Ah, but when that line of tiny change is so arbitrary… Is it a true chicken until it grows up and fulfils its destiny? Is it a chicken based purely on its genetic code, so the egg whence it hatched is a chicken egg; or is it truly a chicken when it becomes a chicken… meh, I write this far and find I still agree with you: even in that case the egg it hatched from becomes a chicken egg by virtue of the chicken it grew into.
Comment on Chicken vs Egg
OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 7 months ago
I don’t like this because it’s not addressing the actual saying. Obviously the saying is about chicken eggs specifically.
But I’ve always felt obviously the egg came first. The first chicken was born in an egg, so the egg came first. That egg could have been produced from a creature with a mutation which caused it to produce the first chicken egg when it is not itself the exact same species.
milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 7 months ago
bob_lemon@feddit.de 7 months ago
In other words, the question becomes: “Is an egg defined by the creature that laid it, or the creature that will hatch from it?”
mynameisigglepiggle@lemmy.world 7 months ago
This shit is getting deep
milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Hatch or grow. Because once you’re asking those questions, is the first chick truly the first chicken?
“Is a juvenile defined by what it currently is or what it will/might become?” And, “is chicken-ness an innate quality of the animal, or in relation to the animal fulfilling/presenting (or being able to fulfil) some chicken-ness?”
SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 7 months ago
The thing that defines chicken-ness is crossing the road. So if the egg rolled across the road before hatching does that mean the egg is a chicken egg?
But of course the chicken must also see the other side of the road. Since it’s impossible for see outside of the egg before hatching it might be the egg lacks sufficient chicken-ness to be considered a chicken egg.
But once the egg hatches the chicken will see the other side of the road. So if the egg crosses the road and the chicken that hatches from the egg sees the other side of the road, both the egg and chicken must both be considered to be sufficiently chickenly to complete the sequence required to establish the complete chicken.
srecko@lemm.ee 7 months ago
It’s somehiw obvious now, but the question appeared 25 centuries ago when it wasn’t even remotely clear what was the answer.
Holzkohlen@feddit.de 7 months ago
But I think it’s not about chicken at all. People just don’t know which creature on earth laid the first egg, so the chicken is just a stand-in. As chicken are the species we most associate with eggs for obvious reasons. What came first: the first egg or the first egg-laying creature? Has to be the egg-laying creature, but then how did that get born?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 7 months ago
I believe this is correct as I read in a book somewhere that it was a kind of proto-chicken if you will, that laid an egg of which came a the first chicken.
The more interesting question is how long did it take for the first BBQ Chicken.
OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 7 months ago
Real question is which came first, BBQ chicken or the Eggs Benedict?
dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 7 months ago
That is an interesting one.
I did a quick search using Arc and it says eggs Benedict was 1860s and BBQ. Chicken is unknown.
tor@poeng.link 7 months ago
MIDItheKID@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Image
Guy_Fieris_Hair@lemmy.world 7 months ago
The newly classified creature didn’t mutate as soon as it hatched, it was a chicken inside the egg the whole time.
Is it the mom’s egg or the chicken’s egg I guess is the argument you are making. I call it the chicken’s egg. So the egg came first.