The Chicken And The Egg

[Pro]

The Chicken And The Egg.

[Pro]

It's pretty much impossible for me to rewrite the protheory.com topics in full as I'd end up just making it too complicated so for now please just take a look at this original archive from my website and then you can ask me any questions below here

The Chicken and the Egg



Introduction

No single answer seems to be any more correct than its opposite.



Chicken

The chicken creates the egg.



Egg

The egg creates the chicken.



Impossible

We have the impossible question of which came first.



Contradictions

Each separate answer seems to contradict the other.



Summary

The chicken cannot exist before the egg.

The egg cannot exist before the chicken.



The Problem

Which came first the chicken or the egg?



The Answer



Accuracy

To be totally accurate we need to realise that there are three simultaneously possible answers to this question.



Proof

The idea that we could singularly and unchangingly prove one of these answers to be any more "accurate" than another is "inaccurate" so to speak.



Three

Three answers accounts for the three simultaneous potentials within everything.



Answers

1. The chicken came first.

2. The egg came first.

3. The chicken and the egg both came first (neutral).

Simultaneously.



Am I wrong?

I simultaneously oppose, agree with, and neutralise all criticism ad infinitum.

My point is literal.

There is no point creating a theory of everything that doesn't work.

[D. Vos]

I guess this is a question that keeps us all busy mate.
Youre taking the Chicken for an example but i think its also a question about where did life start, because there
has got to be one thing before the other.

The Chicken cannot exist before the egg and the egg cannot exist before the chicken.
What happened then? Because still they are there, while they shoudnt be.

also a Tree cannot exist before its seed and a seed cannot exist before its tree.
And people cannot exist without their parents being there before.
Nothing can come from nothing but, though impossible, still we are alive.

I think the third option makes sense in a way: 3. The chicken and the egg both came first (neutral). Seeing chicken and eggs not seperately, but both the egg and the fullgrown chicken as a part of the chicken-system.
but then is the question. ..... How did they develope ?

then there are also three posibilities i guess.

1. the Chicken system has been Evoluted

2. The Chicken system has been Created

3. the Evolution and Creation option might both be correct answers, both words try to decribe the developement of the Chicken-system and the rest of life on this planet. (neutral)

Just some thoughts about it mate

[Pro]

Originally Posted by D. Vos I guess this is a question that keeps us all busy mate. Youre taking the Chicken for an example but i think its also a question about where did life start, because there has got to be one thing before the other. The Chicken cannot exist before the egg and the egg cannot exist before the chicken. What happened then? Because still they are there, while they shoudnt be. also a Tree cannot exist before its seed and a seed cannot exist before its tree. And people cannot exist without their parents being there before. Nothing can come from nothing but, though impossible, still we are alive. I think the third option makes sense in a way: 3. The chicken and the egg both came first (neutral). Seeing chicken and eggs not seperately, but both the egg and the fullgrown chicken as a part of the chicken-system. but then is the question. ..... How did they develope ? then there are also three posibilities i guess. 1. the Chicken system has been Evoluted 2. The Chicken system has been Created 3. the Evolution and Creation option might both be correct answers, both words try to decribe the developement of the Chicken-system and the rest of life on this planet. (neutral) Just some thoughts about it mate

It's a difficult one isn't it mate I usually see this problem as simply a paradox without looking at it as the origin of life.

I actually pretty much agree that life must have started somewhere along the line but I'm not sure still. On my YouTube channel at the moment my Chicken and Egg video has an ongoing discussion with people debating genetically which must have come first to create life. This is interesting to me but as I say I still tend to think of this as just a paradox without one answer being able to be proven as more accurate than the other.

I have my own theories on how and why life started on this planet from books I've read about things but I'm still not sure what to think really in the end. I use this paradox to show how Pro theory works as it's the most famous example of contradiction in the universe and it's also the most argued one in many universities as they often say at school that there is no wrong or right answer, it depends on how well you argue your point.

Thanks for sharing your views on the subject mate

Video for you mate...

YouTube - Theory Of Everything - The Chicken And...

