6 ms·
This is a very interesting sentence, because fish are animals.
by footy 3y ago
This is a very interesting sentence, because fish are animals.
- sacnoradhq 3y agoDenis Leary - Animal Auditions, Cute vs. Food https://youtu.be/gq0tHt3qf-s https://youtu.be/gq0tHt3qf-s
- labrador 3y agoYou are right. I first wrote mammal but change it to animal, because I've never thought of fish as animals. I've never heard anyone refer to them as animals. I have never read anything that refered to them as animals. Edit: The Surprising Answer: Are Fish Truly Animals? Exploring the Debate Around Fish as Animals https://jerrysfishingblog.com/the-surprising-answer-are-fish-truly-animals https://jerrysfishingblog.com/the-surprising-answer-are-fish...
- greenyoda 3y agoFor reference, here's the scientific definition of "animal" - which is broad enough to include insects and various microorganisms as well as humans and other mammals: > Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms in the biological kingdom Animalia. With few exceptions, animals consume organic material, breathe oxygen, have myocytes and are able to move, can reproduce sexually, and grow from a hollow sphere of cells, the blastula, during embryonic development. As of 2022, 2.16 million living animal species have been described — of which around 1.05 million are insects, over 85,000 are molluscs, and around 65,000 are vertebrates. It has been estimated there are around 7.77 million animal species. Animals range in length from 8.5 micrometres (0.00033 in) to 33.6 metres (110 ft). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal (Fish are in the category of vertebrates.)
- ritwikgupta 3y agoOut of curiosity, are you a Christian who observes Lent? Many of my Christian friends do not consider fish to be “meat” as that is not allowed during Lent, but fish is allowed, therefore fish != meat.
- labrador 3y agoNo but my Irish ancestors were Catholic
- DangitBobby 3y agoYou probably rarely hear them referred to as animals because people use the word "fish" to talk about them. But they are certainly animals.
- CalRobert 3y agoHumans are animals too for that matter
- drt5b7j 3y ago[flagged]
- labrador 3y agoIn a class room setting sure, but in every day conversation, no. Not on the West Coast of the United States. Kurt Cobain made the distinction and didn't think fish had feelings: And the animals I've trapped Have all become my pets And I'm living off of grass And the drippings from my ceiling It's okay to eat fish Cause they don't have any feelings - Something in the way Could you give me some samples of how you and your friends refer to fish as animals?
- drt5b7j 3y agoFriend 1: what kind of animals do you keep in your fish tank? Friend 2: In my fish tank I have fish, turtles, and snails.
- labrador 3y agoAccording to Google, you are the first person in the Universe to say "what kind of animals do you keep in your fish tank?"
- hydrok9 3y agoWhat people would say is: "What kind of fish do you keep in your fish tank?" "Oh, well, I actually have more (animals) than just fish in there." "Oh really? What else (what "other animals") do you have? "Turtles and frogs."
- drt5b7j 3y agoIf you use exact match, and craft a phrase that is 11 words long, it's almost guaranteed that you'll be the first person in the universe. You're just being disingenuous. Why don't you ask Google if fish are animals? You absolute moron.
- antonvs 3y agoThat “Jerry’s Fishing Blog” just demonstrates the problem with using google to try to support a point. It way overstates the “debate” on the subject. At least since Linnæus developed his biological taxonomy in the 1700s, fish have been considered animals. Here’s what Linnaeus wrote around 1758 (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces_in_the_10th_edition_of_Systema_Naturae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisces_in_the_10th_edition_of_... ): > Always inhabiting the waters; are swift in their motion and voracious in their appetites. They breathe by means of gills, which are generally united by a bony arch; swim by means of radiate fins, and are mostly covered over with cartilaginous scales. Besides the parts they have in common with other animals, they are furnished with a nictitant membrane, and most of them with a swim-bladder, by the contraction or dilatation of which, they can raise or sink themselves in their element at pleasure. And here’s a modern take, from https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/biological/fish/what-fish https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/biological/f... : > Fish are aquatic vertebrate animals that have gills but lack limbs with digits, like fingers or toes. Recall that vertebrates are animals with internal backbones.
