The Great Debate: Is Chili a Soup?

I don't know. Maybe, but maybe not.

I don't know, but Chili is certainly un-Constitutional!

Its closer to a stew than soup. I make a fine pot of chili. For extra heat I stick my finger in it.

No.

Cincinnati chili, the best kind of chili, is obviously not a soup.

Edwin DOIIIII wrote:

Discus.

I think it is chili.

For those of you who are unsure, ask yourself this simple question, is a stew on the spectrum of soup? I believe it is. Here is why, most people think a stew is a hardy soup. Those that don't agree often times say a stew is not a soup due to the "fact" it doesnt have broth. Well a broth is defined as liquid food preparation in which consist of water, meat, cereal grains or vegetables that are simmered. Therefore, the defense of "stew is not a soup due to lack of broth" is completely wrong. So, back to the chili and soup question. Chili is a stew, and a stew is a hardy soup, therefore I am on the side of chili being a soup.

Where I come from, for lunch, we always had a big bowl of chili soup with saltine crackers and a big glass of soda pop.

Edwin DOIIIII wrote:

Discus.

In the south at least, it is a soup if it contains beans, otherwise no

No No No No no. The real question is what in the heck is Canadian Bacon?

Soup is served in it's cooking liquid while chili is served over spaghetti in Cincinnati, OH and is more soup-like than stew-like

Chili soup is a soup.

Chili con carne is a stew.

If you eat it with a spoon, it is soup. If you eat it with a fork, it is a stew.

Chili is, in fact, a soup. It's culinary lineage can be traced back to the mid-1800's in Mexico where they mixed together essential whatever meats and spices they at hand. Later use, says around 1850 would show that they would mash up these meats and spices into a brick for and would reconstitute it in boiling water for later use likely during travel. So with that in mind, chili could definitely be classified as a soup. What we see in restaurants today is merely an adaption of the original recipés used by the cowboys of the mid-1800's. If you ask me the only way to eat chili is in a wide mouth bowl with a big'ole spoon.

lk wrote:

Chili soup is a soup.

Chili con carne is a stew.

Campbell makes/made a chili soup, was just like a can of chili inside, only add water.

Soup!

Chili is a soup, morons. It is either clearly a liquid(albeit an amorphous one) with meat and other ingredients suspended within it(obviously making it a traditional SOUP) OR those same ingredients sitting in a smaller amount of liquid akin to a STEW, an undoubtedly soup-classified dish.

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_bacon

run2slow wrote:

For those of you who are unsure, ask yourself this simple question, is a stew on the spectrum of soup? I believe it is. Here is why, most people think a stew is a hardy soup. Those that don't agree often times say a stew is not a soup due to the "fact" it doesnt have broth. Well a broth is defined as liquid food preparation in which consist of water, meat, cereal grains or vegetables that are simmered. Therefore, the defense of "stew is not a soup due to lack of broth" is completely wrong. So, back to the chili and soup question. Chili is a stew, and a stew is a hardy soup, therefore I am on the side of chili being a soup.

Are you one of those morons that says " party hardy"?

Have to say you have a great username for your post. Alton Brown is the expert on culinary history and science.

run2slow wrote:

For those of you who are unsure, ask yourself this simple question, is a stew on the spectrum of soup? I believe it is. Here is why, most people think a stew is a hardy soup.

No they don't.

herez the answer wrote:

I am allergic to chili. So put that on your dick and suck it.

I can't find it?