This is a really silly thing, but I'm sick of the debate about whether tomatoes are fruits or vegetables. The entire problem with this debate is that it confuses two distinct but overlapping definitions of "fruit".
A fruit can be a lot of different things. In botany, "fruit" is a very broad category of the part of the flower that carries seeds. this includes a lot of things like apples, citruses, bananas, grapes, cucumbers, melons, peppers, corn, beans, mangoes, even cereal grains and many spices like black pepper, and whatever other seed-bearing thingy on a plant you can think of. However, the more common use of the term fruit is by its culinary definition, which only includes sweet or sour fleshy fruits that can be eaten raw and are often used explicitly for their sweetness or sourness in cooking. We use fruits a lot when making sweet foods like baked goods, cakes, syrups, preserves, confectionaries, and so on.
Vegetables aren't a botanical or at all scientific category; it's completely cultural. A vegetable is just any part of a plant that's used for food, which can be the roots, stems, flowers, leaves, seeds, fruits, and more. Vegetables are predominantly found in savory foods, like sandwiches, stews, sauces, whatever. You probably understand intuitively what vegetables are to you, and depending on your cultural background, consider different things to be vegetables insofar that you use them in food or not.
There's a similar and related issue with the botanical and culinary definitions of "berry", where botanically speaking, a berry is any fruit that keeps its seeds inside the fleshy pulp of its pericarp. This again is a broad category that includes apples, bananas, citruses, grapes, cucumbers, melons, pumpkins, peppers, tomatoes, eggplants, avocadoes, and so on, but doesn't include accessory or aggregate fruits like strawberries or blackberries. Again, there's a cultural, culinary definition of "berry" that overlaps with the botanical definition, which is more commonly used in common parlance. When you talk about berries, you are probably never talking about them in the botanical sense, and the same goes for fruits.
The problem is that when the question of "are tomatoes fruits or vegetables?" comes up, we're only talking in the oppositional culinary/cultural terms, not botanical terms. People will use the tomato's botanical definition as a fruit, but think that they are defining it in culinary terms, and use that to argue that it precludes tomatoes from being a vegetable. This makes no sense when the way we use tomatoes in cooking aligns much more closely with how vegetables are used versus fruits. It's precisely because of this that I loathe the saying "knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit; wisdom is knowing not to put them in a fruit salad", because it so clearly confuses the two definitions! Fruit salads don't include all botanical fruits, they are only concerned with the other, completely unrelated cultural category of fruit that tomatoes aren't included in!
Tomatoes are scientifically speaking fruits, but are otherwise vegetables in every way that matters! You know this intuitively, and every argument to suggest anything else is forced and asinine! Just shut up!