yeah. I don't know how common it is but it was the subject of some debate at the kids' table for a few thanksgivings. I was raised on the "cobbler and pie are two distinct dishes" side of the family.
I think of it as a pie kind of the same way I think of pizza as a pie: like, it's maybe technically a pie but it's different enough that it merits its own name. Calling it "pie" sounds odd.
Interesting, Ive only ever made or seen cobblers made in rectangular pans. I wonder if shape is the dividing line between people who consider them pies vs not.
Apple jam exists, but mostly apples make applesauce or apple butter or apple jelly. Or apple pie.
Orange pulp and pith turn bitter when cooked, which is why marmalade uses only the juice and a thin layer of the zest, which is boiled and drained to remove bitterness before cooking with the juice.
Yes I understand that to be true. I tried with some of my extra lemons and somehow managed to get the bitterness without the gelling effect, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it works if properly done.
Come autumn I can buy a 20lb bag of winesap apples for like 15 (probably 20 this year) and then I get to can SO MUCH apple butter! It's a delight! Homemade is great.
I've never had homemade! There is an apple festival near me every year, and I grab what I can there, though. Every year I think to myself that "this is the year I will pick some apples and I will make stuff out of them for cheap!", but laziness always wins lol.
It's easy to make in the slow cooker! Apples, both sugar, some spices, let them cook until the dice apples feel hollow, puree them, let cook even longer til desired consistency!
"This orange sucks. I can't just bite into it and enjoy it like an apple." That's not a sensible assessment of the orange. That's applying the desired attributes of an apple to an orange.
Are you confusing "can't" and "can, but is fruitless" (pun intended)?
Like, if someone says to you "you can't put nails in with a screwdriver", are you going to say "You totally can. Just whack the nail with the handle. I don't see the problem".
Or, like, "You can't eat crayons" do you respond "sure you can. chew it up and eat it. i don't see the problem. it's just like a cookie"
"With this fruit this step is mandatory and with the other it's optional" seems like a perfectly fair comparison. If you're going around finding fault with the fruit because of that comparison, that's a completely separate step that is on you.
So you're telling me neurotypical/non-autistic people are incapable of making comparisons without attaching a judgment value to them?
Like, if you had two daughters who took the same math test, you would be unable to compare how they did without finding fault with the one that "did worse"? You would actually end up loving that one less unless you could convince yourself of an excuse that makes the comparison "apples to oranges"?
How would I know what neurotypical people do? You can hardly compare me to a neurotypical person, that's like... The phrase escapes me.
I am going to tear apart the insinuation that "it has faults" mean "I love it less." My favourite D&D movie is the second one, which most people are unaware even exists. I can enjoy a flawed movie while recognising its flaws. Why would my love for my children be dependant on a maths test?
Also, "did worse" is objective when it comes to maths tests. You get graded, and the answers are absolute.
Think of this. One daughter gets A grades in english, but C grades in maths. The other daughter, it's inverted. Which daughter is smarter? You can't... Actually, you SHOULDN'T compare them. Morally.
Think of this. One daughter gets A grades in english, but C grades in maths. The other daughter, it’s inverted.
What do you call the action of putting their grades together like this, without the sentences you put after it? (this is the most important question of this comment).
You can’t… Actually, you SHOULDN’T compare them. Morally.
Is your objection to comparing apples and oranges also a moral one? Or are apples and oranges incomparable in a different way than a child who gets all Cs and a child who gets all As?
(Or is a child who gets all Cs comparable to a child who gets all As in a way a child who gets one C and one A is not comparable to a child who gets one A and one C? Because in that case you're arguing in bad faith.)
And if you believe it is possible but immoral to compare apples and oranges, why?
Like, if you had two daughters who took the same math test, you would be unable to compare how they did without finding fault with the one that “did worse”?
Also, “did worse” is objective when it comes to maths tests. You get graded, and the answers are absolute.
