more useful options PerlMonks

### Re^2: Which came first?

by shmem (Chancellor)
 on May 05, 2008 at 15:32 UTC ( #684659=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: Which came first?

from an evolutionary 'historic' perspective the 'egg' (and sperm) preceded the cellular aggregates

Really? 'egg' and 'sperm' are rather specialized cell types, thus part of a 'cellular aggregate'...

So it seems to me that your exposition of evolution history is yet another shift of viewpoint (as dino/egg, turtle/egg, fish/egg, ...) containing the same problem:

```Egg+Sperm<->Multicellular_Organisms

To solve the chicken/egg puzzle we first have to put both terms on the same level. "Chicken" is a specialized term, "Egg" is general, so establishing "firstness" of chicken and egg is like comparing apple and fruit.

So, let's just talk about 'chicken' and 'chicken egg'. There's the reasoning that the first chicken egg was laid by a creature which itself was not a chicken. Later, a chicken hatched from that egg.

But until the chicken hatched, the egg was not a chicken egg, but an ordinary non-chicken egg. The non-chicken egg became a chicken egg at the moment the chicken hatched from it, not before. If it already had been a chicken egg, because it contained a chicken, then the egg was formed as a container of the chicken, and the chicken was formed as content of it's chicken egg.

They both came into existence at the moment the chickenness of the chicken-egg's chicken and the chicken-eggness of the chicken's chicken-egg could clearly be established beyond doubt.

That's why chicken and egg are one, and there's no "first" in chicken nor egg...

Name them, and they are. In principio erat verbum.

--shmem

```_(\$_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
/\_¯/(q    /
----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.(\$e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;\$e.e && print}```

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Which came first?
by ady (Deacon) on May 06, 2008 at 19:50 UTC
update: sorry - double post (I must have doubleclicked the send btn. --- Post deleted.
allan
Re^3: Which came first?
by ady (Deacon) on May 06, 2008 at 19:52 UTC
A more narrow speciation angle (which seems to be what you are driving at)

No, what I was driving at is the timelessness of being and wording (related to what jdporter wrote)

(in the beginning was energy, evolving (given time and negative entropy) to egg, chicken -- and in the end : a lot of words... :)

I personally believe wonder why there isn't any serious research investigating the linkage between love (which is the highest (and source of all) energy, as we all know) and energy as physicians understand it...

--shmem

```_(\$_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo.  G°\        /
/\_¯/(q    /
----------------------------  \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.(\$e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;\$e.e && print}```
OK, this is another line of research (than biology).

There is an increasing amount of investigation these years into the nature of consciousness (including emotions), but THAT egg seems hard to break on a purely physiological or even higher functional level. Maybe consciousness is a Gödel kind of self referential proposition hard to crack inside the axoiom system of current biology...

There's also a growing understanding - at least among people working with serious introspection such as yoga or zen meditation - that consciousness is deepely integrated in the senses, body, - even matter/time in a broader sense.

Allan

Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://684659]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (5)
As of 2020-09-25 20:51 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
Voting Booth?
If at first I don’t succeed, I …

Results (141 votes). Check out past polls.

Notices?