Asklemmy

43826 readers

856 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
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

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 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

46 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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Something not defined as a chicken would have to lay an egg that hatched something defined as a chicken at some point. Otherwise we couldn't have chickens.

But as you say the definition is the problem with this question.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Something not defined as a chicken would have to lay an egg that hatched something defined as a chicken at some point. Otherwise we couldn’t have chickens.

Yep. But at least with our current definition of what a "species" (roughly a group of organism that can interbreed and have fertile offspring), that's not possible.

If some not-chicken would lay an egg that hatches a chicken, that chicken would have nothing to breed with. It would basically be a genetic defect that makes it infertile.