Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!husc6!caip!sri-spam!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!beryl!mgdlin
From: mgdlin@beryl.berkeley.edu (Gary D. Lindsay)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Tomatoes, Fruit or Vegetable.
Message-ID: <1298@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Fri, 19-Sep-86 16:23:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: jade.1298
Posted: Fri Sep 19 16:23:43 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Sep-86 03:24:46 EDT
References: <1886@shark.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@jade.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mgdlin@beryl.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Gary D. Lindsay)
Distribution: na
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 31

In article <1886@shark.UUCP> ronba@shark.UUCP (Ron Bates) writes:
>>
>
>I've read that a tomato is a fruit until it is cooked, when it is then
>a vegetable.  Does it really matter?
>
>If this definition is correct, then zucchini, pumpkins, green beans, chilies,
>and corn are fruits while seedless grapes are a vegetable!
>
>Some how this doesn't sound right.

The whole problem here is one of perspective.  A tomato is a
fruit to the botanist, and a vegetable to the greengrocer.
Neither position is intrinsically right or wrong - only in con-
text can we evaluate.

(I could go into a discussion of linguistic/cultural perceptions of
color, as well:  suffice it to say where you stand on an issue depends
on where you sit.)

As far as this relating to motss: our perspectives are valid
to us.  Unfortunately, many in the 90% minority deny the
validity of our perspectives.  One man's making love is
another's perversion.

Let's send the tomato controversy to net.tower.babel or
/dev/null.


Gary
mgdlin@beryl.berkeley.edu