So you are comfortable saying someone who can't read English well and got a C did worse at a math test than someone with dyslexia who got a B than who has a private tutor who got an A than someone who cheated on the test who got an A+?
So you claim it is possible and morally upstanding to say some of these people did worse than others, but that this is not an act of comparing those people, which would be immoral and perhaps incongruous?
Or are you saying it is moral to compare people when it is at least as objective as comparing written test results between a dyslexic kid and a kid with a private tutor?
Or do you perceive me reminding you of possible differences between students as unfair and do you hold people should assume people are comparable for "objective" things like a math test unless they are explicitly validated exceptions? (which is also a position I've seen people de facto hold).
I am going to tear apart the insinuation that “it has faults” mean “I love it less.” My favourite D&D movie is the second one, which most people are unaware even exists. I can enjoy a flawed movie while recognising its flaws. Why would my love for my children be dependant on a maths test?
Alright, fair, that's on me, I assumed that because you were conflating comparison with critique and judgment you were also conflating it with more in a way I've seen people do. And I assumed you were NT because you were arguing against an autistic intepretation, which is also bad.
The point of the saying is that you shouldn't fault a thing for not being like another different thing. It's not that you can't do it. But you wouldn't evaluate the quality of an orange on the same parameters you would an apple.
All the people trying to explain it to us isn’t helping at all. This is a stupid saying and we’re not missing out in it’s meaning. Gonna go back to doing our own thing 👋
The phrase isn't "you can't compare apples and oranges" it's "it's like comparing apples and oranges". Meaning that what you're comparing are distinct things with their own merits, and it would be silly to try to declare an objective winner. It basically does mean that apples and oranges aren't the same.
Never ever have I seen it used in that manner. It's always used as a thought terminating cliche suggesting that any comparison requires two things to be equal.
If your job is to grade oranges for sale, and an apple hits your line, it will fail completely.
If your job is to grade apple cider for sale, and someone hands you a cup of orange juice, even the best orange juice ever created, you can't give it marks for how good it is as apple cider.
Velociraptors and rabbits are both land dwelling creatures, that existed on the planet earth, and both featured in the game Amju pet zoo. Why can't we compare them?!?
Pretty much everything we have knowledge of is linked in some way, the question of the comparison depends on the properties we wish to compare.
"Apples to oranges" is saying "these are two different things, and your comparison is shit".
THANK YOU!! When that analogy was taught to us, we found it profoundly stupid, both are categorized as fruits, both can used to make juices, both grow on trees, both are yummy, what isn’t there to be able to compare?!
We’re wonder what the fuck was going in inside their head while making that analogy.
73 replies
Fun fact: the German equivalent is with apples and pears which makes even less sense
Apples and pears both give you delicious hard ciders!
Yes, and apples make the best non alcoholic drinks, imo
And the best pie.
Only if you don't count peach cobbler as pie.
Does anyone count cobbler as pie?
yeah. I don't know how common it is but it was the subject of some debate at the kids' table for a few thanksgivings. I was raised on the "cobbler and pie are two distinct dishes" side of the family.
I think of it as a pie kind of the same way I think of pizza as a pie: like, it's maybe technically a pie but it's different enough that it merits its own name. Calling it "pie" sounds odd.
I am far from well versed in baking, but my brain basically considers a cobbler a subset, or type of pies.
Grandma would make pies and cobblers with the same circular pans, same dough, same crust... so... its just a specific kind of pie to me.
Interesting, Ive only ever made or seen cobblers made in rectangular pans. I wonder if shape is the dividing line between people who consider them pies vs not.
So hard, so delicious
I disagree with you, but I respect the moxie of comparing apples and oranges and apples and pears.
Love apples, hate pears, can't eat both because they give me diarrhea :(
Bitch that phrase don't make no sense, why can't fruit be compared?
-Lil Dicky
I've heard the dicky don't get little if you use it enough to not atrophy.
This bitch don't know bout pangea
Apples make jam, oranges make marmalade. Only apple juice turns tasty when fermenting it.
That's it...