- satvikpendem 3y agoYou have never heard of or read about fish being referred to as animals? Not even in your biology classes at school? That you haven't is extremely strange to me, I understand what people mean when they say fish aren't animals, in terms of the colloquial usage when referring to meat, but I didn't think that most people thought that fish literally weren't animals at all.
- footy 3y agoThere's no debate about fish being part of the animal Kingdom. If you've never heard anyone refer to fish as animals, you probably never took biology in grade school. I mean no offense, but literal children with single-digit ages know that fish are animals.
- mongol 3y agoYes and is not meat animal flesh? So it is double interesting.
- maxbond 3y agoMost product taxonomies will categorize them separately. Here's two examples trying to categorize tilapia. Google Product Taxonomy: Food, Beverages, & Tobacco > Food Items > Meat, Seafood & Eggs Note the distinction between meat and seafood. GPC: Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Fish - Prepared/Processed (Frozen) > Attribute: Type of Fish = Tilapia Whereas meat in the GPC is defined separately: Food/Beverage/Tobacco > Meat/Poultry/Other animals - Prepared/processed> ... Your local grocery store probably is organized the same way. Many people think of fish flesh and meat as being different things. Words are made up and all categories are artificial, whatcha gunnuh do.
- retrac 3y agoTechnically speaking, tomatoes and chilis are fruits, while strawberries are not fruits (they are fruit clusters - each "seed" is an individual fruit). This is such a point of contention (apparently) that there's a whole "culinary" vs. "botanical" fruit distinction made. Logically, eggs are meat. It's a giant animal cell. Culinarily speaking, meat refers to the tissue of mammals, particularly muscle tissue from pigs and cows and other ungulates. Fish usually excluded, poultry is often excluded, and offal may be excluded as well. It's for the same reason why we call blackberries and strawberries both fruits (even though they are not). Culinarily speaking, they're similar. Used in a similar way. Deer, beef, and pork are interchangeable in many recipes. Beef, chicken, and salmon, are not.
- maxbond 3y agoI agree fish are animals, but it's perfectly ordinary to use lay definitions rather than scientific definitions. Most people don't call fish animals, and that's fine.
- danielbln 3y agoUh, citation needed. I don't know anyone that doesn't call fish animals.
- SkyPuncher 3y agoNot necessarily scientific fact, but religion has historically differentiated between fish and other forms of animal meat (e.g. land meet). During lent, Catholics don't eat meat on Fridays but can still eat fish. In fact, some people practice it all year long.
- danielbln 3y agoOh, I wouldn't think of fish when I hear "meat", but that's separate from thinking of fish as something separate from "animals".
- maxbond 3y agoYou sure? Have you asked? Most of the people in my life have a strong interest in biology, my friends are nerds who are liable to use binomial names they picked up in Seek. But I doubt we're reflective of the broader culture. I think a lot of people couldn't tell you the difference between a kingdom from a phylum, and again, that's fine, it doesn't make them stupid or something. See also this comment for some citations about how they are categorized in the context of commerce: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37542165 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37542165
- danielbln 3y agoThe differentiation you've linked is about meat vs seafood, which I would go along with. This is about using the term "animal" for fish, no?
- firecall 3y agoIt's idiomatic American and International English, and a perfectly reasonable distinction in conversation. :-)
- labrador 3y agoGPT-4 agrees with you and I: Q: Is common for English speakers using colloquial English to refer to fish as animals? They technically are animals, but people don't often refer to fish as animals in every day speech. Is this correct? A: In colloquial English, people often categorize living organisms in ways that may not align perfectly with scientific classifications. For example, many people might refer to "animals" as creatures that are mammals, birds, or reptiles, but might not immediately include fish in that category during casual conversation. This is despite the fact that, scientifically speaking, fish are indeed animals. In everyday speech, people might say things like "I saw some animals and fish on my hike," separating fish from what they casually refer to as "animals." This is similar to how people might separate "birds" or "insects" from "animals" in casual conversation, even though both birds and insects are technically animals as well. So, while it's scientifically accurate to refer to fish as animals, colloquial usage often makes distinctions that aren't scientifically rigorous. This is a feature of everyday language, which is shaped more by cultural norms and common understanding than by scientific taxonomy.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoIt's not the first time I've seen people claim to be vegetarians while eating fish. What's even weirder is the amount of people that don't know insects are animals. Some people have a really limited idea of what animal means.