Chicken or Egg ?

[Aryan]

Well u might put it as : An egg is a chicken's way of producing more chickens.
But i might say: A chicken is an egg's way of producing more egg's.

[cloakable]

Shouldn't this be in Philosophy?

[Boozer]

Chicken.

An almost chicken (chicken ancestor right before real chickens) laid an egg with a chicken inside, but since it was laid by an almost chicken it is an almost chicken egg, not a chicken egg. However once it has hatched it is apparent that it is a chicken, not an almost chicken (ty evoloution). So chicken first.

[nobarcode]

The Rooster came first, then the chicken.

[Strephonade]

e-i-e-i-o.

(Hm, maybe _I_ just laid an egg....)

*ba-domp-domp*

[nobarcode]

e-i-e-i-o.

(Hm, maybe _I_ just laid an egg....)

*ba-domp-domp*

With a quack-quack here? :huh:

[jimkopelli]

Egg before chicken... because I had eggs for breakfast, and chicken for lunch.

[CeSoirNoir]

How can you get a chicken without an Egg?

[Strephonade]

With a quack-quack here? :huh:

Well, I didn't mean to duck the question, if that is what you mean. :D But, nevermind my attempts at silliness. Here is my response: both--the egg is the chicken, and the chicken is the egg. For one to exist, you need the other.

[nobarcode]

An egg is not a chicken without a rooster.

[Strephonade]

Yes, unless there is parthenogenesis, but that is quite an unusual occurrence. So, we agree, no?

[nobarcode]

:)

[Aryan]

Ok so the rooster might be God !

[Six]

Chicken.

An almost chicken (chicken ancestor right before real chickens) laid an egg with a chicken inside, but since it was laid by an almost chicken it is an almost chicken egg, not a chicken egg. However once it has hatched it is apparent that it is a chicken, not an almost chicken (ty evoloution). So chicken first.

hm. so it depends on whether you name the egg after its parent or after its occupant...

I'd go for the egg. If you had a chicken-Mother and a (geez...where is my dictionary...it doesn't know the word for a male goose...hm...anyway) goose-father...you wouldn't call it a chicken-egg. whatever it would be called...

nono... egg has to be first ;)

[CosmicDust]

Gander.

The egg would be a chicken-goose hybrid egg, I guess.

[jimkopelli]

I'm pretty sure geese and chickens don't crossbreed. That's why we have turkey.

[s]

I'm pretty sure geese and chickens don't crossbreed. That's why we have turkey.

WTF? :rofl:

Oh, blue little man, that is great!

[booyalab]

The chicken had to be first because of the relationship between the two, the chicken takes care of the egg and the inevitable hatchling so it can turn into an adult. It doesn't just leave it , because if it were first it'd have to be self-sustaining.

[booyalab]

Although, maybe by some coincidence the bird that the chicken evolved from decided not to peck the eyes out of/ or abandon two of it's mutated babies.

[jimkopelli]

Oh, blue little man, that is great!
Return WTF?!? Maybe it's time for a new ava... nah.

[s]

Oh, I like the avatar... he is cuddly.

[Lucas]

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

The egg came first; the reptilian ancestors of chickens laid eggs.


-Lucas

[jimkopelli]

Hmm... do any modern reptiles lay unfertilized eggs like domesticated chickens? I don't think so, but if iguanas are the chicken of the jungle... could they eventually be bred to? I'll have an iguana omelette, hold the poison dart frogs, please...

[s]

I agree with Lucas.

Well, done.

[INTrPosr]

Arrggghhhh CIRCULAR REASONING!!! And to think, I once pondered that question as a teenager.

[jimkopelli]

But eggs are round... and chickens are... kinda round... but I think Lucas has it, too. The question never specifies what kind of egg. One thing, though... the aquatic ancestors of reptiles probably laid eggs, too... and their ancestors... and so on, way back into the Pre-Cambrian...

[Birdsnest]

I guess you know this, but it was neither the chicken nor the egg. Space debris (from who knows where, perhaps aliens?) came into the earths atmosphere and settled in swamps, probably those in Georgia or Florida. They left one-celled asexual amoebas there with the abilty to mutate and change. The chicken came much much later.

[hoodrich84]

:grin:

[Jayk]

A not-chicken laid an egg. That egg hatched, then you had a chicken. Given a time line, that would be as follows.

sometime:
not-chicken

sometime later:
egg

sometime after that:
chicken

(I'm sure there's a logical structure to that)

From the looks of things, the egg came before the chicken.

[manza]

Question based on faulty premises.

[Anonymous]

Question based on faulty premises.

And metaphysical properties like "purpose".

[1104]

i don't understand why this question is still seriously considered.

[gator]

The chicken was the egg's idea for getting more eggs.

[kali]

hm. so it depends on whether you name the egg after its parent or after its occupant...

Yus, this is where the contention lies. I think people who believe an egg's identity comes from its parents are more likely to pander to relativistic branches in philosophy, while people who believe the occupant decides the egg's essence believe in an underlying aboslute structure in the world.

Egg came first mannnnnn. An egg containing the full genetic components of a chicken should be called a chicken egg, not a half-reptilian half-chicken egg.

[manza]

I'd like someone who thinks there's any sort of remotely adequate answer to this question to point to the exact moment when the chicken ceased being Gallus gallus and became Gallus gallus domesticus. There's a gradient between non-chicken and chicken, where "non-chicken" and "chicken" are totally arbitrary designations. Chickens, like everything else, continue to evolve-- at what point will they no longer be chickens? Evolutionarily speaking, the question is bullshit.

The "chicken or the egg?" question is valuable as a philosophical experiment, as "Which came first, X dependent on Y, or Y dependent on X?" but is absurd when taken literally.

[gator]

T-Rex. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/apr/13/uknews.taxonomy)

[JollyBard]

Well, I'd say that from an evolutionnary point of view, the egg came firts, because it's parents may not have technically been chickens.

[ApeTheDog]

God came first, and he created a chicken with an unhatched egg inside. True story.

[vSv]

God came first, and he created a chicken with an unhatched egg inside. True story.

Did god create himself... oh wait...

[ApeTheDog]

Did god create himself... oh wait...

Turtles all the way down.

[ciphersort]

Chegg.

[LastRailway]

Shouldn't this be in Philosophy?

It should be in some special place, that's sure.

For the moment, moved to Playground.

EDIT: Oh well, it's an ancient thread.

[kali]

Chicken.

An almost chicken (chicken ancestor right before real chickens) laid an egg with a chicken inside, but since it was laid by an almost chicken it is an almost chicken egg, not a chicken egg. However once it has hatched it is apparent that it is a chicken, not an almost chicken (ty evoloution). So chicken first.

hm. so it depends on whether you name the egg after its parent or after its occupant...

I'd go for the egg. If you had a chicken-Mother and a (geez...where is my dictionary...it doesn't know the word for a male goose...hm...anyway) goose-father...you wouldn't call it a chicken-egg. whatever it would be called...

nono... egg has to be first ;)

I think these answers are very telling of whether you think truth is relatively-defined or absolute.

[NotATanar'ri]

Lucas took my awesome answer. Phooey.