[D. Vos]

Originally Posted by Pro It's a difficult one isn't it mate I usually see this problem as simply a paradox without looking at it as the origin of life. I actually pretty much agree that life must have started somewhere along the line but I'm not sure still. On my YouTube channel at the moment my Chicken and Egg video has an ongoing discussion with people debating genetically which must have come first to create life. This is interesting to me but as I say I still tend to think of this as just a paradox without one answer being able to be proven as more accurate than the other. I have my own theories on how and why life started on this planet from books I've read about things but I'm still not sure what to think really in the end. I use this paradox to show how Pro theory works as it's the most famous example of contradiction in the universe and it's also the most argued one in many universities as they often say at school that there is no wrong or right answer, it depends on how well you argue your point. Thanks for sharing your views on the subject mate Video for you mate... YouTube - Theory Of Everything - The Chicken And The Egg Which First?)

Thanks for the video Simon. yeah its a difficult question.

I see what you mean mate, and i agree there is no wrong or right to this question because all of the three answers you give have the potention to be right or wrong, as all the posibilities are open. I guess no-one can tell for sure wich came first.

i understand you see the problem simply as a paradox, but i allway have the habit to take everything quite literally
and when your asking what came first... i was thinking about the very first one, wich brings me back at the point of the origin of life - the origin of Chicken anyway.

I see chicken and egg not as two seperate things, but as "one thing" - one species.. that somehow developed a system for reproduction.
I can asume Chicken-like creatures were around to develope that system during millions of years but i could never prove that. Or i could believe that a God created a fullgrown chicken in just a few seconds, but that cannot be proved either.
So all posibilities stay open.

they often say at school that there is no wrong or right answer, it depends on how well you argue your point.

I dont think the way we feel or think or believe, or the way we are capable to argue our points could possibly change the given reality around us.
We can have a view to things, an opinion or even a belief. But it doesn't influence the way things are.
even if we can argue very well it doesnt proves us to be right or wrong.
There allways can be some facts we simply dont know of, wich we cant include in our argument.

gee.. i was brainstorming about this a couple of hours now mate, i guess this IS a difficult matter indeed.
but i think chickens and eggs are very tasty anyway.

See you mate :wave2:

[Pro]

Very good points all there D

I've long thought about the genetic version of this question too but I've never really written much about it as I'm always focused on the paradox side of things.

It's interesting in itself to think about the genetic or origin of life answer to this problem and it ties in with some other things I've been thinking a lot about lately too.

I've been thinking about what the meaning of life is. You know how films sometimes have a character or theme on the meaning of life? Invariably the conclusion they draw is that it's up to your own interpretation or reality if you like.

Life has meaning according to what means something to you. There is not usually a generic meaning of life that applies equally to all humans is there. When people ask about the meaning of life, why are we here, and similar things they often mean why are we conscious I think.

What I mean here is that all humans are conscious and aware of their realities and their surroundings but there is no other race or species on planet Earth that we know of that is able to be as aware as we are.

This seems to be the root of all mystery and religion in my view. I'm not saying religion comes directly from this I just mean that religion helps us to explain our consciousness sometimes. It's difficult for me to put into words mate but I'm trying to say that we tend to look to a higher being sometimes when we think deeply of the universe and our place within it.

I think that in terms of the genetic origin of life we have to look first at L.U.C.A which means Last Universal Common Ancestor and refers to the last organism of life cell that all life on earth was related to.

I suspect that there was a life form that divided itself over and over to multiply and over time it developed a way of splitting itself into body (chicken) and new division of itself (egg). This seems like the most logical explanation to me.

Originally the life form in the form of maybe a single cell would have created an exact copy of itself as it split, like how an egg can split to form identical twins. Over time, perhaps millions of years, perhaps longer, this process created life as we know it and created all life with a way of duplicating itself using body and egg.

I've often heard it said that an egg is a genetic copy of its parent, with variation sometimes, and the egg or seed of a tree for example is coded to grow as the same species or whatever as its parent.

I think that perhaps originally the bacteria or cells or whatever would have divided by themselves but that over time the process became split between two parents. Simply put there are three possible outcomes for the evolution of bacteria here.

1. Bacteria/life/cells divide themselves as they currently do in the human body for example. This process happens within a single unit not requiring another to reproduce.

2. Bacteria/life/cells form into two separate bodies or forms, male and female, and can only reproduce by interaction, the two are opposites.

3. Neutral.

Sorry I'm confusing things here mate, I've been thinking too much about too much stuff and I think I'm on overload or something

[D. Vos]

Originally Posted by Pro Very good points all there D

Thanks Simon

Originally Posted by Pro I've been thinking about what the meaning of life is. You know how films sometimes have a character or theme on the meaning of life? Invariably the conclusion they draw is that it's up to your own interpretation or reality if you like. Life has meaning according to what means something to you. There is not usually a generic meaning of life that applies equally to all humans is there. When people ask about the meaning of life, why are we here, and similar things they often mean why are we conscious I think. What I mean here is that all humans are conscious and aware of their realities and their surroundings but there is no other race or species on planet Earth that we know of that is able to be as aware as we are. This seems to be the root of all mystery and religion in my view. I'm not saying religion comes directly from this I just mean that religion helps us to explain our consciousness sometimes. It's difficult for me to put into words mate but I'm trying to say that we tend to look to a higher being sometimes when we think deeply of the universe and our place within it.

I noticed by what you share in the other thread, The Tao Te Ching thread, you've been thinking about these matters quite a lot lately Simon.

I also tend to look at a higher being when i think about the origin and the meaning of life, as we are just small people here on earth and our knowledge is limited.
Science tells us there was a "big bang" at the start of
the universe, i guess that term stands for "a very huge amount of energy", that created the universe and made life develope

personally i dont see how from a "big bang", an explosion,
would come anything good.
Explosions are mostly uncontrolled, and devestating.
I believe the huge Energy that developed us and everything, was a controlled, intelligent and Creating Force.

I think the evolution theory and Creationist views go well together because both views try to explain the developement of everything, they both hold parts of the truth, wich is the reality surrounding us and the fact we are.

I think there's a lot of similarities in the Tao Te Ching and in the bible, Genesis, i think both books hold poetic stories, Giving praise to the higher being: the "Energy" that brought us life.
Just like the ancient Egyptians who worshipped the Sun as their God, i think they were absolutely right, because there wont be any life on earth without it i guess..

Originally Posted by Pro I suspect that there was a life form that divided itself over and over to multiply and over time it developed a way of splitting itself into body (chicken) and new division of itself (egg). This seems like the most logical explanation to me. Originally the life form in the form of maybe a single cell would have created an exact copy of itself as it split, like how an egg can split to form identical twins. Over time, perhaps millions of years, perhaps longer, this process created life as we know it and created all life with a way of duplicating itself using body and egg. I've often heard it said that an egg is a genetic copy of its parent, with variation sometimes, and the egg or seed of a tree for example is coded to grow as the same species or whatever as its parent. I think that perhaps originally the bacteria or cells or whatever would have divided by themselves but that over time the process became split between two parents. Simply put there are three possible outcomes for the evolution of bacteria here. 1. Bacteria/life/cells divide themselves as they currently do in the human body for example. This process happens within a single unit not requiring another to reproduce. 2. Bacteria/life/cells form into two separate bodies or forms, male and female, and can only reproduce by interaction, the two are opposites. 3. Neutral.

It remains difficult stuff mate.

i guess when the chicken envolved from a single cell to a body noone can tell if that cell should be called an egg or a chicken.
i suppose when the egg was at first it would contain a chicken within allready. It would also need another chicken to keep it warm, otherwise it would be the first and the last one.
if the chicken was there at first it would allready hold a row of eggs inside. but a rooster would also be nescesary. One form of a species cant do without the other forms i guess, its a system.

Life remains a mystery... where did the first building stone bacteria come from?
How do specific bacteria develope into birds? and other bacteria into humans, during milions of years.

Its a miracle allready that ONE species would develope out of bacterial soup, still the planet is filled with thousands of species.

to me a one-cell bacteria is not less a miracle than a million-celled elephant, not the number of cells is what i call the biggest miracle but the fact it's alive

Originally Posted by Pro Sorry I'm confusing things here mate, I've been thinking too much about too much stuff and I think I'm on overload or something

Never mind mate, I like to think things over too, though it's a bit later now than i intended,
I guess i'm also a bit on overload now

see you mate

[Pro]

Hi mate, sorry it's taken me a while to reply to you but I've been thinking a lot. I'm not really sure what I think about God and everything to do with Him really. As you know I've been raised as a Christian but I choose to follow the Tao instead as the view of my parents' God doesn't quite fit with me as an adult. My dad was a preacher and my mother teaches Christianity (Alpha course) and my uncle runs a church as a preacher as well. I like the Tao so much as it doesn't rely on a God but rather on the Universe instead in a way which doesn't remind me of God and my early experiences.

I think that I'm not really sure what God is or could be and so maybe this is why I'm reluctant to discuss Him perhaps When I first began to write about Pro theory the very first thing I ever wrote was an essay on God actually as I wanted to try to explain it for myself at the time. Having said this I do have my own ideas about Gods but in the physical sense. This was always the problem for me, I never could work out why God seemed so strange to me as I couldn't work out if He was a physical thing or a spiritual thing or what.

And you're right, there are a lot of similarities between Genesis and the Tao Te Ching mate, I have read about most of the religions in the world and they all seem to share a common root, namely the presence of something higher than us humans. Tribes in the Amazon rainforest, Protestants and Catholics, even down to the American Indians, they all seem to believe in a higher creator force somehow which I find very telling actually. I have read some very complicated books about this subject and it comes down to consciousness basically. I can't explain adequately at the moment but it's the fact that we're so conscious that is the key to a creator or intelligent life force creating us or perhaps modifying us in some way.

For what it's worth I personally believe that evolution happened but only to a certain extent. What I mean is that some species have definitely evolved as Darwin suggested but other species seem to have jumped or leapt in a massive way from monkeys or apes to humans with computers etc which apes obviously don't have at this time. I think the key lies in the fact that apes currently are still evolving but they are nowhere near our human capacities as evolution takes such a long time unless it's helped along in some way by an intelligent being of some sort.

I've purposely avoided talking of this before as it implies a conspiracy or crazy God theory in parts but it's not as far fetched as it seems. Genetics are moving on at a fast rate and when God takes Adam's rib to make Eve would it not be so far fetched that he was taking Adam's DNA to form her? This isn't by far the whole story but it's an important part of it I think. This is difficult for me to write properly but I'm basically suggesting that life perhaps existed first because bacteria etc is a chemical reaction at its most basic form. Each of our body cells are mini chemical processes, using oxygen and sunlight etc to keep us alive. I think that maybe God, an astronaut or something, found 'life' and modified it into humans by expanding the genetic makeup of the apes perhaps and expanding our brains to give us more capacity for thought. This is an extremely simplified view of my thoughts but it's what I think. If God created a physical being (humans/life/etc etc) then in some way He must have a way to be physical too mustn't He?

I've read a lot of stories of early 20th Century explorers in remote places and jungles visiting tribes and the tribes worshipped the people as Gods. They lived as nomads in the jungle and when they saw record players and guns etc they automatically thought the people were Gods when in reality they were just Western people from England or America or wherever. I could go on forever about this stuff but I won't as I'm still not sure how to express what I'm trying to explain here. I'm not saying God doesn't exist, nor am I saying that God didn't create the Universe, I'm just saying what I personally think happened a long long long time ago on earth. Like when God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible, apparently on these sites they have found blackened stones from a nuclear explosion for example. Have you heard that Lot and his wife left a city and God warned them not to look back or they would instantly die? Lot's wife looked or went back and was "turned into a pillar of salt" which to me says she was vaporised by a nuclear force.

My main problem is that I don't believe all of what the Bible tells us, although I do believe parts of it to be true. I've also heard it said that when Noah built his arc for the animals it wasn't necessarily God causing the flood it was God having prior knowledge of the flood but being powerless to stop it and so He warned Noah that it was coming. I hold back a lot on my real knowledge of these things as I'm not good enough to explain them without it seeming like I'm trying to put down religion which isn't the case as it's singular. As you know mate Pro theory is three things, never a single one such as God does or does not exist, God modified our DNA singularly etc.

My own ultimate view is partly that 'God' modified life that already existed and yes, He or they were and are intelligent but I also think that 'life' is created and cycled or perhaps recycled but the universe rather than a physical God. I believe in a mixture of atoms, Gods (Elohim), the Tao (path or way), the middle road, genetics, spirituality, higher thought, ley lines and energies that are as yet undetectable and a million other things, including last but not least Pro theory

I'll try to explain further when I'm able to do so, I'm in a difficult stage at the moment where I can't write like I used to be able to so it's clear but at least I'm doing my best which is very important to me

[Pro]

Basically I think God and 'the universe' have been combined into one over the years by humans in some way. God "created Man in His own image" which roughly implies that He copied us as Himself. Perhaps we're all Gods, who knows?



Follow the Tao, the universe is created and nobody owns it, life exists without words, the universe lives forever because it doesn't live for itself, where it came from I do not know, without even opening my window I can know the whole world...