Yes, I had to fight my own pedantry to post that phrasing! It’s one piece, but calling it two pieces connected by a handle is the only way I could think of to describe it and actually be understood. I challenge you to come up with a title for this which is both easy to understand and topologically accurate.
but calling it two pieces connected by a handle is the only way I could think of to describe it and actually be understood
Yes completely fair! I’m actually not sure about what would count as a separate “piece” with glassware and ceramics. There’s probably a mereological argument for why its one or the other
If you consider a mug to consist of two parts, the handle and the cup, the cup has broken into pieces and the handle is holding two of them together. So I think “two pieces held together by the handle” is the most correct way to describe it.
I think it’s an art piece now
On that note
Is it all one big piece, or is it three pieces working together 😄
Yes, I had to fight my own pedantry to post that phrasing! It’s one piece, but calling it two pieces connected by a handle is the only way I could think of to describe it and actually be understood. I challenge you to come up with a title for this which is both easy to understand and topologically accurate.
Yes completely fair! I’m actually not sure about what would count as a separate “piece” with glassware and ceramics. There’s probably a mereological argument for why its one or the other
Never heard that word before. Wikipedia: “Mereology is the philosophical study of part-whole relationships.” Fascinating that there’s a name for that!
Would you settle for
“OH SHIT…damnit. oh wait a minute…”
Two shards held together by the handle to form one piece
Dang that’s pretty good
If you consider a mug to consist of two parts, the handle and the cup, the cup has broken into pieces and the handle is holding two of them together. So I think “two pieces held together by the handle” is the most correct way to describe it.