The answer depends on who you ask.
But first let’s answer this question: Is a tomato a vegetable or a fruit?
That answer also depends on who you ask.
Why Aren’t Tomatoes Included in Fruit Cocktail?
If you ask a botanist, a tomato is a fruit. Why? Because it:
- Develops from the ovaries of flowers
- Contains seeds of the plant from which it sprouted
If you ask a legislator, a tomato is a vegetable. Why? Because the US Supreme Court declared it so. End of story.
Tomatoes, Legally, Became a Vegetable
In 1893, you see, taxes on vegetables were higher than on fruits. And people wanted to skirt the higher taxes by claiming, as a botanist would, that tomatoes are fruit and, thus, should be subject to the lower tax rate. Nope, said the Supreme Court, as they officially ruled that a tomato is a vegetable.
Basically, the US Supreme Court said that, botanically, a tomato is a fruit. However, in its common use is is seen as a vegetable and will be officially categorized as such.
Aren’t the Legislatures Horribly Wrong? Botany is a Legitimate Science, After All
So which of the two groups is wrong? And which one correct?
The botanist correctly calls the tomato a fruit by using the criteria a botanist should use. And the legislator calls the tomato a vegetable by using the criteria a legislator should use.
Neither of the two groups is wrong. And both are correct.
In their individual universes, each group contextually creates a different version of a tomato.
What About Intentional Contextual Creation? Is It a “Fruit” or a “Vegetable”?
Becoming an intentional contextual creator of your material experiences, your life, is more than possible. It is, in fact, a 100% certainty if you desire it and find the proper instructions. And you know that.
Yet some will continue to maintain that this is all pseudoscience and new age hooey. Some will say this is not “real” and that all of us are head-in-the-clouds, naive, moonbeam chasers.
Both parties are correct.
In their individual universes, each group contextually creates a different version of contextual creation.
Don’t Worry! You Can Be Correct Either Way
- Group A (which, thankfully, includes you) is correctly calling intentional contextual creation absolutely real by using the criteria we use. We contextually create, intentionally, every single day – and we know it works.
- While Group B is calling intentional contextual creation poppycock by using the criteria they use. What is that criteria? Not sure in all cases, but in many I’m pretty certain that criteria is an amalgamation of not liking new things, not appreciating seeing people becoming empowering and no longer suffering, and wanting to hold on to old paradigms upon which they’ve based their identities as human beings. Whatever the cause, that version of intentional contextual creation is absolutely real in the individual universes of Group B members.
There’s No Joy to Be Found in Group B’s Suffering
I’m not mocking Group B, by the way. I used to belong to Group B and I have the utmost empathy for anyone in that group. I wish nobody any more pain or suffering than they’re already experiencing and I find no joy, whatsoever, in someone’s pain or suffering.
I’m simply supremely grateful that I’m in Group A. And also incredibly grateful you are too. Because you being a part of our group adds energy to it and grows it.
And the more Group A grows, the more opportunities will become available for members of Group B to let go and join us. Join us in the freedom of intentional contextual creation.
And please stay tuned to this website for more tips and techniques for using new paradigms from quantum physics to align your beliefs with your desires and intentionally create a life of your dreams…