WMN: t3_2rcpqy_t1_cneniy0

[TITLE]

CMV The EGG came first before the chicken.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

According to the theory of evolution it makes more sense that the egg preceded the chicken. Before the chicken there was a similar but different creature. Let's call it X. Its completely arbitrary when the X officially evolved into a chicken, but at some point it does. An X, not a chicken lays the first chicken egg. The chicken egg comes before any creature considered a chicken exist. Am I wrong? PS I'm playing laser tag soon so I will respond in 20ish minutes.

[nonowh0]

If we are being really technical, we can confidently say that the egg came first. The chicken, as far as we know came into existence around [2500-2100 BC.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken#Origins) Egg bearing animals, however, seem to be [as old as the dinosuars](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_egg) From this, we can conclude that the egg came first. ^Unless ^you ^are ^talking ^about ^the ^CHICKEN ^egg ^vs ^the ^chicken, ^in ^which ^case ^I ^have ^no ^clue.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

While the question doesn't specifically say a chicken egg, I think that argument is kind of silly.

[nonowh0]

well... yeah. My comment was a silly way to point out a flaw in your post. It wasn't an actual argument.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

Back from laser tag! First place! Here to respond!

[perfidius]

The modern domestic chicken is a hybrid of a red and grey junglefowl. The egg produced by cross-breading the two species resulted in the first chicken. Therefore, you are correct in saying that the egg came first, but your explanation is incorrect.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

Interesting. I didn't know that. You may have just solved thus debacle. Where in the world did the chicken first live?

[perfidius]

It's generally thought they originated in Asia -- India or Southeast Asia, most likely.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

Cool. Thanks

[electricmink]

Don't forget to award a delta if your view was changed. ;)

[celeritas365]

The question of what came first the chicken or the egg is arbitrary. It depends on how you define chicken egg. Is a chicken egg an egg that will hatch into a chicken? Or is it an egg that was laid by a chicken? The answer to this question determines which came first.

[guitarandcheese]

A chicken egg is an egg that will hatch into a chicken, independent of its parents. If a horse and donkey mate, they will have a mule, not a "horse offspring".

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

Good analogy. I was trying to think of one.

[sm0cc]

So what do you call the egg laid after two proto-chickens of the same species mate?

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

If there isn't a chicken baby, then an X-egg.

[sm0cc]

If you're trying to make the point that GWhizzz made [over here](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/2rcpqy/cmv_the_egg_came_first_before_the_chicken/cnersdk) I think that's a good point that changes my view from "It's clear once you make a semantic choice" to "you can make the semantics go so deep that it stops even being fun, and that's saying something."

[celeritas365]

If that is the definition then the egg came first.

[Teh_doctor42]

In terms of evolution, the question is erroneous. The ancestral organism from which the chicken is derived never gave birth to a chicken egg. There is no sharp line representing a single generation that became chickens. The newly defined chicken species (a species is hard enough to define as it is) is not recognized as a new species of chickens until you already have an independently reproducing population. Though there were ancestral species that produced eggs, due to the gradual process that produces what we call new species and how we define them, there was never a single egg that gave rise to the first chicken.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

While the dividing line between species is quite arbitrary, if scientists had enough evidence a distinction would be made. Species are labeled by humans, but really we are all similar life. Where ever the distinction would be made, wouldn't that make the egg first? And if you define a species as an independently reproducing population I think both comes at the same time. An independently reproductive community of animals should only be defined as such once their chicken babies are layed or hatched. When that happens the egg becomes a chicken egg and the X becomes a chicken. You sort of C'd my V. I'll give you a delta once I go learn how. ∆

[parentheticalobject]

I think you left out an ";" at the end.

[jmsolerm]

[STA-CITE]>While the dividing line between species is quite arbitrary [END-CITE]If it were arbitrary it would be simple. The problem is that it is, if I'm allowed the language, *thick as fuck*, and spans many generations. [STA-CITE]>Where ever the distinction would be made, wouldn't that make the egg first? [END-CITE]The distinction is made over millennia, centuries or even decades perhaps, considering artificial selection. It simply cannot be made from one being to another. What criteria do you use for the change? A single protein? A couple? Because that's what you can get at most in one generation. "Regardless of which distinction" is pretty lax, but it requires that there *is* a relevant distinction to be made. It's like asking: is the dollar at which you become rich odd, or even? A dollar more or less won't really make a difference. In fact, at this point you may be tempted to say "I'll give you ten if you shut up".

