Per Wikipedia: “Vegetables are edible parts of plants that are consumed by humans or other animals as food. This original meaning is still commonly used, and is applied to plants collectively to refer to all edible plant matter, including flowers, fruits, stems, leaves, roots, and seeds.”
it’s kinda like how people insist that paradoxes are some wild freaky thing, when in reality it’s just “we don’t know what would happen because it’s not real and doesn’t make sense in reality as we know it”.
Or like “did you know there’s no such thing as a fish?” when in reality obviously fish are real, it’s just that fish describes the shape of a creature.
people just love fixating on and exaggerating stuff like this, presumably because it starts arguments online
Tbf when people do the whole “theres no such thing as a fish” thing its not supposed to be a paradox. Its a simplistic version of relativistic/constructivist philosophy which really does tend to hold truth. A fish is a fish but only because we call it that, and the fish otherwise exists independently of us calling it as such. Thats not really a useless point if followed by a solid understanding that the constructed terms we use to talk about everything do actually have weight and power, and dont always align with reality
For example, gender is broadly viewed as a non-constructed and biological concept by the majority of people. This human construct ignores a lot of people, but especially the 2% of the population that is made up of people born or living intersex. It pushes the very idea of intersexuality to the margin and labels it an anomaly, despite the fact that intersexuality exists independently of human constructs and is made up of a variety of entirely natural phenomena (like a fish).
Constructivist perspectives definitely have weight and affect the social realities and lives of people. Its more than just “theres actually no such thing as a fish”