Why do you consider wine to be superior to drink than beer ?

The potential superiority of wine is completely subjective, so while I am not a beer fan (I like one every once in a while, but that's it) I won't say that one is superior to the other. I will say I prefer wine.

We are talking about a relationship here between wine and beer, not some sort of ultimate superiority by itself. The comparison on the grounds of superiority is not completely subjective if you are going by dictionary definitions, which I would employ before declaring a word to be completely subjective. Remember, a word is created by people and given agreed-upon definitions; although a word evolves and its definitions, spelling, etc., may change over time.

The comparison on the grounds of superiority is not completely subjective if you are going by dictionary definitions

What dictionary definitions of superior are you using? The ones I see define the term as 'higher in quality' or 'better than others', all of which sounds completely subjective to me. Not to mention difficult to apply to the broad categories of 'beer' and 'wine' since most of both categories is absolute crap and it's only a tiny percentage that beer and wine enthusiasts actually care about.

So why don't you make your case in more detail for why wine is superior to beer?

[David M. Bueker]

Covert,

I'm with Rahsaan. What dictionary are you using?

Don't know about the other poster, but this is the dictionary I prefer (even though wine is in there but not beer).

It is a heck of a lot harder to make a consistently good wine than a good beer! You don't have bad vintages of hops or barley. You don't have to deal with the oak regimen! You don't have to deal with TCA. I don't know of any ageable beers (at least not for 10-25 years). And you certainly don't have "single vineyard" beers. And like many have already said, wine and food are made for each other, like "love and marriage". Beer on the other hand is more easy-going. I like beer a lot, but there might be 50 different beer experiences, while there are a thousand different wine experiences. Wine is not necessarily "superior" but it is surely a lot more complex and (I'll go ahead and say it) more intellectual!

I have found that for the home brewer/winemaker, beer is harder to make than wine. Sanitation for beer is critical because the alcohol content is lower and more bad things can taek over beer than wine. If you have ever visited a winery and a brewery and noticed the differences in facilities it becomes obvious. If one can maintain a sanitary enviornment then I agree brewing is easier for the production of a consistent product.

As for ageable beers they exist. Check out Thomas Hardy Ale. I have vintage dated beers in my cellar as old as 1994.

You are all so kind and considerate, and politically correct. And wrong.

Wine is superior to beer because:
1) Nobody ever built a beer cellar.
2) Nobody pays >$100 for a bottle of beer.
3) Nobody buys a case of beer to put down for their newborn's 21st birthday.
4) Nobody swirls beer.
5) Nobody debates whether the '89 budwieser was better than the '90.
6) Nobody collects expensive beer openers. In fact, Oster doesn't even make an electric beer opener.
7) There is no "beer advocate," "beer spectator" or other rating system for beer.
Nobody debates the proper closure for beer.
9) Nobody spends weeks touring the beer vineyards of France, Italy, Spain or anywhere else for that matter.
10) And while I may be wrong on every one of the above reasons, no one can argue with this: There is no beer table at MoCOOL!!!

1. Don't make me do the research. They exist.
2. Sam Adams Utopia
3. Wrong. Some do put down vintage beers for newborns.
4. Wrong. I do and I use a wine glass.
5. Wrong. There was a lot of debate in beer circles about the 1994 vs. 1995 Sam Adams Triple bock.
6. No clue but this seems to indicate that some people do http://www.oldbeerstuff.com/opener.html
7. Wrong. http://beeradvocate.com/beer/
8. Wrong. Grolsch closures are much loved or much despised. The anti-grolsch closure crowd sound very much like the anti-cork crowd.
9. Maybe but I do know folks that have planned trips based upon breweries they can visit.
10. O.K.

Wine is superior to beer because:
1) Nobody ever built a beer cellar.
2) Nobody pays >$100 for a bottle of beer.
3) Nobody buys a case of beer to put down for their newborn's 21st birthday.
4) Nobody swirls beer.
5) Nobody debates whether the '89 budwieser was better than the '90.
6) Nobody collects expensive beer openers. In fact, Oster doesn't even make an electric beer opener.
7) There is no "beer advocate," "beer spectator" or other rating system for beer.
8 ) Nobody debates the proper closure for beer.
9) Nobody spends weeks touring the beer vineyards of France, Italy, Spain or anywhere else for that matter.
10) And while I may be wrong on every one of the above reasons, no one can argue with this: There is no beer table at MoCOOL!!!

What a wonderful troll!

1) Except for me - currently 100 bottles or so of beers that benefit from short term (1-2 years) bottle age.
2) I don't, but I have tasted several. And some of them are stupendous.
3) True, I won't do so if I ever get children, but having tasted Chimay from the early '80s recently (this was when Chimay still made good stuff, btw, unlike today) I know that some beers not only last but also improve for decades.
4) I do
5) That's because Bud is crap! But there are many "vintage" beers where the differences between years are strong. And beer geeks do debate them.
6-10) nothing to add to others' answers

There are some breweries in the US and elsewhere where live yeast is inserted into the bottle before capping. These benefit substantially from aging. Ommegang in Cooperstown, NY is an example. Touring their facilities is not a lot different from a winery, other of course than one brews and the other ferments.

Covert,

I'm with Rahsaan. What dictionary are you using?

Cripes, Webster's Third New International Dictionary. But I knew the definitions before checking the dictionary; I thought everybody did, practically. It baffles me that anybody could argue the point that the dictionary does not list definitions of superiority that way more apply to wine than beer.

