Paradox and Antithesis

back slang is just a wierd way of talking, it was originally used in Victorian London street gangs could talk without others knowing what they were planning. but it is such a fun thing to learn,

its not common and people say it's made up but it is something different, and funny.

In back slang, the word is spoken phonetically backwards -- for example, "yob" is back slang for "boy."

A line from the play Romeo and Juliet, by William Shakespeare; Juliet is saying good night to Romeo. Their sorrowful parting is also "sweet" because it makes them think about the next time they will see each other.

There are dozens of answers like this on the internet - "parting is sorrow because this but sweet because that". All true but it goes deeper: Juliet is not saying "parting is sorrowful but also sweet", the sorrow itself is sweet. It is Love that delights in the beloved and it is Love that hurts to be apart; the joy and the pain are a single emotion, the pain isthe joy: they cannot be separated.

There is an extensive amount of debate on the subject of "What came first? The Chicken or the Egg?" Here are a few alternating views and personal opinions from various Answer.com users:

The Chicken

• The answer is the chicken because God created all the animals not all the eggs. It's easy because for those that believe in Him God made animals not eggs.
• The chicken... it had to be because creatures in the sea evolved and they didn't evolve into eggs now did they?
• The chicken. The chicken has to be around to lay the egg.
• Depends on what you believe. I believe the chicken came first. Since DNA can be modified only before birth, a mutation must have taken place at conception or within an egg such that an animal similar to a chicken, but not a chicken, laid the first chicken egg.
• The chicken came first. How would the egg survive without the chicken? I also believe there is a protein that the egg is made of that the egg can only get from the chicken.
• Using literature, the chicken comes first.
• Using grammar, "the chicken" comes first in the sentence (They come before the words, "the egg.")
• In a dictionary, the word "chicken" comes before "egg."
• Recent studies now show that the chicken came first, because of the methodology of evolution. An egg cannot occur unless a bird, or in this case a chicken, is able to lay that egg.
• The answer is the chicken: God created all the animals and not all the eggs. It's easy because for those that believe in Him God made animals not eggs. The chicken because God wouldn't just put a egg on the earth and even if he did nothing would warm the egg for it to hatch.
• The chicken...it had to be. Creatures in the sea evolved and they didn't evolve into eggs now, did they?
• The chicken. It has to be around to lay the egg.
• In the seven days that God created the earth, it makes no mention of animals' eggs. Thus, the chicken came first.
• I say that the chicken came first because the chicken was made before the egg because God made all the animals first and birds and etc..... so the chicken came first before the egg, the eggs came when a male (rooster) and a female chicken repopulate with each other.
• The chicken came first because, if the chicken didn't come first, there would be no egg or care for it. So, God had to make the chicken first.
• If you are an evolutionist, you probably think that the chicken evolved from a dinosaur or something. But the chicken came first; if you think about it, how was the chicken alive before the egg.

The Egg

• The Answer to this is the egg! the reason for this is that for an animal to change, its genetics would have to change also and this is impossible. Therefore the change would have to take place as an embryo or egg. so the first chicken was most likely spawned in prehistoric times as an embryo/egg. Concluding that the first living organism had to come from the form of an egg or embryo.

• The egg would have come first laid from another animal when it was hatched it was that animal but had to move its habitat so it had to adjust and became the chicken.

• Theoretically, the egg must come first. A chicken is conceived and born in an egg; therefore, without the egg the chicken could not have been either conceived or born, it may be that the egg was the product of two different species accidentally mating to conceive the egg that contained the first, "chicken" as we know it. the egg came first, think about it logically, instead of trying to question it, there is no other logical/practical conclusion.

• The egg came first. Two animals who really liked each other and were not the same breed, mated and the female laid an egg and it came out a chicken. They didn't know what to call it so they just named it chicken. Therefore the chicken is a crossbreed. I don't know what between though.