Your компот privileges have been revoked.
Apple jam exists, but mostly apples make applesauce or apple butter or apple jelly. Or apple pie.
Orange pulp and pith turn bitter when cooked, which is why marmalade uses only the juice and a thin layer of the zest, which is boiled and drained to remove bitterness before cooking with the juice.
Depends on who's making it. The pith may add some bitterness but it also allows you to make it without adding pectin because it is naturally present.
Yes I understand that to be true. I tried with some of my extra lemons and somehow managed to get the bitterness without the gelling effect, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it works if properly done.
Apple jam? The fuck?
Apple butter is superior for sure!
Shawty got that apple butter jam...
Apple butter is the superior condiment for toast.
Come autumn I can buy a 20lb bag of winesap apples for like 15 (probably 20 this year) and then I get to can SO MUCH apple butter! It's a delight! Homemade is great.
I've never had homemade! There is an apple festival near me every year, and I grab what I can there, though. Every year I think to myself that "this is the year I will pick some apples and I will make stuff out of them for cheap!", but laziness always wins lol.
It's easy to make in the slow cooker! Apples, both sugar, some spices, let them cook until the dice apples feel hollow, puree them, let cook even longer til desired consistency!
Makes the house smell amazing!
Yeah, I've looked up a few recipes like this, but getting a large jar for $10 from somewhere local tends to win. I will do it one day, I promise...
It's good stuff, EXCELLENT on pumpernickel toast
The most reasonable interpretation is that you cannot use the standards of apples on oranges, nor the other way around.
You wouldn't fault an apple because it doesn't have a thick skin that needs peeling.
"You shouldn't judge apples as oranges"
That doesn’t make sense??
You can still peel an apple and an orange. Even that’s still a comparison
"This orange sucks. I can't just bite into it and enjoy it like an apple." That's not a sensible assessment of the orange. That's applying the desired attributes of an apple to an orange.
Ok but thats still a comparison??? Yes they’re different fruits and served differently, however fundamentally those are still comparisons in itself.
Are you confusing "can't" and "can, but is fruitless" (pun intended)?
Like, if someone says to you "you can't put nails in with a screwdriver", are you going to say "You totally can. Just whack the nail with the handle. I don't see the problem".
Or, like, "You can't eat crayons" do you respond "sure you can. chew it up and eat it. i don't see the problem. it's just like a cookie"
Yes, but you are comparing a serving choice to a serving requirement. It hardly seems like a fair comparison.
"With this fruit this step is mandatory and with the other it's optional" seems like a perfectly fair comparison. If you're going around finding fault with the fruit because of that comparison, that's a completely separate step that is on you.
...That separate step is the entire point, though.
So you're telling me neurotypical/non-autistic people are incapable of making comparisons without attaching a judgment value to them?
Like, if you had two daughters who took the same math test, you would be unable to compare how they did without finding fault with the one that "did worse"? You would actually end up loving that one less unless you could convince yourself of an excuse that makes the comparison "apples to oranges"?
Wow that must suck.
How would I know what neurotypical people do? You can hardly compare me to a neurotypical person, that's like... The phrase escapes me.
I am going to tear apart the insinuation that "it has faults" mean "I love it less." My favourite D&D movie is the second one, which most people are unaware even exists. I can enjoy a flawed movie while recognising its flaws. Why would my love for my children be dependant on a maths test?
Also, "did worse" is objective when it comes to maths tests. You get graded, and the answers are absolute.
Think of this. One daughter gets A grades in english, but C grades in maths. The other daughter, it's inverted. Which daughter is smarter? You can't... Actually, you SHOULDN'T compare them. Morally.
What do you call the action of putting their grades together like this, without the sentences you put after it? (this is the most important question of this comment).
Is your objection to comparing apples and oranges also a moral one? Or are apples and oranges incomparable in a different way than a child who gets all Cs and a child who gets all As?
(Or is a child who gets all Cs comparable to a child who gets all As in a way a child who gets one C and one A is not comparable to a child who gets one A and one C? Because in that case you're arguing in bad faith.)
