• bob_lemon@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    6 months ago

    In other words, the question becomes: “Is an egg defined by the creature that laid it, or the creature that will hatch from it?”

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Hatch or grow. Because once you’re asking those questions, is the first chick truly the first chicken?

      “Is a juvenile defined by what it currently is or what it will/might become?” And, “is chicken-ness an innate quality of the animal, or in relation to the animal fulfilling/presenting (or being able to fulfil) some chicken-ness?”

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        The thing that defines chicken-ness is crossing the road. So if the egg rolled across the road before hatching does that mean the egg is a chicken egg?

        But of course the chicken must also see the other side of the road. Since it’s impossible for see outside of the egg before hatching it might be the egg lacks sufficient chicken-ness to be considered a chicken egg.

        But once the egg hatches the chicken will see the other side of the road. So if the egg crosses the road and the chicken that hatches from the egg sees the other side of the road, both the egg and chicken must both be considered to be sufficiently chickenly to complete the sequence required to establish the complete chicken.