fav pasta shape?

[kami_ryu]

-- deleted post --

[fightinfrenchman]

The definition of a rectangle doesn't say anything about the lengths of the sides, so a square is a type of rectangle where all the sides are equal. A square matches the definition of a rectangle.

Unfortunately, some people cannot comprehend what a definition is. A definition is when we take something and attach a certain word to that something. That is the definition, common ground where we all agree on what a certain word means. Using that common ground, we are able to communicate with each other and have intelligent discussions.

Some people cannot understand that their own poor definition of something is not necessarily universal.

I can't believe when people argue math, which is pure logic.

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

[Durokan]

equilateral rectangle = square, hence a square is a specific kind of rectangle as it is simply a modified rectangle

[fightinfrenchman]

equilateral rectangle = square, hence a square is a specific kind of rectangle as it is simply a modified rectangle

No, whether all the sides or equal or not makes it a different shape. If it has all equal sides it's not a rectangle, it's a square

[P i k i l i c]

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

[fightinfrenchman]

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

The definition of a rectangle is not universally agreed upon

[Jam]

I don't know man, they all look the same to me.

edit: What have I done

[fightinfrenchman]

I don't know man, they all look the same to me.

You think squares and rectangles look the same?

[Jam]

I don't know man, they all look the same to me.

You think squares and rectangles look the same?

[P i k i l i c]

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

The definition of a rectangle is not universally agreed upon

Yes it is. You are not a mathematician and all mathematicians agree on the same definition of a rectangle.

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

The definition of a rectangle is not universally agreed upon

Yes it is. You are not a mathematician and all mathematicians agree on the same definition of a rectangle.

I actually am a mathematician, and I don't agree with the definition so it is clearly not "Universal"

[Vinyanyérë]

So Jam/Callen/etc. are right that squares are special cases of rectangles. BUT for that reason, the ear's original question asking about squares was a good one, since "do you prefer round or rectangular pizza" excludes those who prefer square but not rectangular pizza.

"I like rectangles" => implies that I like squares as well
"I like squares" => leaves open the possibility that I do not like rectangles

[P i k i l i c]

Show hidden quotes

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

The definition of a rectangle is not universally agreed upon

Yes it is. You are not a mathematician and all mathematicians agree on the same definition of a rectangle.

I actually am a mathematician, and I don't agree with the definition so it is clearly not "Universal"

What do you have to describe yourself as a mathematician? Even if you were one 99.99% of mathematicians would disagree with you anyway

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

Definitions constantly change, there is no group that universally governs the English language. There are hundreds if not thousands of definitions that not everyone can agree upon.

Fortunately this is false about math lol.

The definition of a rectangle is not universally agreed upon

Yes it is. You are not a mathematician and all mathematicians agree on the same definition of a rectangle.

I actually am a mathematician, and I don't agree with the definition so it is clearly not "Universal"

What do you have to describe yourself as a mathematician? Even if you were one 99.99% of mathematicians would disagree with you anyway

The definition of a mathematician is "an expert in or student of mathematics." I take math classes sometimes so I am a student in the field, thus making me a mathematician. And because I disagree with your definition it is not universal, completely destroying your argument.

[kami_ryu]

-- deleted post --

[fightinfrenchman]

asinine

What did I say that's wrong?

[Jam]

The definition of a rectangle doesn't say anything about the lengths of the sides, so a square is a type of rectangle where all the sides are equal. A square matches the definition of a rectangle.

No, they are both parallelograms but rectangles and squares are different shapes

They are both parallelograms I agree with that. How can you be okay with squares and rectangles being type of parallelograms, but not with squares being a type of rectangle. Actually I just realised that they're all just types of shapes. Rectangles, squares, triangles, and octagons, they're all just types of shapes!

[fightinfrenchman]

The definition of a rectangle doesn't say anything about the lengths of the sides, so a square is a type of rectangle where all the sides are equal. A square matches the definition of a rectangle.

No, they are both parallelograms but rectangles and squares are different shapes

They are both parallelograms I agree with that. How can you be okay with squares and rectangles being type of parallelograms, but not with squares being a type of rectangle.

Because, parallelograms is the over arching category that they both belong to, but they branch off separately. It's not a linear path down. Two species can be part of the same genus, doesn't mean one is the same as the other!

[Darwin_]

rotini brah

[Jam]

Two different rectangles are different from each other in the same way that a square is different than a rectangle.

[P i k i l i c]

The definition of a mathematician is "an expert in or student of mathematics." I take math classes sometimes so I am a student in the field, thus making me a mathematician. And because I disagree with your definition it is not universal, completely destroying your argument.

rofl
So no definition is universal because whatever the definition is about, you will find at least 1 random person on Earth who tooks classes in the field sometimes and disagree with what all experts agree about

[fightinfrenchman]

Two different rectangles are different from each other in the same way that a square is different than a rectangle.

No, all types of rectangles fit under the rectangle category. Squares all fit in the square category.

[fightinfrenchman]

The definition of a mathematician is "an expert in or student of mathematics." I take math classes sometimes so I am a student in the field, thus making me a mathematician. And because I disagree with your definition it is not universal, completely destroying your argument.

rofl
So no definition is universal because whatever the definition is about, you will find at least 1 random person on Earth who tooks classes in the field sometimes and disagree with what all experts agree about

The definition of universal is: of, affecting, or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to all cases. So you misused the word then

[P i k i l i c]

The definition of a mathematician is "an expert in or student of mathematics." I take math classes sometimes so I am a student in the field, thus making me a mathematician. And because I disagree with your definition it is not universal, completely destroying your argument.

rofl
So no definition is universal because whatever the definition is about, you will find at least 1 random person on Earth who tooks classes in the field sometimes and disagree with what all experts agree about

The definition of universal is: of, affecting, or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to all cases. So you misused the word then

I disagree with this definition of universal. So the definition of universal is not universal.

[fightinfrenchman]

Show hidden quotes

The definition of a mathematician is "an expert in or student of mathematics." I take math classes sometimes so I am a student in the field, thus making me a mathematician. And because I disagree with your definition it is not universal, completely destroying your argument.

rofl
So no definition is universal because whatever the definition is about, you will find at least 1 random person on Earth who tooks classes in the field sometimes and disagree with what all experts agree about

The definition of universal is: of, affecting, or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to all cases. So you misused the word then

I disagree with this definition of universal. So the definition of universal is not universal.

Well you're not a definition maker so your opinion on it doesn't count