4 ms·
> You need to invoke tree to define leaves and wood. I don't think so? All non-tree plants have leaves (almost all maybe? edit: not cacti, so not all but most
by williamdclt 1y ago
> You need to invoke tree to define leaves and wood.
I don't think so?
All non-tree plants have leaves (almost all maybe? edit: not cacti, so not all but most).
Wood can be defined biologically ("cellulose fibers embedded in a lignin matrix" or something like that)
- hshshshshsh 1y agoNon tree plants still require you assume what a tree is.
- mrkickling 1y agoOk, but all plants have leaves so you would only have to agree on what a plant is. You are trying to make a point but it makes no sense. EDIT: you could also have totally separate definitions on what wood and leaves are without talking about trees or plants, don't you think?
- hshshshshsh 1y agoSure. But when most people think of plants they already use a tree like thing as mental model. People who have only seen non tree plants doesn't exist. And nor does any non tree plant leaves help you generate a tree leaf.