Discussion in 'Tests and Online Tests' started by Ghost, Dec 20, 2015.
Yep, it figures from your response
this question is controversial. a creationist would say the chicken because God kept the chicken on the ground and said "be fruitful and multiply" while an evolutionist would say the egg because of certain mutation in the first chicken. Well, I got the question right, just had to think about it from your perspective.
Please read Moshin and Molochs conversation about genetic mutations within protochickens and their eggs or sperm cells.
Of course the creationist view answers the question in definite but "god did it" is not considered a good enough explanation.
This question is often fielded when it's unclear what's the cause and what's the effect. The analogy only works if there's a (deliberate) ignorance of genetics and evolution, in particular about the more or less arbitrary taxonomy. Otherwise, the case is clear-cut, thinking that the first bird we call a chicken that has the genetic mutation which makes the difference between a not-yet-chicken (which is it's mother and his father - nd all other not-yet-chickens, even it's siblings perhaps) came out of an egg. The egg had to come first, staying within the dimensions of the stated problem: mother lays egg - young hatches.
The often stressed analogy is an eternal regression, a thought-experiment in the abstract space, and has nothing to do with biological reality (or rather, leaves aside evolution), reduced to "a chicken comes out of an egg and the egg comes out of a chicken". If one takes into account evolutionary reality and anthropogenic terminology (what is a chicken is a human-made definition after all) the question becomes solvable.
Sorry, but you all got it wrong. The only correct answer can be: the rooster!