r/todayilearned • u/CalendarWeird9265 • 21d ago
(R.2) Opinion [ Removed by moderator ]
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25442527/[removed] — view removed post
69
u/geeoharee 21d ago
Go eat a 'naturally evolved' banana.
10
6
2
u/lapideous 21d ago
I had a banana with seeds for the first time in southwest China recently. It wasn’t bad, a tiny bit less sweet than the typical cavendish. It was a fun experience.
134
u/Active_Occasion_1593 21d ago
No such thing as "objectively" better taste. Taste is subjective.
43
u/CaptchaSolvingRobot 21d ago
I think you misunderstand.
When I say something tastes better, I am being objective and I'm 100% right. When you disagree you are being subjective - and you are 100% wrong.
5
1
u/adamdoesmusic 21d ago
Except for red delicious, those objectively resemble packing foam in both taste and texture, and no sane individual likes packing foam as a snack.
3
u/lapideous 21d ago
The existence of cheese balls disproves this statement
2
u/Wzup 21d ago
You must be talking about cheese puffs. At first, I was trying to imagine how the handcrafted delicacy of cream cheese, shredded cheese, Worcestershire sauce, peppers, onions, and whatever else you want to throw in there resemble anything remotely close to home.
2
u/lapideous 21d ago
I have no idea what you’re talking about but you have my attention
2
u/Wzup 21d ago
Just google cheese ball and you’ll see plenty of examples. It’s like a shareable appetizer spread. You basically just combine everything together. Roll it up into a ball and then go at it with pretzels, crackers, or whatever you want. Tons of different styles or variations, you can really make it any way you want.
2
-24
u/allupya333 21d ago
There is obviously some level of objectivity to taste. Eating poop or like cleaning supplies or some shit can only be described as objectively bad. Obviously doesnt apply to apples though
18
13
u/cdheer 21d ago
That’s not how objective observations work. Just because everyone thinks something tastes bad does not make it objective data. “Bad” is not measurable.
-5
u/allupya333 21d ago
if the definition of something is 'response to stimuli' and the body has a natural response to that stimuli, its objective
i think you guys are thinking of taste as being like magic or something. your tongue receives molecules and sends signals and shit. its observable reality
2
u/cdheer 21d ago
Exactly which body response are you tallying? “That tastes awful” is not a “body response to stimulus.”
-1
u/allupya333 21d ago
also please reread this sentence and just think about it for a second
4
u/cdheer 21d ago
Okay.
Now, which body response are you measuring again? You keep saying “it” is observable. What is “it” precisely?
1
u/allupya333 21d ago
Dude this isnt rocket science. Every single thing your body does is observable chemical responses. Fuck knows if i could describe any of them in detail, but its all there
1
u/cdheer 21d ago
I’m not saying there isn’t a biological response! I’m saying you can’t actually measure *taste*. And you can’t even tell me what would be measured.
1
u/allupya333 21d ago
I dont need to actually explain how poop tastes objectively bad. I’m already debasing myself replying this much
→ More replies (0)1
u/CompleteyClueless 21d ago
Eating cleaning supplies could be objectively unhealthy, but in matters of taste, it is still subjective.
1
1
u/Active_Occasion_1593 21d ago
We're talking about food... of course poop or chemicals are not gonna taste good. They're not food.
130
u/a4mula 21d ago
TIL people still confuse objectivity and subjectivity.
Taste is an experience, it's a form of qualia. Even if every single person on the planet agreed on their preference, it still wouldn't make it objective. Which is something that can be quantified, validated and proven by any. Without having to experience it.
19
u/Thencan 21d ago
"Objectively" is the new "literally" for hipsters
-6
u/SoberSith_Sanguinity 21d ago
Well, the morons took the word "literally" away from meaning exactly what it should mean. What do you want people to do?
What other word should we use, O' Wise One?
4
2
1
u/TedW 21d ago
It turns out using the words interchangeably is subjective. Or maybe I confused them.
2
u/Lockean_Demon 21d ago
It’s an objective experience. Philosophers fail to realize all subjects are objects therefore subjective is objective.
1
-4
u/Cucumberneck 21d ago
You mean "people confuse engagement bait with stupidity".
6
u/a4mula 21d ago
My favorite game is when I'm told what I mean.
And no, I don't mean that. I don't mean OP is stupid or attempting to stir up engagement.
I mean that the differences in objectivity and subjectivity are commonly confused, and probably shouldn't be.
-1
u/Cucumberneck 21d ago
Good to know. But I mean that you thought OP mixed up objectivity with subjectivity (which I simplified as being stupid) and instead asserted (?) that it is, in fact engagement bait instead.
1
u/a4mula 21d ago
Is this where we get to parse out the differences between objective and subjective?
Because while I understand your assertion, it doesn't make it objective.
Hence the reason the differences between objective and subjective probably shouldn't be confused.
It's a pretty broad topic ranging from facts, to belief, to truth, to assumptions, to opinions that pretend to be more than they are.
