3 ms·

well yeah, but we knew that long ago. fish, dinosaurs, etc. and this one was long after chickens.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
No one has ever interpreted the question as "which came first, the chicken or the fish egg?" It's not interesting even when you don't intentionally misinterpret it. If a chicken egg is an egg from which a chicken will hatch, then the egg came first by definition. If a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, then the chicken came first by definition.
- kortex 5y ago
  The attribute of "chickenness" is a sorites paradox. So even if you allow the interpretation of "egg which will become chicken" vs "egg laid by a chicken" (which is quite clever, I hadnt encountered that) you are still stuck with marginal difference between mother and child/egg in overall "chickenicity." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox
  - cogman10 5y ago
    Fun take and it really points to one of the problems of making species distinctions. The very nature of evolution on macro organisms is very gradual changes. Reminds me of the futurama joke around the "missing link"[1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM
  - mbg721 5y ago
    Chickens are a fun example to use here, given the culinary cliche that unfamiliar meats taste to varying degrees "kind of like chicken". So I guess any individual chicken would be very close in flavor to the Standard Chicken, whichever one that is.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    > even if you allow the interpretation of "egg which will become chicken" vs "egg laid by a chicken" (which is quite clever, I hadnt encountered that) you are still stuck with marginal difference between mother and child/egg in overall "chickenicity." But that has no effect on the answer to the question. Given the definition, it is not necessary to identify the first chicken in order to know whether that first chicken hatched from the first chicken egg (definition 1) or laid it (definition 2).
- jandrese 5y ago
  The whole question is a proxy for the evolution question. If God put chickens on the Earth then they came first obviously. If chickens evolved from some close but not quite chicken ancestor then the first chicken hatched from an egg with a beneficial genetic mutation.
  - StavrosK 5y ago
    Maybe God put chicken eggs on the Earth.
    - klyrs 5y ago
      A chaotic neutral god would put one chicken and one fertilized egg on the earth, just to confound philosophers

No one has ever interpreted the question as "which came first, the chicken or the fish egg?" It's not interesting even when you don't intentionally misinterpret it. If a chicken egg is an egg from which a chicken will hatch, then the egg came first by definition. If a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, then the chicken came first by definition.

kortex 5y ago
The attribute of "chickenness" is a sorites paradox. So even if you allow the interpretation of "egg which will become chicken" vs "egg laid by a chicken" (which is quite clever, I hadnt encountered that) you are still stuck with marginal difference between mother and child/egg in overall "chickenicity." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorites_paradox
- cogman10 5y ago
  Fun take and it really points to one of the problems of making species distinctions. The very nature of evolution on macro organisms is very gradual changes. Reminds me of the futurama joke around the "missing link"[1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM
- mbg721 5y ago
  Chickens are a fun example to use here, given the culinary cliche that unfamiliar meats taste to varying degrees "kind of like chicken". So I guess any individual chicken would be very close in flavor to the Standard Chicken, whichever one that is.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > even if you allow the interpretation of "egg which will become chicken" vs "egg laid by a chicken" (which is quite clever, I hadnt encountered that) you are still stuck with marginal difference between mother and child/egg in overall "chickenicity." But that has no effect on the answer to the question. Given the definition, it is not necessary to identify the first chicken in order to know whether that first chicken hatched from the first chicken egg (definition 1) or laid it (definition 2).
jandrese 5y ago
The whole question is a proxy for the evolution question. If God put chickens on the Earth then they came first obviously. If chickens evolved from some close but not quite chicken ancestor then the first chicken hatched from an egg with a beneficial genetic mutation.
- StavrosK 5y ago
  Maybe God put chicken eggs on the Earth.
  - klyrs 5y ago
    A chaotic neutral god would put one chicken and one fertilized egg on the earth, just to confound philosophers