NationStates Jolt Archive

I get so tired every time I see this saying, because I think you can. You can compare, for example, how much juice you can get out of both, the nutritional value of both, how well they stand up to pressure, ect. As long as there is something quantifiable, it can be compared.

they ARE both fruits, so comparing them is not entirely without merit.

...how much more like an orange the oranges do in fact taste...

I always thought they were comparable.

I like apples better.

I agree. You could have lots of fun comparing apples and oranges, for example what happens to each one after being dropped 10 floors? which one can be thrown farther with the same catapult? which is best for cakes?

The list is endless.

Both are fruits, both provide important minearls, and both are quite tasty.

I get so tired every time I see this saying, because I think you can. You can compare, for example, how much juice you can get out of both, the nutritional value of both, how well they stand up to pressure, ect. As long as there is something quantifiable, it can be compared.

Yes you can compare all of those things, but the results will be very different. Thus the meaning of the saying....when you are comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing two totally different things. So its a bad way to try and make a point if you compare things that vary so greatly. Like comparing natural child birth to spraining an ankle.
Its not a literal meaning. Of course you could compare any thing to anything else.

Does it make a bit more sense now?

Yes you can compare all of those things, but the results will be very different. Thus the meaning of the saying....when you are comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing two totally different things. So its a bad way to try and make a point if you compare things that vary so greatly. Like comparing natural child birth to spraining an ankle.
Its not a literal meaning. Of course you could compare any thing to anything else.

Does it make a bit more sense now?

But you can compare those. Which would you rather have, a natural child birth or a sprained ankle?

But you can compare those. Which would you rather have, a natural child birth or a sprained ankle?
Child birt, obviously. Childbirth gets you a free slave for 18 years, a sprained ankle gets you nothing (besides a sprained ankle).

But you can compare those. Which would you rather have, a natural child birth or a sprained ankle?
Let's see:
Amount of pain.
Sprained ankle: 5
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of pain.
Sprained ankle: 2
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of annoyance.
Sprained ankle: 6
Natural child birth: around 18 years, so that's 10

Cost of putting through college:
Sprained ankle: 0
Natural child birth: lots, so that's another 10.

So, yeah. The comparison between a sprained ankle and natural child birht clearly indicates that a sprained ankle is better.

But you can compare those. Which would you rather have, a natural child birth or a sprained ankle?


You can compare anything to anything else. I can compare a chocolate bar to a garden hose if I want...youre missing my point. You can of course compare apples and oranges. But the saying is merely symbolic of comparing things that are different.

http://sketch.psycho-ward.org/applesoranges.jpg

http://sketch.psycho-ward.org/applesoranges.jpg

A+ artwork...

A+ artwork...
http://sketch.psycho-ward.org/

Whole internet comic series.

http://sketch.psycho-ward.org/

Whole internet comic series.

funny stuff... :p

Really, if you can't compare an apple and an orange, just what CAN you compare? The letter A with... the letter A?

Let's see:
Amount of pain.
Sprained ankle: 5
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of pain.
Sprained ankle: 2
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of annoyance.
Sprained ankle: 6
Natural child birth: around 18 years, so that's 10

Cost of putting through college:
Sprained ankle: 0
Natural child birth: lots, so that's another 10.

So, yeah. The comparison between a sprained ankle and natural child birht clearly indicates that a sprained ankle is better.

Are you sure that's 10 out of 10, and not 18 to life? ;)

Good one, Colodia.

You can compare anything. There's an old party game where you ask two people for nouns, then see how long of list can be made of things they have in common.

I get so tired every time I see this saying, because I think you can. You can compare, for example, how much juice you can get out of both, the nutritional value of both, how well they stand up to pressure, ect. As long as there is something quantifiable, it can be compared.
Isn't that just a metaphor, though? I don't think all those people are really objecting to the comparison of apples and oranges.

What is the comparison about? You can't say that oranges are better at being oranges than apples are. That would be redundant. You can say that oranges are more acidic than apples, but then you'll get into a shouting match comparing pH levels of Granny Smiths and Japanese Mandarins. The whole point is that you can not compare two dissimilar things as though one is somehow exactly like the other. Don't compare Canada to the US as though they are the same thing in every way. If you want to compare our populations, do so. If you want to compare the amount of bacon eaten, beavers slaughtered or cute aboriginal women on the internet, go ahead...but don't just say US=Canada and think you'll live to get away with it, 'eh!

Let's see:
Amount of pain.
Sprained ankle: 5
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of pain.
Sprained ankle: 2
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of annoyance.
Sprained ankle: 6
Natural child birth: around 18 years, so that's 10

Cost of putting through college:
Sprained ankle: 0
Natural child birth: lots, so that's another 10.

So, yeah. The comparison between a sprained ankle and natural child birht clearly indicates that a sprained ankle is better.

You clearly have not experienced both natural childbirth and a sprained ankle, or your numbers would be substantially different. I was on a car trip with my siblings and cousins once, when my brother kicked me in the face. I started crying and carrying on, and my uncle asked me on a scale of 1 to 10 how much I was hurt. I said ok, maybe 6. And then he started defining the scale...

1. A hangnail or bruise.
2. A cut or scrape, bleeding.
3. A cut requiring stiches.
4. A broken bone
5. A broken leg with the bone sticking out
....
10. Death

It was rather effective in terms of shutting me up, and I never forgot it.