Am I the only one on this forum who interprets the definitions this way?

The comparison on the grounds of superiority is not completely subjective if you are going by dictionary definitions

What dictionary definitions of superior are you using? The ones I see define the term as 'higher in quality' or 'better than others', all of which sounds completely subjective to me. Not to mention difficult to apply to the broad categories of 'beer' and 'wine' since most of both categories is absolute crap and it's only a tiny percentage that beer and wine enthusiasts actually care about.

So why don't you make your case in more detail for why wine is superior to beer?

My position comes strictly from a matter of definition.

From Webster: of more importance, value, accomplishment, significance (if you argue that paying thousands of dollars for bottles of wine doesn't bear these criteria out, then I give up on you and David). More subtly, of greater force, influence (again, with the amount of critique, auctions, poetry written and dollars devoted to wine as opposed to beer, I don't see how you can argue this - but if you and David persist, as I said, I give up and you guys win).

Am I the only one on this forum who interprets the definitions this way?

Res ipsa loquitur.

I think you guys scared BDuncan away.......

Am I the only one on this forum who interprets the definitions this way?

Res ipsa loquitur.

I guess you are right. It is right there is my face. Luckily for my self confidence I have more than once seen 1,000 persons be wrong about the rectitude of something that was obvious to me.

[David M. Bueker]

Covert,

I will argue to my grave that spending thousands of dollars on a bottle of wine is NOT a clear cut example of superiority.

To use that definition an outfielder who bats around .270 is worth 100 teachers (or more). I'll never buy into that.

dollars devoted to wine as opposed to beer, I don't see how you can argue this

Pretty easily. Beer is more widely consumed (in the US and across the world) and is a larger part of the US and the global economy than wine.

Not sure you can stand on that definition.

I must admit that in a weak moment before Christmas I purchased a bottle of Sam Adams Infinium and it was outrageously delicious.

[David M. Bueker]

I must admit that in a weak moment before Christmas I purchased a bottle of Sam Adams Infinium and it was outrageously delicious.

I like much of the Sam Adams product line. Haven't had the Infinium yet, but I will at some point.

Covert,

I will argue to my grave that spending thousands of dollars on a bottle of wine is NOT a clear cut example of superiority.

To use that definition an outfielder who bats around .270 is worth 100 teachers (or more). I'll never buy into that.

Well, I am not going to argue to my grave: I concede and declare you the winner. I don't think I have ever won an argument in my life, because every human being is right by grand design - so I finally have a New Year's Resolution: to STOP ARGUING.

You are all so kind and considerate, and politically correct. And wrong.

Wine is superior to beer because:
1) Nobody ever built a beer cellar.
2) Nobody pays >$100 for a bottle of beer.
3) Nobody buys a case of beer to put down for their newborn's 21st birthday.
4) Nobody swirls beer.
5) Nobody debates whether the '89 budwieser was better than the '90.
6) Nobody collects expensive beer openers. In fact, Oster doesn't even make an electric beer opener.
7) There is no "beer advocate," "beer spectator" or other rating system for beer.
Nobody debates the proper closure for beer.
9) Nobody spends weeks touring the beer vineyards of France, Italy, Spain or anywhere else for that matter.
10) And while I may be wrong on every one of the above reasons, no one can argue with this: There is no beer table at MoCOOL!!!

OW! you're right on, so I"ll not be liked by a few more people. "If you're all things to all people it's usually because you stand for nothing."

Most of us aren't answering the question, which is probably giving the wily BDuncan a good laugh. He didn't ask if we think wine is "superior" to beer or "better" than beer. He simply asked why we "consider wine [and certain spirits] "so much better to drink."

Those of us who drink wine more often than beer -- which I suspect is just about all of us -- must think wine is usually "better to drink," as otherwise we would be acting illogically, so Duncan is right in asking a loaded question. And so why do we think wine is (usually) better (for us) to drink? I think so because generally I get more pleasure from wine. That's my answer to BD. I get "more" pleasure but I'm not going to say I get a higher quality or superior pleasure as that's a toughie to prove, as I once found out to my humiliation in a freshman philosophy class.

I prefer wine simply because I like to drink it more than beer.
The reasons for this are numerous, but I think this is the main reason. Wine is the only alcoholic drink that I liked from the first taste.
I had to convince my palate i liked beer and liquor.

In general, I prefer wine with my food over beer although I have to admit beer is a better match with Mexican food and pizza.

Although I have to admit I am drinking more beer now than I used to, but there is a reason for that. My son now works at a brewery and is really into craft brews. So I drink some of them with him and try new stuff.

I don't. I like beer. I can't imagine pairing wine with wings. Welcome to the forum.

Agree with Howie. Neither is superior; each is indispensible for certain food pairings.

I think you guys scared BDuncan away.......

But he has joined one of the Australian boards just today and posted exactly the same question - word for word.

I’ll just say a couple of more things about all of this.

I sometimes define accuracy and factuality as the scientific opinions du jour. They can change with time. Truth is a metaphysical thing which is individual but usually enjoys a strong central tendency of experience shared by most people in their heart of hearts, which in turn rarely gets recognized because of the layers of principled bullshit over it. Being right is a state of mind, a reflection of how a mind is wired. It is the most rigid aspect of points of view, more rigid than fact and even truth. The hardest thing in the world to change is the human mind.