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.
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.
Two shards held together by the handle to form one piece
Dang that’s pretty good
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…”
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.