And if you believe it is possible but immoral to compare apples and oranges, why?
So you are comfortable saying someone who can't read English well and got a C did worse at a math test than someone with dyslexia who got a B than who has a private tutor who got an A than someone who cheated on the test who got an A+?
So you claim it is possible and morally upstanding to say some of these people did worse than others, but that this is not an act of comparing those people, which would be immoral and perhaps incongruous?
Or are you saying it is moral to compare people when it is at least as objective as comparing written test results between a dyslexic kid and a kid with a private tutor?
Or do you perceive me reminding you of possible differences between students as unfair and do you hold people should assume people are comparable for "objective" things like a math test unless they are explicitly validated exceptions? (which is also a position I've seen people de facto hold).
Alright, fair, that's on me, I assumed that because you were conflating comparison with critique and judgment you were also conflating it with more in a way I've seen people do. And I assumed you were NT because you were arguing against an autistic intepretation, which is also bad.
The point of the saying is that you shouldn't fault a thing for not being like another different thing. It's not that you can't do it. But you wouldn't evaluate the quality of an orange on the same parameters you would an apple.
All the people trying to explain it to us isn’t helping at all. This is a stupid saying and we’re not missing out in it’s meaning. Gonna go back to doing our own thing 👋
Maybe, but we have another expression with that meaning. You don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.
I've never heard that expression before, but that's pretty good.
this is so real (R$) i have never understood that one
obrigado pela comunidade. eu usarei ela constantemente contra todos ao meu redor
Spotting differences is also a form of comparison, so the phrase makes no sense at all
Petition to change the phrase:
'You can't compare apples and tomatoes.'
... now it makes considerably less sense, and also does splash damage against the concept of a vegetable.
10d4 psychic damage in a 20 ft. cube.
... also, said damage cube is comprised entirely of Red40
interpret this as you will, DMs
How about comparing apples and liability insurances?
Apples are usually cheaper than insurance and also far more nutritious
The phrase is to say two things are not the same, not that they aren't similar.
So why isn't the phrase that then?
"Apples and oranges are not the same."
The phrase isn't "you can't compare apples and oranges" it's "it's like comparing apples and oranges". Meaning that what you're comparing are distinct things with their own merits, and it would be silly to try to declare an objective winner. It basically does mean that apples and oranges aren't the same.
Never ever have I seen it used in that manner. It's always used as a thought terminating cliche suggesting that any comparison requires two things to be equal.
That's the implication, but saying it doesn't make it true. It's up to you to decide if it's a valid point.
Because the phrase is very, very old. It didn't change alongside the change of the meaning of "compare". I guess it sounded better this way.
The vagueness of "compare" is the problem here.
If your job is to grade oranges for sale, and an apple hits your line, it will fail completely.
If your job is to grade apple cider for sale, and someone hands you a cup of orange juice, even the best orange juice ever created, you can't give it marks for how good it is as apple cider.
Velociraptors and rabbits are both land dwelling creatures, that existed on the planet earth, and both featured in the game Amju pet zoo. Why can't we compare them?!?
Pretty much everything we have knowledge of is linked in some way, the question of the comparison depends on the properties we wish to compare.
"Apples to oranges" is saying "these are two different things, and your comparison is shit".
and this, 🟠, is a tangerine
French version is "from ass to cock", IE, from donkey to chicken.
THANK YOU!! When that analogy was taught to us, we found it profoundly stupid, both are categorized as fruits, both can used to make juices, both grow on trees, both are yummy, what isn’t there to be able to compare?!
We’re wonder what the fuck was going in inside their head while making that analogy.
Anything can be compared to anything. It's trivial to find some axis they share.
How about comparing dark energy with Graphene OS?
Nerds talk about both, but as far as most people are concerned they're just imaginary concepts?
Preach!
Peach!
You can't compare apples and oranges because oranges are such a superior fruit that they are in a different league from apples.