Fruit trees and necessity

[Ignorant]

So yes?

[Little lunch]

I was trying to think of an answer when suddenly I wondered, did I read that question or did my brain read that question?

[Ignorant]

Either way, somehow, you became aware of the question and its meaning. =)

Any comments on an answer?

[ignoramus]

The environment will determine the quantity and quality of the fruit but not whether the tree will fruit.
The seasons and its dna determines that.

[Ignorant]

Great! Thanks, ignoramus!

Is it weird that I feel bad for your avatar rabbit? You can do it little buddy, keep chewing!

[robvalue]

You can hopefully take some of the conditions for granted. If we're already supposing it's a fruit tree, then we're supposing it exists and has the correct equipment to produce fruit. (Unless it's dead or something.)

[The Grand Nudger]

1 We make estimates -regarding- fruit set according to certain conditions, that much is certainly true.  Those estimates provide a useful projection of average yields within lower and upper boundaries. That much is also certainly true. 

 Outliers at the extreme high and low ends are excluded (because they would spike the average out of proportion to their contribution), and there are always outliers...acres under crop that did not yield to our expectations based upon the conditions. We assume that there are unknown conditions, or unknown interplays between known conditions, but the presence and neccessity of that assumption actually erodes the premise underlying all of those estimates.  We can only say, with certainty, that there is a strong correspondence between chilling hours, for example - and fruit set on deciduous trees.  

Whether a tree does, or is even capable of doing anything according to anything would be another issue.  I don't know, but discounting dryads and ents entirely (as we discount fairy pollination above as an explanation for outliers).....I don't think so.  It does what it does, what it can do, all of the according is on our end.  


2 I think that this restatement exacerbates the problems of the initial formulation.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Here is a single question posed in two different formulas:

     1) Do fruit trees make fruit according to certain conditions or not?

     2) Do certain conditions determine that fruit trees make fruit or not?

<klaxon on>
Disingenuous equivocation detected. Sterilisation needed in-thread.
</klaxon off>


Both questions are the same when viewed as a process acting within a larger process. Reality is that the fruit tree is a living process maintaining homoeostasis in a dynamic environment.

But phrasing them in two different ways implicitly suggests that one object is passive and the other is active.

Q1 suggests that the fruit tree is making the fruit given an environment
Q2 suggests that the environment is making the fruit appear on the tree.

Neither is correct because the fruit tree is part of its environment.

Sorry but yes this is a trap. You are trying to narrow the option down to a yes / no answer which glosses over a deeper understanding of the phenomenon.

And yes I can guess what your next step will be. No, your god did not create life. The environment of the tree is not analogous to your god.

[bennyboy]

I'm not sure that there's a difference between (1) and (2) at all, except word order. Could you restate?

[quip]

Here is a single question posed in two different formulas:

     1) Do fruit trees make fruit according to certain conditions or not?

     2) Do certain conditions determine that fruit trees make fruit or not?


Choose one or both, and answer. You can explain your answer too, if you'd like. Thanks!

Are you alluding to different methods of creation; an artifact method of creation (the existence of a clay pot in relation to a potter) #2 as opposed to a natural emergence of a specific fruit set about by specific natural conditions (#1)?

I would say fruit trees don't "make" fruit, rather they "generate" them via specific conditions . A stark difference.