1y ago

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 ?

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 ?

46 comments

The answer is egg, because egg-laying creatures predate the chicken.
If we count it as a chicken egg only, then it depends on if you describe a chicken egg as "an egg laid by a chicken" or "an egg that could hatch into a chicken".
- If we count it as a chicken egg only, then it depends on if you describe a chicken egg as “an egg laid by a chicken” or “an egg that could hatch into a chicken”.
  I think we watched the same youtube video on the topic!
  
  I don't think we did, no.
- Um no.
  The foetus is first formed in the uterus and then the hen lays down the calcium layer around it.
  So it depends on whether you consider a foetus a chicken or not.
  
  I think you mean the embryo; it takes some time after being laid for the zygote inside the egg to develop to the point it could be considered a fetus.
If nothing else, eggs were a way of producing offspring many millions of years before anything you can reasonably call a chicken.
Chickens evolved from earlier animals. The process is gradual, of course, but we can say that at some point some proto-chicken ancestor laid an egg that was different enough genetically that it counts as a chicken. In other words, a non-chicken laid a chicken egg, which eventually grew up to be the first chicken. Therefore, the egg came first.
- but we can say that at some point some proto-chicken ancestor laid an egg that was different enough genetically that it counts as a chicken
  This is not correct. At no point can the offspring in a single generation be differnet enough to be called a different species.
  What we call "species" are just current snapshots of time. Species only make sense in a narrow timeframe. In reality things change very slowley over a large amount of time and there a no clear transition points.
  
  This is not correct. At no point can the offspring in a single generation be differnet enough to be called a different species.
  I'm not saying we should call it a different species but if we're saying species Y is the direct descendant of species X, then, we can imagine a dividing line, and the line must always begin with an egg because eggs are different from their parents but adults are not different from the egg they started off as.
  In reality things change very slowley over a large amount of time and there a no clear transition points.
  Isn't that obvious?
  
  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.
- at some point some proto-chicken ancestor laid an egg that was different enough genetically that it counts as a chicken. In other words, a non-chicken laid a chicken egg
  This is incorrect. If I take an ostrich egg, empty it out through a small hole, then put a chicken fetus inside, it does not suddenly become a chicken egg. We must therefore conclude that "chicken egg" can only reasonably be defined as an egg laid by a chicken.
  The proto-chicken ancestor can never lay a chicken egg, it can at most lay a proto-chicken egg which by some mutation contains a chicken. Therefore the chicken came first.
  
  When science kills the mystery, semantics keeps the debate alive!
- Incorrect. Until the chicken hatched it was a proto chicken.
  
  "Proto chicken" in this context refers to a genetic ancestor of the chicken. An egg hatches into the exact same species as the egg itself, but the egg is genetically different from the mother that laid the egg, and in this thought experiment, we're talking about the mother being different enough to call a different species.
the egg that hatched the first chicken, obviously, laid by something that was not quite what we’d consider a chicken.
Fish, arthropods, etc, had eggs millions of years before chickens.
_ /\ _
- Dinos (~~within the arthropods~~) are an easy example.
  Edit: correction
  
  Aren’t all dinosaurs chickens ?
  https://www.birdlife.org/news/2021/12/21/its-official-birds-are-literally-dinosaurs-heres-how-we-know/
The concept of "eggs" is way, way older then chickens. Fish lay eggs. So in this case, it's definitly the egg that came first.
You can dig deeper, but eventually you end up on the what is a "chicken egg" and a "chicken" .. which means you have to deal with taxonomy. And well, it's just made up... so that doesn't really lead anywhere.
So I say it's the egg. final answer.
- This is the only answer. Dinosaurs laid eggs long before they evolved into chickens.
I'm genuinely curious OP how you could even consider the chicken coming first? How did you imagine that scenario going down?
I can’t really remember the study or whatever, but the answer is egg. You’d need the mutation in DNA in the laid egg before you could get the chicken. And then propagation after until chickens are everywhere of course.
This is a simplified version of what I read, but that’s basically it.
- Unless you define "chicken egg" as an egg laid by a chicken. It's question of definitions
  
  But the question doesn't specify a "chicken egg". It simply says "egg". So the answer is egg, laid by some chicken ancestor.
To answer your other question, yes there are still single-cell organisms evolving into new species all the time, in the ocean and elsewhere. That includes new multi-cellular species evolving from single cells all the time. But it takes a long time to develop from cell, to clump of slime, to something with legs. So you might not notice the changes if you aren't super patient.
Or were those separate questions? Are you asking if chickens descended from single-cell organisms? Yes they did. With a lot of steps in between.
Egg
to answer your edit, yes all creatures started out as single celled-organisms many billions of years ago and gradually evolved. this process is still happening today but takes millions of years, not something you would observe in a human lifetime

46 comments