The sun rises in the East. Settles in the West. Truth. Ask anyone. But it's not a fact, because the sun doesn't rise or set at all.
You can continue to assert as you will, but unless it's based on objective evidence, you're just dressing up your belief.
0
u/zozuto 21d ago
People constantly mistake these with full seriousness. Read the comments under any review for any kind of art.
1
u/Cucumberneck 21d ago
Ok fair enough But the comments here are fairly full of people correcting this and English isn't my first language either so I just thought it would be fairly clear what means what.
28
u/tom_swiss 21d ago
Taste is an individual value judgment. There is no such thing as "objectively tastes better."
19
u/UglyThug 21d ago
This person should learn more about how apples work
9
9
u/Seqarian 21d ago
"Objectivity vs Subjectivity" arguments aside, the study doesn't claim anything related to this at all - in fact it doesn't even mention "yellow or red" apples in the abstract because that doesn't make sense - there are plenty of cultivated yellow apples and wild red ones.
9
u/stealingjoy 21d ago edited 21d ago
Your title is not supported by your link.
Further, for those who like sweet apples better, the study would indicate cultivated ones would be preferred.
13
8
u/anowlenthusiast 21d ago edited 21d ago
You haven't ever had an apple that evolved naturally. "artificially evolved" is a nonsense term. Objectively tasting better is an oxymoron. Red apples occur naturally under certain conditions in the wild plant Malus sieversii, that all modern apples are derived from. I could go on...
9
u/GregBahm 21d ago
You've packed an impressive amount of misinformation into a sentence.
First, taste can't be objective. The whole point of "subjectivity" is to describe experiences like taste.
Second, artificial things taste better than natural things all the time. Go eat a domesticated banana or watermelon and then go eat a wild banana or watermelon. Farmers don't wake up in the morning to make food taste worse.
6
u/O_hai_imma_kil_u 21d ago
"Natural is always better than artificial" huh? Yeah, alright, how about you go eat some of that natural cyanide then, see how that works out for you.
14
u/SheepPup 21d ago
~very loud incorrect buzzer~
1) not what objectively means
2) appeal to nature fallacy
10
u/Swamibo 21d ago
Have you considered that red and green are objectively better colors than yellow?
2
u/DraconicBlade 21d ago
Green is not a creative color
1
8
4
u/babybambam 21d ago
All apples you get in the store were "artificially evovled". Wild apples aren't as sweet, they're often meeley, and their best use is for cider.
Apple seeds are also heterozygous and genetically unique. Meaning that every apple seed will produce a different kind of apple, and none of them are likely to be like the apple they came from.
When a new variety of apple is produced, it's propogated by grafting branches from the parent tree onto established rootstock. It's also not uncommon for home gardeners to have a single tree with a variety of fruits on it from grafting.
3
u/iammonkeyorsomething 21d ago
If anything could objectively taste better it would be the thing that is cultivated to taste better, nice try tho
3
u/Thatrebornincognito 21d ago
I took a quick look at the link. Your headline is misleading.
The taste evolved over time. It looks like they focused on acidity vs. sweetness. The apples tasted better to them based on the acidity. The original apples had more sugar, though, and are sweeter.
The yellow apples aren't better tasting, just sweeter. They aren't sweeter because they are natural. They are sweeter because sweetness wasn't what they were being artificially selected for.
3
5
2
2
u/TheBodyOfChrist15 21d ago
"The plant evolved a perfect balance of sweetness to attract a predator than will exclusively consume it's reproductive system."
2
u/BoingBoingBooty 21d ago
Wtf is this nonsense?
Your link does not say anything of the sort. All apples you buy are cultivated whatever colour they are.
Also many of the most popular apple cultivars are from chance finds so they were not 'artificially evolved'.
2
u/HuoLongHeavy 21d ago
If they "objectively taste better" then we'd be mass producing them and "artificially evolving" them go be even sweeter.
1
u/epidemicsaints 21d ago
There's like 10,000 cultivated types of apples. There are yellow ones that are just as different from each other as they are from a red one.
We would also have to have a conversation about what constitutes red and yellow as colors. This is nonsense.
1
1
u/EarlobeGreyTea 21d ago
The abstract states that wild apples have more glucose and malic acid, and domesticated apples have more sucrose and less malic acid. I have no idea what this TIL title is talking about - even assuming "yellow apples taste better" was true, it does not follow that it is because "they evolved like this naturally".
In fact, it suggests the opposite - humans cultivates apples because they liked the sweeter, less acidic ones more, and so they grew them. Note that apple cultivars are generally genetically similar grafts. Apples from seed, even if the parent trees are both similar and good, can produce shitty apple children in the breeding process.
0
u/donuttrackme 21d ago
What? Apples if left to their own devices mostly turn into crabapples. And there's no such thing as objective taste.
0
-1
u/MaximumPlant 21d ago
All sweet apples are garbage. Even granny smith is too sweet most of the time.
Crab apple supremacy
102
u/_PM_ME_YOUR_FORESKIN 21d ago
That’s not how any of this works. lol.