• The egg came first. Dinosaurs laid eggs for millions of years before chickens were present on Earth.
• The egg came first because other animals i.e dinosaurs or prehistoric birds (chickens) would've laid the egg that hatched to become classed as the first chicken.
• What came first, the prehistoric bird or its egg? The egg came first. Definitely.
• The 'chicken or the egg' dilemma has been frequently asked as "What came first, the chicken or the egg?". This question baffles many people so it proves that the askers: 1. Have never been taught the theory of evolution. 2. Don't believe the theory of evolution. With these parameters, the answer becomes obvious. Birds evolved from reptiles, and reptiles evolved from the dinosaurs, so a dinosaur lays an egg - dinosaurs become extinct - the egg remains - and hatches into a new reptile. The older reptiles lay an egg - they evolve into birds - and a bird comes out. Well if you use common sense the egg came first. It doesn't necessarily have to be a chickens egg. The egg came first. Dinosaurs were laying them before the chicken appeared on Earth.
• The egg, dinosaurs were laying them far before the chicken's existence.
• The answer is the egg! For an animal to change, its genetics would have to change also and this is impossible. Therefore the change would have to take place as an embryo or egg. So the first chicken was most likely spawned in prehistoric times as an embryo/egg. Concluding that the first living organism had to come from the form of an egg or embryo.
• The egg would have come first laid from another animal when it was hatched it was that animal but had to move its habitat so it had to adjust and became the chicken.
• Theoretically, the egg must come first. A chicken is conceived and born in an egg; therefore, without the egg the chicken could not have been either conceived or born, it may be that the egg was the product of two different species accidentally mating to conceive the egg that contained the first, "chicken" as we know it. the egg came first, think about it logically, instead of trying to question it, there is no other logical/practical conclusion.
• The egg came first. Two animals who really liked each other and were not the same breed, mated and the female laid an egg and it came out a chicken. They didn't know what to call it so they just named it chicken. Therefore the chicken is a crossbreed. I don't know what between though.
• The egg came first. Dinosaurs laid eggs for millions of years before chickens were present on Earth.
• The egg came first because other animals came before the chicken that had eggs of some kind. One kind are the fish in the seas; fish lay eggs. Another are snakes; snakes also lay eggs.
• A chicken could not have its genetic material altered during life, so the egg must have evolved and been first.
• If you take into account the doctrine of evolution, the egg's coming first becomes plausible on the cellular level under perfect circumstances (abundant food and resources). There will be an asexual reproduction once the environment becomes unfavorable. The species would then evolve, and a lot of animals have no parental instincts but through evolution some have started to look after their young.
• An asexual reproduction is reproduction in which there is no fusion of male and female sex cells gametes.
• The egg came first because the chicken descended from a dinosaur, and it laid an egg that was changed from Darwin's theory.
• The egg came first because a chicken comes from an egg. At whatever point you decide to call the chicken a true chicken, it must have come from an egg. Because the different species before it must have evolved to make a chicken, the egg came first
• The egg comes first because a bird a long long time ago evolving into a chicken lays an egg which hatches into a chicken.
• An egg comes first, because dinosaurs laid eggs, and chickens didnt exist at that time.
• Simple. The Egg.
• Egg. I am not trained in philosophy, but my reasoning is simple and seems solid to me. If it was not born from an egg, it would not meet the definition of chicken so it must have come from an egg. A bird that is not a chicken can still lay an egg with a chicken in it if there is a genetic abnormality in the egg being laid. Because chickens were not the first life form on earth, it conforms to our current scientific understanding that the first ever chicken to be born was a genetic abnormality. Because genetic abnormalities that survive are not substantially different from the original, it is very likely that the parent of the chicken was genetically very similar to a chicken and was an egg layer. The first chicken was a genetic abnormality born from an egg that was laid by a similar parent that was not genetically similar enough to meet the definition of 'Chicken'.
• The egg came first. Darwin's Theory of Evolution infers genetic adaptation. This adaptation occurs when parents' DNA is copied inaccurately throughout a species and the strongest of the adaptations survive. The male and female chickens DNA is copied during the mitosis/meiosis process and form the gametes that go on to form the blastocyte/morula/foetus in the egg - so the egg came first.

Neither

• Isn't it both? Because the chicken would have to teach the chick how to do stuff and the egg to reproduce the chickens.

• The chickens most recent ancestor laid the egg. Think of it this way: along the slow and steady evolution from single celled organisms to full fledged modern chickens, at some point, if you could observe every animal in that evolutionary line, you would have to say, "well, this one's not a chicken, but the next one is." The line simply must be drawn somewhere. So whatever egg that the first chicken hatched from would have come first!

• There is no final answer but the most reasonable conclusion is that a certain breed of dinosaur laid an egg, then a period of extremely cold weather preserved the egg. Whilst that occurred the egg genetic form was rearranged into a creature similar to the chicken. At first the animal could have been very different from the chicken we know today but over time it changed into the chicken form we are so familiar with today.

• The modern chicken was believed to have descended from another closely related species of birds, the red junglefowl, but recently discovered genetic evidence suggests that the modern domestic chicken is a hybrid descendant of both the red junglefowl and the grey junglefowl.

• There is some disagreement about the pseudo-philosophical question "Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?" Those of us who believe that the account of creation found in the Book of Genesis is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth believe that, like everything else, chickens were created fully formed, by magic, and therefore tend to claim that the chicken must have come before the egg. Of course the Bible does not spell it out one way or the other, and for all they know, God created the chicken by causing a fertilized chicken egg to manifest first. Those of us who rely on Biblical poetry for our spiritual truth and on science for our understanding of the material world dismiss the question as childish nonsense, but if pressed will more likely claim that the egg must have "come first," having been laid by a bird that was almost, but not exactly, a chicken itself.

• It depends on how you see the question. The chicken might come first if "it was the result of years of genetic engineering by mother nature". The egg might have come first if "it was the result of an unexpected mutation inside another animal's (bird) egg". None of them, if "the specie was developed in centuries of slow natural selection process".

• Let us begin our discussion with the question properly posed: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Now, this is a brain-teaser, a rhetorical form called a paradox, intended to be finally unanswerable. It is not a question about natural history for which a "correct" answer may -or may not- be discovered. Trying to answer it in real-world terms is like trying to design a runcible spoon, or to find meaning in superfragilisticexpialidocious: missing the point and not getting the joke. Still, the complacency of some of the Wikianswers on the subject cannot be allowed to pass without comment, in my opinion. It is incorrect to claim that the chicken came first on Biblical grounds. God created the chicken, along with everything else, as it says in the Bible. But of course, the Bible does not spell out any of the mechanics of God's creation - that's the job of science, after all - and so for all we know from the Biblical account, God created all oviparous creatures egg-first. Clever ol' God, that's just how He would do it.
• Isn't it both? Because the chicken would have to teach the chick how to do stuff and the egg to reproduce the chickens.

• The chickens most recent ancestor laid the egg. Think of it this way: along the slow and steady evolution from single celled organisms to full fledged modern chickens, at some point, if you could observe every animal in that evolutionary line, you would have to say, "well, this one's not a chicken, but the next one is." The line simply must be drawn somewhere. So whatever egg that the first chicken hatched from would have come first!
• There is no final answer but the most reasonable conclusion is that a certain breed of dinosaur laid an egg, then a period of extremely cold weather preserved the egg. Whilst that occurred the egg genetic form was rearranged into a creature similar to the chicken. At first the animal could have been very different from the chicken we know today but over time it changed into the chicken form we are so familiar with today.
• Neither the chicken, nor the egg came first. It was the rooster that came first.
• The egg and the chicken came at the same time. The chicken and the egg are just two different names for the same process or being. It's like water on its way to becoming ice is still water, and vice versa.
• Darwin's theory; the chicken egg came from a different species.
• There is no answer. Since the question is a paradox, there is no answer. If the chicken came first, it came from the egg. If the egg came first, then it came from a chicken, and so forth.
• Evolution suggests that both chickens and eggs evolved from creatures and "egg-things" you would not recognize to be part of the lineage. (Similar to how, in the very distant past, some molecule[s] that was [were] not what we would call "life" became "life".) That was the beginning.
• There is no correct answer that can be proven. It's all theory.
• This question has been debated about so many times but no-one really knows. It is undecided.
• I think its both because the chicken wouldn't have been born without a female parent and the female parent would most likely came first in an egg also given birth by the mother.

Additional information:

Without some very serious scientific intervention an egg cannot be produced independently of its parent's body, whether that parent is a chicken, a lizard, or a spider.

So the chicken had to be there first, for the egg to form. Scientific researchers at the University of Sheffield in England published a report - see link below - in July 2010 confirming this, although their research is more concerned with shells in general: eggs were produced by the earliest egg-producing creatures millennia before chickens evolved.

The scientists involved in this research weren't interested in solving unsolvable riddles, but in discovering more about how shells are formed.

The question of whether the chicken or the egg came first can never be answered: it is unanswerable. One can work out which came first, the wheel or the wheeled vehicle, because one caused the invention of the other, but when we look at life-forms we cannot say with any degree of authority whether the grass seed came before the blade of grass, or whether the bird came before the egg, because life simply doesn't work in terms of traceable inventions.

Today we can taste a delicious new strain of tomato and know the seed that produced that improved tomato was developed from tomato plants considered to be less delicious: this new seed came first, before this new tomato. But it came after the other, less delicious, tomato, and that tomato's seeds came before it, and so on... The egg came first; natural selection tells us that species appear because of gradual changes from generation to generation. So the first chicken egg would have been laid by a bird that genetically wasn't quite a chicken - presumably a genetic error caused the slightly different eggs to be laid and the birds that hatched would be chickens. The egg as dinosaurs laid eggs long before chickens came along :) The egg! Apparently, according to scientist's, two (unknown at the moment) species bred together to create what we now know as the chicken. And science it was not two chickens that bred together, it must mean that the egg came before the chicken, and not the chicken before the egg.
The chicken came first. When making this world animals were made first. Therefore the life of chickens started with a chicken not an egg.

First the dinosauras came then they layed eggs than the hen camed then the dinosauras were finshed than the hen started to laying the eggs

written by:- Shaikh Zahid hussain