what came first the chicken or the egg. what philosophical, social or political relevance does this question and or answer pose.
2007-06-16 07:31:41 · 12 answers · asked by "GoSANE" 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
It is the layman's question for the nature/nurture or the cause and effect controversy.
Does thought determine language or does language determine thought? - The Whorforian Hypothesis.
The nature/nurture or cause & effect question is basically the fundamental aspect of all scientific theories: which came first? What was the cause?
Almost every scientific theory is reduced to cause & effect.
And as profound is the cause & effect paradox, most working people only understand it as the 'chicken & egg' question.
Karl Marx tried to reduce economics to capitalism vs. socialism. Religion tries to reduce ethics to good vs. evil. Psychiatrists try to reduce humanity down to brain vs. mind. Philosophers see physics vs. metaphysics.
So the 'chicken & egg' cause and effect duality permeates most human thought.
2007-06-16 07:41:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is an intellectual exercise and it is also an easy way to make a person seem clever. I enjoy coming up with cheap, superficial answers for these questions. It amuses me and can sometimes lighten up a conversation that has gotten dreadfully specious.
If a Tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
No, Trees don't complain!
What came first, the chicken or the egg?
The Rooster!
Why did the chicken cross the road?
That's where the rooster was silly!
Can GOD make a rock so big that even GOD can't lift it?
Yes, but then GOD can lift it anyway, You're talking about GOD silly!
Why does GOD allow pain and suffering?
GOD doesn't ALLOW pain and suffering silly. It really ticks GOD off. We are the ones who ALLOW pain and suffering. The question should be, Why does GOD keep putting up with people who allow pain and suffering?
Is there life after death
Yes. It could be yours or it could be your kids! Who knows, but there is definitely life after death.
You know, stuff like that! Kinda fun for me. Hope I didn't bore you.
2007-06-16 14:42:56 · answer #2 · answered by MUDD 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
X,
The ramifications of the answer, are that people don't tend to look beyond the formatory, that is, the black and white, of an issue.
In FACT, the egg came first. The females of many species have eggs, and HAVE HAD eggs, going clear back to the time before amphibians and reptiles. Fish were, for one, around long before chickens.
Like a true Zen Koan, there IS an actual answer. One must look beyond the mundane, widen their scope of view, to find such answers.
2007-06-16 14:56:06 · answer #3 · answered by Martha S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People ask this question because it is a major issue...it is about creationism versus evolutionism...My answer to this question is the chicken came first...philosophically, it implies that God made the chicken, socially, it helps us determine to which social group we pertain and politically, it sets our values, I suppose...
2007-06-16 14:42:20 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yea i know i think the chicken came first because if the egg came first who would raise it and show what it needs to do in life at least a chicken has a little more common sence lol
2007-06-16 14:41:42 · answer #5 · answered by `~*sheila *~` 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Honey, all the answers thus far are valid. In my humble opinion, the question is often used simply to open up a discussion of sorts. Not necessarily on this subject, but to get the group of folks to "loosen up and open up." And most of the time, it works quite well.
2007-06-16 14:52:14 · answer #6 · answered by MAGGIE MAE 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Also I found it is worthless to keep asking this question thaugh I believe that the chicken came first coz it makes sense more than the other option..
Peace!
2007-06-16 15:18:46 · answer #7 · answered by Eve 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is continued to be asked because it can not be answered. Believe it or not , its not social, or political, it is a true , plain, straight forward question, We have adopted it and applied it to emphasize things we have no answer for.
2007-06-16 14:37:31 · answer #8 · answered by Lilly 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The answer to that question is simple, biologically speaking. But the philosphical side to it still eludes me. Aside from that, its the same reason people ask "what's the meaning of life?"....I've answered that one so many time, i lost track...but i've noticed my answers have evolved over the past year?
2007-06-16 14:42:53 · answer #9 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has no relevance whatsoever. The result is the SAME either way.
2007-06-16 15:41:51 · answer #10 · answered by CrazyArtistSara 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