English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-07-13 08:49:11 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

6 answers

Consider that chicken eggs cannot survive without incubation, and as you don't have to go that far back to pre-date man-made incubation technology, it seems logical that the eggs would have never survived to have become chickens before other chickens would have existed to keep them warm. Therefore, we can conclude that the chickens came first.

Even if you believe in evolution, changes happen slowly, and a chicken egg would still have to be preceded by a chicken, even if that chicken were not a chicken by today's standards. An egg is identified by the animal that laid it, therefore a chicken would have to lay a chicken egg, further reinforcing the aforementioned conclusion.

I take this particular modification of the question to assume that the chickens/eggs cannot co-exist. Otherwise, you could have two chickens before two eggs, or you could have a chicken that laid two eggs, and upon hatching you would have two chickens. It just complicates the ability to draw a conclusion if you take it to be anything but exclusive.

2007-07-13 09:04:02 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan F 3 · 0 0

If it was a race, the chickens would thrash the eggs. Which chicken would win? I don't know, but I know the eggs wouldn't stand a chance.

2007-07-13 10:16:46 · answer #2 · answered by pilkington01 1 · 0 0

first there was one chicken and one egg
then came two chickens and two eggs
then three chickens and three eggs ;)

2007-07-13 08:57:52 · answer #3 · answered by HopeH 4 · 0 0

Two eggs over easy. That's breakfast.

2007-07-13 08:54:07 · answer #4 · answered by jsardi56 7 · 0 0

Two eggs.

2007-07-13 10:01:15 · answer #5 · answered by shmux 6 · 0 0

Two grills.

2007-07-13 08:52:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers