The Instigator
roman.legion
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
solo
Con (against)
Winning
40 Points

The egg came first, not the chicken.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/1/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,971 times Debate No: 1223
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (17)

 

roman.legion

Pro

Definitions:
Chicken: a domestic fowl bred for flesh or eggs.
Egg: an egg containing a growing chicken.
solo

Con

Logically, the chicken had to be in existence before an egg could be hatched, as their eggs require a mother chicken to keep an egg warm in order for it to hatch.

A chicken egg is the egg that only a chicken lays.

A chicken egg will hatch a chicken and was laid by a chicken.

Therefore, both the chicken and egg must have always existed.

"If there has been a first man he must have been born without father or mother -- which is repugnant to nature. For there could not have been a first egg to give a beginning to birds, or there should have been a first bird which gave a beginning to eggs; for a bird comes from an egg." - Aristotle (384-322 BC)
Debate Round No. 1
roman.legion

Pro

I sort of screwed up here. I did not post my "Chicken" definition exactly as would have liked. That definition is "an egg containing an organism which, once it hatches, will be a chicken."

There are three reasons this definition should be accepted after the debate began.

1). You ignored my definitions to begin with. I initiated this debate with a certain set of definitions in mind, and you went ahrad and posted your own, leading me to believe you would have ignored my definition of chicken as I wanted it to begin with.

2). You are getting away from the traditional debate. Obviously, if what was in the egg in the first place was a chicken, they would have existed simultaneously. It is taken for granted when people debate chicken vs. egg that what is in the egg does not count as a chicken.

3). If you grant me this definition, I believe I can defend my position from either an evolutionary OR a creationist standpoint. Can you really pass up a challenge like that?
solo

Con

Yes, I can pass up a challenge like that and am going to -- better luck next time. I've already strategized how I'm going to use your 'misquote' to my advantage, so just do your best and learn from your mistake.

As you did not dispute any of my points, I'll assume you accept them, as I accepted Round 1 without any dispute.

Considering the logical side of my debate fulfilled, I will attempt to make Round 2 scientifically support my argument.

< Egg: an egg containing a growing chicken.>>

If an egg contains a growing chicken, as you've defined "egg", then it is reasonable to assume that the chicken does come before the egg. It always has, by your own definition.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
roman.legion

Pro

We seem to stand at a stalemate. I made a mistake, and then you made what I hope is the bigger mistake.

I grant you number 3, you do not HAVE to accept my new definition of "egg."
But you lose anyway.

In round two, I did, in fact, dispute your points. Specifically, I disputed your definition. I said that my new one was better, and I gave two reasons why. YOU however, did not dispute either of those two points, or say why any of the previous definitions, yours or mine, were better than my new one. I can't do your work for you.

You did not dispute that my new definition was the better one even when I gave reasons. Since it is the only definition that was actually argued for, it is the only accepted definition.

But wait, you have no arguements about my new definition. All of your arguements stem from inferior (by default) definitions. And this is my last post. That means that you have put yourself at an unfair advantage. I can not refute any of the arguements that you might now bring up.

***************************************************
On the grounds that YOU are the one who failed to address your opponents arguements and therefore don't have any for me to refute during my last post, I claim that I win by default.
solo

Con

Your attempt to justify your error is pathetic.

You CLEARLY posted: << 3). If you grant me this definition, I believe I can defend my position from either an evolutionary OR a creationist standpoint. Can you really pass up a challenge like that?>>

And I JUST AS CLEARLY posted: Yes, I can pass up a challenge like that and am going to -- better luck next time. I've already strategized how I'm going to use your 'misquote' to my advantage, so just do your best and learn from your mistake.

What part of that did you miss? Read it seven or eight more times. You can make all the claims to victory that you want, but you alone do not decide whose argument is better and whose was more tragically flawed from the start. LOL! Thank you.

< Chicken: a domestic fowl bred for flesh or eggs.
Egg: an egg containing a growing chicken.>>

Since an egg contains a growing chicken, a fact that you did not build a rebuttal against, you cannot not claim that the egg came first. By your own definition it is an impossibility.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by ImAPanicBomb447 9 years ago
ImAPanicBomb447
My understanding of the theory of evolution would suggest that whatever laid the egg that held the first chicken wasn't completely what we would consider a chicken; So I think the egg came first:

Not-quite-chicken => Egg-with-mutation-leading-to-first-chicken => chicken
Posted by paulajayne 9 years ago
paulajayne
either way, the Bible clearly states that God made fowl, not egg.
Posted by phunkyboy123 9 years ago
phunkyboy123
Roman legion stop kidding yourself. You lost this debate. Better luck next time.
Posted by roman.legion 9 years ago
roman.legion
No, I mean it is taken for granted what is in the chicken egg does not count as a chicken. Otherwise there would be no question if the egg came first because what is in the egg counts as a chicken so the chicken must come at least at the same time as the egg.
Posted by Miserlou 9 years ago
Miserlou
"It is taken for granted when people debate chicken vs. egg that what is in the egg does not count as a chicken."

Not it isn't. When people say the "egg", they assume meaning a chicken egg. That's the essence of the debate; it is a paradox.
Posted by roman.legion 9 years ago
roman.legion
I can read what I posted. And what I read is a "3)." in front of the rest of it. Clearly, there was a "1)." and a "2)." that you needed to address as well. I gave three reasons, and you only addressed one. You lose.
17 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by solo 8 years ago
solo
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Grandma 9 years ago
Grandma
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Raisor 9 years ago
Raisor
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sagarous 9 years ago
sagarous
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Ethereal 9 years ago
Ethereal
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sdcharger 9 years ago
sdcharger
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by monetary_sniper 9 years ago
monetary_sniper
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ephyrlove 9 years ago
ephyrlove
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by big_chief90 9 years ago
big_chief90
roman.legionsoloTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03