You are free to interpret the nature of rice however you wish.
This was the most zen thing I've ever read.
You are free to interpret the nature of rice however you wish.
This was the most zen thing I've ever read.
Humans are just ravioli.
So are you telling me that if I bake a pie, it is type 5 or 6, but as soon as I cut it it becomes type 1 or 3? This doesn't seem right.
Cutting it to serve or eat, doesn't change it's classification.
It clearly does. I point you to number 3, tacos, in the original link. Where it classifies "Slice if pie" as a taco. Clearly being sliced gives it it's class.
This is also true of hot dogs, where if you didn't slice the bun it would be class 1.
Slicing the hot dog bun is a standard part of it's preparation and presentation. Not really part of this.
And if you were presented a "Slice of pie" as A thing. It would in fact be a Taco.
However If you were presented a whole pie and decided to slice it to eat it. "The Pie" would still be a 5 or 6. "The Slice" would be a 3. "The Pie" didn't change by having a slice removed.
Does that distinction make sense? "A Pie" is one thing. "A Slice of Pie" is a different thing.
That slice of pie is clearly in the wrong category
Fair points, but they did not release a scientific paper like the people who came up qith the salad sandwich soup theory did:
I have started, and ended, many bar chats over this. I am a firm believer in the cube rule above all other starch based food classification systems.
I guess I have to agree because it supports what I've said all along: pie is the best food.
Pie transcends cubic barriers. It cannot be constrained to merely one construct.
What's a salad with croutons?
I will not respect their taxonomy because of their examples: "Sushi" as a class contains zero examples of sushi. Meanwhile there is an example of sushi in the "Toast" class.
all 27 comments