Now I've had BOTH the things you compare there, and your comparison should've looked more like this:

Amount of pain.
Sprained ankle: 3
Natural child birth: 10

Duration of pain.
Sprained ankle: 5
Natural child birth: 5
(The pain really lasts about a similar time period, and both are much less acute after the initial cause is over. Think about having chemo or something - that is a 10, to hurt all the itme for days and days.)

Duration of annoyance.
Sprained ankle: 3
Natural child birth: 10

Cost of putting through college:
Sprained ankle: 0
Natural child birth: 0-10 depending on if you pay for it, or make them do it themselves.

Duration of love:
Sprained ankle: 0
Natural child birth: 10 - for the rest of your life. If you do a good job with your kids, they'll take care of you when you're old and gray.

All in, sprained ankles are less pain, but less reward.

I said ok, maybe 6. And then he started defining the scale...

1. A hangnail or bruise.
2. A cut or scrape, bleeding.
3. A cut requiring stiches.
4. A broken bone
5. A broken leg with the bone sticking out
....

Did you go to have each of those things to be able to compare the pain, mmmh? Also I think your uncle was using a logarithmic scale instead of linear :D

10. Death
Death causes no pain. :confused:


(The pain really lasts about a similar time period, and both are much less acute after the initial cause is over. Think about having chemo or something - that is a 10, to hurt all the itme for days and days.)
But in natural child birth that's just the start of the pain. Then comes the crying, and waking up in the middle of the night, and getting the fingers in the electrical outlets, tying things to the dog's tail, etc. etc. At least during the actual childbirth you can request morphine. :)

Yes, yes you can.

http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html

Apples and Oranges -- A Comparison

by Scott A. Sandford, NASA Ames Research Center, Mountain View, California
We have all been present at discussions (or arguments) in which one of the combatants attempts to clarify or strengthen a point by comparing the subject at hand with another item or situation more familiar to the audience or opponent. More often than not, this stratagem instantly results in the protest that "you're comparing apples and oranges!" This is generally perceived as being a telling blow to the analogy, since it is generally understood that apples and oranges cannot be compared. However, after being the recipient of just such an accusation, it occurred to me that there are several problems with dismissing analogies with the comparing apples and oranges defense.

First, the statement that something is like comparing apples and oranges is a kind of analogy itself. That is, denigrating an analogy by accusing it of comparing apples and oranges is, in and of itself, comparing apples and oranges. More importantly, it is not difficult to demonstrate that apples and oranges can, in fact, be compared (Art. Cont.)

I think the whole thing started with the math trick question
'If Jane has 5 apples and John throws 5 oranges at her for being poor and jane picks them up, how many apples does jane have?'

Still 5.

Conclusions:1 apples and oranges cannot be measured on the same scales.
2 its hard to get ahead as a girl, what with the throwing

I think saying you can't compare apples and oranges means that you can't compare oranges in terms of apples or vice versa, not that apples are incomparable to oranges or vice versa.

Well, I think the analogy is not talking about comparing apples and oranges as a whole(s), but about a specific apple and orange.

Which is better, this apple or this one?

Which is better, this orange or this one?

Which is better, this apple or this orange?

no, duh. You can't compare two things that are different. :p

no, duh. You can't compare two things that are different. :p

Makes me wonder why I compared the taste of peanutbutter to that of bacon in order to decide what I would put on my sandwhich yesterday. (I ended up with bacon for those interested ;) )

Now what on earth was I thinking comparing two totally different things?! How silly of me.

before we even start comparing apples with oranges. i feel we must break the orange down into its family grouping : tangerine, the clemintine satsuma (any more?) pick the best one then put it up against the apple.

or maybe all types of oranges, cause the apple has a huge head start, it discovered gravity afterall

Yes you can compare all of those things, but the results will be very different.
The problem with this is thinking is that it stops short of the full picture. What the results are is entirely contextual. (I'm sure you know this). The problem is that people assume that because there is no utility in comparing 2 things in one context, there is never utility in comparing them. Thus you get people stating 'you cant compare X and Z' when in fact in a particular context there might be utility in doing.

Thus the meaning of the saying....when you are comparing apples and oranges, you are comparing two totally different things. So its a bad way to try and make a point if you compare things that vary so greatly. Like comparing natural child birth to spraining an ankle.
Which could in fact be a useful comparison; for instance one could compare the two for the purpose of contrasting them (ie illustrating difference rather than similarity) or one might be interested in comparing the impact to the spine of the physical adjustments these conditions imply (for instance the impact of using crutches/limping compared to the impacts of carrying the weight of a pregnancy in the front torso)....whether or not a comparison has any utility is entirely dependent on the context.

The problem with the 'apples and oranges' notion is that it's just too simplistic. It implies that apples and oranges (or any two or more other 'things) ought not be compared due to the inherent traits of the things compared, when in fact the utility of comparison comes not from the inherent traits of things but rather from the relationship between their range of traits and the context in which one is making the comparison (ie the purpose for which the comparison is being conducted).

Hey, it's a two-page thread that is literally about apples and oranges.

No kidding.

Y'know, apples and oranges aren't too good for a saying about two completly different things. They're both FRUIT for crying out loud. By the way:Wikipedia on apples and oranges (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apples_and_oranges)