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

This is really well written. Thanks for taking the time. I think even if there is no specific mutation that should be classified as the first chicken, at some point, by any measure, a chicken is born. This, because of how arbitrary it is, could be considered anywhere, but still somewhere. What ever you call the first chicken did come out of an egg, even if there is no way to classify when that happened.

[DeltaBot]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Teh_doctor42. ^[[History](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Teh_doctor42)] ^[[Wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltabot)][[Code](https://github.com/alexames/DeltaBot)][[Subreddit](http://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaBot/)]

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

Yay!

[guitarandcheese]

Well you could say that one slight mutation was enough for the new egg to constitute a new species, which would be considered the first of its kind. Although you are correct in that technically a new species would require an independently reproducing population, within the parameters of the question you would still say that the egg came first. Even if only because there is no logical argument for the chicken coming first.

[Teh_doctor42]

Barring the exceptions (such as plants which I study) single mutations tend not to produce what we would call a new species. The reason the question is erroneous is that it implies an egg gave birth to the first chicken which, as we agreed, simply isn't how it works.

[guitarandcheese]

Yes although single mutations *tend* not to produce what you would call a new species, there would still exist a point that would define the two species from each other. Certain characteristics would distinct the chicken from the "protochicken". Therefor it wouldn't be beyond reason to say that at one point a single chicken having all the defining aspects of a chicken was birthed from a "protochicken" which had just nearly the characteristics of a chicken but not quite. I suppose it's semantics really, neither answer is incorrect.

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

I think you've got it right. There is no strict answer, but egg makes a bit more sense. Another solution points out that dinosaur eggs came before chickens, and that the classic question spent specify the eggs species, but I do think that's silly.

[don-chocodile]

Technically, this is correct. The first animal that was genetically a chicken [came from an egg laid by a bird that was not a chicken](http://metro.co.uk/2010/07/13/the-chicken-came-first-not-the-egg-scientists-prove-447738/). So while there may not be a "sharp line representing a single generation that became chickens," there is a sharp line representing the first individual chicken.

[DreamCatcher24]

[Just saying the news reporting on this is pretty terrible. Here is a post by an Evolutionary Biologist critiquing the reporting](https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2010/07/14/godawful-science-reporting-msnbc-says-the-chicken-came-before-the-egg/)

[don-chocodile]

You right, you right. I used the wrong link entirely. The fact that it's shoddy reporting backs up what I was saying though; which is that the egg came first.

[sm0cc]

You have implicitly defined a "chicken egg" as an egg which bears a chicken. If you take this definition you are correct. However, if you define "chicken egg" as an egg laid by a chicken then the opposite conclusion is correct. That is, the first chicken came from a proto-chicken egg and subsequently laid a chicken egg. The problem is all semantics.

[GWhizzz]

Well if a chicken egg is an 'egg that bears a chicken,' that it's being defined by having the property of bearing a 'chicken.' So the chicken would have to exist first in order for the egg to be a 'chicken egg' because if it were an egg that didn't bear a chicken it would just be an egg.

[sm0cc]

This is a very good point. I guess I've been assuming that there's no way to tell that the organism inside the egg is a chicken until it hatches, and that the chicken inside doesn't really exist until it has hatched. In that case, the egg becomes a chicken egg at the same time that the chicken begins to exist. And yet, "the egg" still existed before the chicken. Then you can argue at what point the organism inside the egg becomes a chicken. You've changed my view from "It's clear once you make a semantic choice" to "what a remarkably pointless question!" :P EDIT: Also, why did we make the assumption that we have to compare "chicken egg" to "chicken"? The usual framing of the question just says "egg" and "chicken." ∆

[PM_ME_CUTE_PUPPYS]

I think an egg is not considered a chicken until hatching, and many eggs aren't fertile anyways, even in the wild.

[GWhizzz]

Haha. As I was writing I thought the same thing, it is kind of pointless

[DeltaBot]

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/GWhizzz. ^[[History](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/GWhizzz)] ^[[Wiki](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltabot)][[Code](https://github.com/alexames/DeltaBot)][[Subreddit](http://www.reddit.com/r/DeltaBot/)]