msmemory_archive: (Default)
[personal profile] msmemory_archive
Actually, I don't need help, I just use my LJ to vent.

Ooh, look! a button!

Date: 2010-10-12 07:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] herooftheage.livejournal.com
As may be, but it's also technically a vegetable. The distinction most people think of when they say tomatoes aren't vegetables is primarily cultural, with a bit of culinary meaning as well, and as such, not particularly amenable to a technical treatment. In the broad taxonomic sense of "animal, vegetable, or mineral?", tomatoes definitely qualify. :)

Re: Ooh, look! a button!

Date: 2010-10-12 07:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] iheronimus.livejournal.com
How is it technically a vegetable? The commonly accepted definition of a fruit is a seed-bearing part of a plant. Parsnips and potatoes do not have seeds. Of course, neither do mushrooms, for the sake of argument...

Re: Ooh, look! a button!

Date: 2010-10-12 08:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] herooftheage.livejournal.com
In the exact same sense that potatoes and carrots are tubers, and yet are also vegetables. That they belong to a refined sub-class doesn't deny them entry into the enclosing class.

Re: Ooh, look! a button!

Date: 2010-10-13 02:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pale-chartreuse.livejournal.com
U. S. Supreme Court, Nix v. Hedden in 1893 challenged the Tariff Act of 1883. The tariff levied a tax on imported vegetables but not on fruit. The Nix family tomato vendors were suing to recover back duties paid under protest. The court decision declared tomatoes to be a vegetable (in common speech) for tax purposes.

Profile

msmemory_archive: (Default)
msmemory_archive

April 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 5th, 2025 11:37 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios