cm0002@toast.ooo to Funny@sh.itjust.works · 23 hours agoJust so there's no confusionimagemessage-square79fedilinkarrow-up1665arrow-down118
arrow-up1647arrow-down1imageJust so there's no confusioncm0002@toast.ooo to Funny@sh.itjust.works · 23 hours agomessage-square79fedilink
minus-squaremelsaskca@lemmy.calinkfedilinkarrow-up5·10 hours agoI fool-proofed the question…“Which came first, the egg of a chicken, or the chicken?”. And you can’t say they use eggs in dinosaur shaped pasta. /s
minus-squarepinball_wizard@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down1·edit-29 hours agoIn that case the chicken came first, regardless of how we define “chicken”, we can reuse that definition for the first “chicken egg” it laid.
minus-squareGiveOver@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up3·3 hours agoBut how do we define a “chicken egg”? Is it an egg containing a chicken, or an egg that’s been laid by a chicken?
minus-squarepinball_wizard@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 hour agoGood point. Now I’m less sure. I guess any “egg containing a chicken” came first, by definition. I don’t think I would accept anything that didn’t come from an egg as my canonical first chicken, anyway.
I fool-proofed the question…“Which came first, the egg of a chicken, or the chicken?”. And you can’t say they use eggs in dinosaur shaped pasta. /s
In that case the chicken came first, regardless of how we define “chicken”, we can reuse that definition for the first “chicken egg” it laid.
But how do we define a “chicken egg”? Is it an egg containing a chicken, or an egg that’s been laid by a chicken?
Good point. Now I’m less sure.
I guess any “egg containing a chicken” came first, by definition. I don’t think I would accept anything that didn’t come from an egg as my canonical first chicken, anyway.