I think I didn't do a great job of explaining what bothered me about the author's statement. There's botanical definitions and by some of those, a fig is not a

I think I didn't do a great job of explaining what bothered me about the author's statement. There's botanical definitions and by some of those, a fig is not a fruit. What they wrote is that it's deceptive to call a fig a fruit when there's basically no situations outside of academia and propagation where that distinction matters.