Chicken or the Egg

[Pizzabeak]

What came first: the chicken or the egg?

 

[Black Rose]

non-chicken lays egg
chicken pops out of egg
and God lifts a stone heavier than he can lift

 

[computerhxr]

The question presupposes one came before the other, the idea of oneness, the idea that two can be the same, other states of existence, what a chicken is, and that the question has an answer.

We also must also address the question of conception.

When does an egg start; when it is formed, when a sperm penetrates the egg, when it has reached a certain stage of development, or after it has been laid, it some other time?

When does the chicken start; as a sperm, when it penetrates the egg, when it reaches a certain stage of development, after it has been laid, after it has been hatched, or some other time?

The question of what came first; the chicken or the egg, is not fully formed and therefore invalid.

 

[Rook]

Dinosuar > Chicken

Therefore: Egg > Chicken

 

[onesteptwostep]

I say the egg because the first chicken came from an egg, which came from what we delineate as something that's an ancestor of a chicken.

But if someone wants the philosophical questioned answered, I say the chicken because all things need a creator- even things, or matter themselves.

 

[Polaris]

Scrambled egg

 

[gilliatt]

Two alternative expressions of the same thing. It is the same circle conceived under two different "attributes." Both the identical individual. This here chicken distinguished from all other ones. Go back, find the elements out of which the egg is made up, the material of the egg, its from What. You find the hen and her reproduction system, the cock and his. The agents that generated the egg, we still do not understand what an egg really is, unless we recognize the egg as a possible chicken. So, which comes first, obviously the chicken comes first in understanding eggs, the chicken that is to be.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

 

[Pizzabeak]

non-chicken lays egg
chicken pops out of egg
and God lifts a stone heavier than he can lift

It isn't so much a question that hasn't been answered before. It was really answered before it was asked, and only recently tried to get "confirmed". It's not just used as an example of any common sense or redundancy. It doesn't always mean a moral outcome or ideal outset. It just makes you say you should have done the opposite.

 

[lightfire]

cells r a egg so it x 100 and den egg forms and den chicken come out of egg

/scienc(?)

 

[Pizzabeak]

View attachment 4030

I wonder what happened to the chicken who laid the first egg. Did it just run off? Can the chicken lay multiple egg copies of that one or do they all have distinct personalities? Do different chickens all lay the same egg guy?

 

[Rook]

humpty dumpties are the eggs of the jabberwock

 

[onesteptwostep]

Scrambled egg

Well if you think about it a lot of "scrambled eggs" or failed attempts had to be made for our version of the chicken to come to being.

 

[Happy]

Egg, obviously. Why is this still up for debate?

 

[Polaris]

Scrambled egg

Well if you think about it a lot of "scrambled eggs" or failed attempts had to be made for our version of the chicken to come to being.

That's if one assumes that a chicken was "made", implying a maker. But yeah, whatever rocks your boat. It also depends on whether one is interpreting the chicken/egg conundrum in a literal sense. There is no single or exact point in time where we can pinpoint "HAH!!! Chicken, here!!!". We know there was a point in time where their archosaurian ancestors had to specialise due to increased competition for resources, from whence came the Aves. Somewhere in there, the clade split further and there was eventually a chicken to be found, and yes, we have a rough time frame for that. Until more evidence is found, that is.

Evolution is an imperceptively slow process, in which humans are unable to observe dramatic changes due to their short presence in the context of geological time, as well as negligible lifespans. We can only make inferences from observation of past and present data. And yes, palaeontologist and evolutionary biologists get things wrong all the time, but that's expected when one is working with limited datasets. This is obviously an ongoing process, just like in actual evolution. We may never have hard answers to the why's, but we will have a better idea of 'how', from which we can then infer a tentaive explanation to 'why'.

Additionally, I don't think one can think about evolution in terms "failed attempts" unless one believes in some kind of superiority ranking of species - a typically anthropocentric perspective. If you are referring to mutations, these are just what allow evolution to occur (of course, genetic drift, gene flow and natural selection are all part of this process). One can observe evolutionary change in vestigiality of organisms, such as in overly hirsute humans, their appendices, or third molars. Ostrich wings are another example. And in fact, chickens do carry a gene for tooth development:

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(06)00064-9

Translated for general understanding: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5230538

But maybe you are talking about god cracking eggs in his kitchen, and getting things "wrong", which is a different way of looking at it. It seems to me like another suggestion at some creationist/higher meaning agenda, just like this thread. But I'm not about to walk into that one, thank you very much

 

[onesteptwostep]

Haha, well okay.

Btw Polaris,

That's if one assumes that a chicken was "made", implying a maker. But yeah, whatever rocks your boat. It also depends on whether one is interpreting the chicken/egg conundrum in a literal sense. There is no single or exact point in time where we can pinpoint "HAH!!! Chicken, here!!!". We know there was a point in time where their archosaurian ancestors had to specialise due to increased competition for resources, from whence came the Aves clade. Somewhere in there, the clade split further and there was eventually a chicken to be found, and yes, we have a rough time frame for that. Until more evidence is found, that is.

That's what I meant when I said this:

I say the egg because the first chicken came from an egg, which came from what we delineate as something that's an ancestor of a chicken.

 

[lightfire]

aren't chickens basically dinosaurs

so which came first, the dinosaur or the egg?

back to square one : (

 

[Pizzabeak]

It depends on what your standard for "first" is, one thing has to exist for another to, yet, evolution "has no goal", which is beside the point. "Evil exists just for good to react to it", so it's all just "provoked" responses. There's no saying how much personality someone actually has that could be measured, and there's no culture, because it's not your friend, so people "change" stuff to alter what's considered "normal human behavior". You have to predict stuff like Confucius, who lived long ago, except move on toward specifics (if at all possible? How helpful would it be?). Usually, any are an "accident", then people become obsessed with it and base their whole life off it, as if they were "Sherlock Holmes", although they're doing something different, since people don't understand he was a detective, always on a beat. And he had enemies out to get his head. Ni is INTPs sixth function, so it's more "subconscious" or "unconscious" (and even "conscious"), it just depends on how much attention you pay to it, once you realize you have nothing else in your life and anything else stops working. It's basically just "the opposite" of what something currently is, under the impression the status quo can be "improved" because they can "see what's missing". INTPs "live most of their life in their head", so I think it's all just people provoking a response for more Fe, wherever it is in your stack (1st or 2nd, 3rd for ENTP), to improve the quality of life for more people.

So you can see how the feedback loop operates off one another. Se-Ni picks out patterns in data, whereas Ne-Si has all of them as equal points. I could only imagine how much of a headache too much "random" Ne would be for INFJs, if they just constantly look out for significance or hidden insults in any output anyone does as if they were paranoid or searching for meaning or intelligence in answers and looking stupid when they can't find any as fast as it'd take for neurons to fire electricity across axon terminals. I think it's a pattern that no one purposefully wants to get to the bottom of; it doesn't "help" unless you really need to experience a lesser miracle. I don't know what else would happen or who people ask questions to, or what a normal visit/conversation with a doctor or teacher would be like It isn't quite a paradox or logical conundrum, yet it reminds me of romantic endeavors: you try to give in to all your passions they tell you to slow down, you're coming on too strong; you try to take it slow, they call you gay. Everyone is different, so the same thing doesn't always work for each person, although they still just do the opposite no matter what you say or do.

 

[Umberto]

Yeap, egg.