fossilesqueMay 18, 2024

Chicken vs Egg

https://mander.xyz/post/13145609

Chicken vs Egg - Mander

Show threadLillyPipMay 18, 2024

The chicken vs egg question has never been about chronology or science.

It’s been about religion vs science.

Science says the egg came first: a chicken laid an egg that was nearly imperceptibly not a chicken, so the egg was a new thing. Then it hatched and one of its descendants laid an egg that was almost imperceptibly not a not-a-chicken. Repeat ad nauseum. That’s how evolution works, with the egg coming first.

Religion says a god poofed a chicken into existence.

That’s the chicken vs egg thing. It’s not a puzzle at all, it’s just science vs religion.

Show threadsrecko

You can interpret it that way now but that’s not the original meanig.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_or_the_egg

I understand and respect where you are coming from but i prefer not to rewrite history while arguing about ideas.

Chicken or the egg - Wikipedia

May 19, 2024 at 12:22amWeb
Show threadAFK BRB ChocolateMay 19, 2024
Yes, thank you, you’re exactly right. The person you’re responding to is correct that it’s come to have science vs religion overtones, but that’s not what the expression meant to people for ages and ages.
Show threadMrShanklesMay 19, 2024

a metaphoric adjective describing situations where it is not clear which of two events should be considered the cause and which should be considered the effect

I guess the overtones are a product of their times. Currently, it seems to be: is science/religion the “cause” or “effect”.

I always staked claim that it was a “scientific vs philosophical” question; but I never considered how timeline could change the overtones or underlying thinking of “The chicken and the egg” concept. Neat

Show threadLillyPipMay 19, 2024
You’re right, I shouldn’t have said ‘never’. It was a paradox in ancient history, but at least in my lifetime, I’ve read it as basically solved. That may be a relatively recent stance (since 100-200 years ago), but it doesn’t seem useful to continue presenting it as a paradox at this point.