2007-03-19 18:40:20 · 12 answers · asked by JIMBUS_35 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
How do we know it "wasn't " his intention????
2007-03-21 05:42:06 · answer #1 · answered by stoutunicorn 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It wasn't - to the chicken it has no more relevance then walking across a field, chicken coupe or whatever. To the chicken there is no other side. It is man's intention to give the chicken intention.
2007-03-20 01:53:43 · answer #2 · answered by karadansu 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
that would be based solely on the perceiver's objectivity (of whom we don't even know the credentials for chicken observing.)
without the ability to do a long term double-blind study i argue that the experiment is flawed.
just like the answer to:
how many licks does it take to get to the center of a tootsie roll tootsie pop -
the world may never know.....
2007-03-20 02:24:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
We don't. The chicken never told anyone its reasons for going.
2007-03-24 00:04:21 · answer #4 · answered by Izen G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
.....there is no such thing as "the other side"
It is just an illusion. Becasue, when you get there - there is yet another "other side"
A chicken has no intention one way or another.
2007-03-20 02:32:30 · answer #5 · answered by clcalifornia 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The grass is always greener on the other side of the road
2007-03-20 01:51:50 · answer #6 · answered by lonetraveler 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
perhaps to the chicken it was the journey
and not the destination that was important
2007-03-20 01:46:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because it crossed the road.
2007-03-21 08:33:58 · answer #8 · answered by Biqo 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Simple.....there was a hen waiting for him on the other side.
2007-03-20 01:43:17 · answer #9 · answered by Bryan _ 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
He had to prove to the o'possum it could be done. :)
2007-03-20 02:29:55 · answer #10 · answered by tigerbychild 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