how casually English (and possibly other languages, in this case) approach(es) ambiguity and redefining specific words in different contexts in a decently random fashion.

[Reelya]

The "botanic" usage is apparently older however.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=fruit

Originally in English meaning all products of the soil (vegetables, nuts, grain, acorns); modern narrower sense is from early 13c.

So the sweet-fruit people are you upstart 13th century revisionists. Which is also born out in e.g. German. "Fruckt" is the botanical term, and "obst" is the culinary term.

[CABL]

I demand multiple, simultaneous and devastating defensive cake strikes!