12 ms·

You know that fish is a type of meat, right?

Symmetry 9y ago
Lots of cultures don't class fish in with most meats. In traditional Catholicism the rule against meat on Fridays didn't apply to fish and likewise with Japanese Buddhist rules against meat eating. It's sort of like how most people consider tomatoes to be vegetables even though they aren't, scientifically. Yeah, in 21st century English fish is a meat but it's non-centrally meat so the meaning is clear when you apply Gricean norms.
- Shikadi 9y ago
  Woah woah woah, hold up there. Scientifically speaking, a vegetable is the edible part of a plant. Tomatos are vegetables and fruits scientifically. This is like arguing that a square isn't a rectangle! Okay, carry on <3
- hnzix 9y ago
  > In traditional Catholicism the rule against meat on Fridays didn't apply to fish Beaver meat is also a-ok! https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/once-upon-a-time-the-catholic-church-decided-that-beavers-were-fish/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/once-...
- taneq 9y ago
  Likewise chicken is often not considered 'meat' despite clearly being the flesh of an animal. It's kind of weird, but not as weird as the people who think "a little bit of ham" in a salad doesn't count as meat.
- gizmo686 9y ago
  Judism also doesn't consider fish meat for the purposes of Kosher-ness.
- brepl 9y ago
  > Yeah, in 21st century English fish is a meat Having spent the best part of the last 17 years speaking 21st century English, this is a surprisingly strong assertion to me. From http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/115517 http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/115517: > The flesh of animals used as food, esp. excluding fish...
- pault 9y ago
  When I was visiting Brazil I met a bunch of people that called themselves vegetarians who would eat chicken and bacon. Turns out "vegetarian" means not eating beef. It led to some pretty funny misunderstandings.
o_____________o 9y ago
I've found that "meat" is sometimes used in casual English as "Animal muscle/meat, but not fish" I think there's a slight conceptual divide on both the hard-carnivore-against-fish and pescatarian groups. Old world traditions tend to distinguish them separately as well.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  True, but it's just stupid, fish are animals.
  - o_____________o 9y ago
    I know you're being flippant, but we'd lose a lot of what makes language beautiful if we beat the looseness and poetry out of conversational exchanges. Pendatic assertions often miss the fact that words drift in an ever-shifting consensus.
    - gnaritas 9y ago
      No it's more than that; perhaps you haven't discussed with some people, but a great many people actually do believe fish are not animals. It's not mere semantics, they don't actually consider them animals at all, as if animal, plant, and fish are all different categories. Don't dismiss as pedantry what is actually a very interesting topic.
      - o_____________o 9y ago
        Point generally taken, but that's a conceptual leap to make when talking about what "meat" means in a casual conversation. As an aside, I don't think I've encountered anyone who thinks fish aren't animals (but of course they exist)
- taejo 9y ago
  > I've found that "meat" is sometimes used in casual English as "Animal muscle/meat, but not fish" But also often monophylectically as "mammal muscle/meat".
SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago
Catholics don't consider fish meat. I'm not sure what they think it is, maybe some sort of creepily mobile mushroom?
- hnzix 9y ago
  And some Buddhist and Hindu sects consider mushrooms to be meat.
  - CuriouslyC 9y ago
    Ironically enough, fungi and animals separated later in the tree of life than plants. So, while certainly not correct, there is a kernel of truth there.
  - pattisapu 9y ago
    Not as meat. For some Hindus anyway mushrooms and leeks are prohibited just like meat.

Lots of cultures don't class fish in with most meats. In traditional Catholicism the rule against meat on Fridays didn't apply to fish and likewise with Japanese Buddhist rules against meat eating. It's sort of like how most people consider tomatoes to be vegetables even though they aren't, scientifically. Yeah, in 21st century English fish is a meat but it's non-centrally meat so the meaning is clear when you apply Gricean norms.

Shikadi 9y ago
Woah woah woah, hold up there. Scientifically speaking, a vegetable is the edible part of a plant. Tomatos are vegetables and fruits scientifically. This is like arguing that a square isn't a rectangle! Okay, carry on <3
hnzix 9y ago
> In traditional Catholicism the rule against meat on Fridays didn't apply to fish Beaver meat is also a-ok! https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/once-upon-a-time-the-catholic-church-decided-that-beavers-were-fish/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/once-...
taneq 9y ago
Likewise chicken is often not considered 'meat' despite clearly being the flesh of an animal. It's kind of weird, but not as weird as the people who think "a little bit of ham" in a salad doesn't count as meat.
gizmo686 9y ago
Judism also doesn't consider fish meat for the purposes of Kosher-ness.
brepl 9y ago
> Yeah, in 21st century English fish is a meat Having spent the best part of the last 17 years speaking 21st century English, this is a surprisingly strong assertion to me. From http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/115517 http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/115517: > The flesh of animals used as food, esp. excluding fish...
pault 9y ago
When I was visiting Brazil I met a bunch of people that called themselves vegetarians who would eat chicken and bacon. Turns out "vegetarian" means not eating beef. It led to some pretty funny misunderstandings.

o_____________o 9y ago

I've found that "meat" is sometimes used in casual English as "Animal muscle/meat, but not fish" I think there's a slight conceptual divide on both the hard-carnivore-against-fish and pescatarian groups. Old world traditions tend to distinguish them separately as well.

gnaritas 9y ago
True, but it's just stupid, fish are animals.
- o_____________o 9y ago
  I know you're being flippant, but we'd lose a lot of what makes language beautiful if we beat the looseness and poetry out of conversational exchanges. Pendatic assertions often miss the fact that words drift in an ever-shifting consensus.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    No it's more than that; perhaps you haven't discussed with some people, but a great many people actually do believe fish are not animals. It's not mere semantics, they don't actually consider them animals at all, as if animal, plant, and fish are all different categories. Don't dismiss as pedantry what is actually a very interesting topic.
    - o_____________o 9y ago
      Point generally taken, but that's a conceptual leap to make when talking about what "meat" means in a casual conversation. As an aside, I don't think I've encountered anyone who thinks fish aren't animals (but of course they exist)
taejo 9y ago
> I've found that "meat" is sometimes used in casual English as "Animal muscle/meat, but not fish" But also often monophylectically as "mammal muscle/meat".

SAI_Peregrinus 9y ago

Catholics don't consider fish meat. I'm not sure what they think it is, maybe some sort of creepily mobile mushroom?

hnzix 9y ago
And some Buddhist and Hindu sects consider mushrooms to be meat.
- CuriouslyC 9y ago
  Ironically enough, fungi and animals separated later in the tree of life than plants. So, while certainly not correct, there is a kernel of truth there.
- pattisapu 9y ago
  Not as meat. For some Hindus anyway mushrooms and leeks are prohibited just like meat.