Asklemmy

43363 readers

2329 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Is there a scientific ,logical or theoratical answer to the "what comes first chicken or egg question ? I know it's suppposed to be a paradox but i wanted to know if there is one. if there is share ? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by THEDAEMON@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

EDIT : It seems as no one understood what i was talking about and maybe its my fault for not elaborating . I always thought chicken was a metaphor for this paradox and not really meaning chicken as a specific spiece . So my question is how did the ancestor of chicken came to be if it was born (egg) wouldn't it need a parent or if it was a parent (chicken ) woudn't it need to be born ? Or did all the creatures start out as bacteria and climbed out from ocean through evalution if so why isn't any new species being born this way or am i missing something ?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kirklennon@kbin.social 26 points 7 months ago (21 children)

Chickens evolved from earlier animals. The process is gradual, of course, but we can say that at some point some proto-chicken ancestor laid an egg that was different enough genetically that it counts as a chicken. In other words, a non-chicken laid a chicken egg, which eventually grew up to be the first chicken. Therefore, the egg came first.

[–] sushibowl@feddit.nl -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

at some point some proto-chicken ancestor laid an egg that was different enough genetically that it counts as a chicken. In other words, a non-chicken laid a chicken egg

This is incorrect. If I take an ostrich egg, empty it out through a small hole, then put a chicken fetus inside, it does not suddenly become a chicken egg. We must therefore conclude that "chicken egg" can only reasonably be defined as an egg laid by a chicken.

The proto-chicken ancestor can never lay a chicken egg, it can at most lay a proto-chicken egg which by some mutation contains a chicken. Therefore the chicken came first.

[–] hallettj@beehaw.org 3 points 7 months ago

When science kills the mystery, semantics keeps the debate alive!

load more comments (19 replies)