- Home
- Philosophy
- the egg or the chicken
the egg or the chicken
- By Vital Germaine
- Published 01/29/2008
- Philosophy
-
Rating:
Vital Germaine
Vital is a multifaceted individual who was born of biracial parents in the former Belgian Congo during a horrific civil war. He was raised in London before moving to Belgium during his late teens where he was introduced to the world of entertainment. Vital soon moved to New York to further his entertainment career. After two years in the Big Apple, he auditioned for Cirque Du Soleil. He performed for over 5 years in Cirque’s productions of Mystère and Quidam. A tragic injury forced him to prematurely end his acrobatic career. He has since become a published artist, a business owner, and an author with his first book on the verge of publication. For more on Vital log onto http://artofvital.com
View all articles by Vital Germaine
The Egg or The Chicken
When it comes to “Existentialism,” which essentially addresses the quandary of us being in control or not of our destiny, the answer lies within the mystery of the chicken or the egg debate. A debate that will test the reasoning and sanity of theologians and learned men forever. The attempted resolution of this mystery, however, is nothing more than speculation validated by philosophical and/or religious rhetoric. There is no single philosophy, ideology or religion that can resolve whether or not God created the chicken or the egg first. Furthermore, is it God that created them and us? Such questions regarding our existence cannot be resolved with one isolated theory. All philosophical theories and religions are plagued with inconsistency, confusion and contradictions. Perhaps the chicken and the egg came into existence simultaneously. More importantly, does it really matter which came first? The existence or non-existence of God, in stark contrast, has a hint more importance than chickens and eggs. But, in both cases, there is no right or wrong answer, for now. Why is there no right or wrong answer? Because, we can neither prove nor disprove either. Concerning God, one either has faith or not.
Existentialism does, needless to say, present some interesting possibilities. There are, nonetheless, as many possibilities in existentialism as there are improbabilities. I believe the solution is hidden between overlapping theories which contradict each other, and which are therefore illogical and incomprehensible. In an attempt to counteract our lack of cosmic understanding, society has come up with numerous theories disguised as philosophy and/or religion, to put our collective conscience to rest. Regrettably, those theories have achieved nothing more than war and conflict! Whichever belief or non-belief one chooses to follow is one’s prerogative. If one claims to be in control of his or her destiny void of God, then so be it. If another chooses to have God plot his or her destiny, then so be that. If one man refers to his God as scientology, then why not? Allah, too, is fine with me. They are all higher powers that probably exist. But, do they control our destiny? I like to think I have some control concerning my lot in life. I do not, however, consider myself the only pilot on the journey, who has total freedom to have things his way. I am a mere co-pilot who makes requests to the senior pilot, a co-pilot who has influence on the same senior pilot, and a co-pilot who collaborates, asks and pushes for what he wants. Where I start is probably in the hands of fate, but God-given talent doesn’t guarantee success. Fate is not that generous -- destiny is earned. Where I end up has to do with my choices. Fate may hand an individual a trump car, but what, when and how that individual does with that trump card, will determine their fate. Many a hand without an ace or a trump card, has won despite the odds. But one could argue that what one does with the ace, is predetermined anyway. Meaning that the choices weren’t really choices, but predestined programs implemented by fate.
If fate is indeed predetermined, then one can only accept that we do, in fact, have no control whatsoever over our destiny. Hence, the theory that God is in complete control. The tragedy of submitting to God’s complete control is the potential abuse of powerlessness. It invites cowardly excuses such as, “God made me so.” I refuse to accept or acknowledge that lack of responsibility.
Please allow a cold, brutal, and border-line insensitive defence of my conviction regarding lack of responsibility. We shall start with addictions for example. Alcoholism, in my opinion, is not a disease. I don’t care what research says. How can one pretend it’s a disease? Alcoholics don’t become possessed and compelled to buy booze. It’s a calculated choice submissive to temptation. Even worse, researchers will one day conclude a theory that sex offenders suffer from a type of genetic disorder that attracts them to children, and it will officially become a disease.
Disease my foot! Yes, they are inflicted with tendencies and/or disorders, but they, as individuals, decide whether or not to entertain, negate or curb the tendency. It is a choice.
I understand that alcoholics, for example, have a problem that is not necessarily easy to deal with, but one shouldn’t put the blame on a disease. Making the alcohol addiction a disease now makes the addict the victim. They’re not the victim; perhaps addicted victims of their own undoing yes, but not victims. Their loved ones are the victims. If those same alcohol-addicted souls were stuck on a treasure island without booze, would they still be the drunken bastards they are today? No! They’d have no choice but to sober up.
I also have no pity on those who use their painful childhoods as a means to justify their inabilities to succeed or prevail, or as a means to justify cruelty or beastly behaviour towards others. There is neither need nor excuse to inflict pain and misfortune on others because of a challenging life, as have many a criminal. Life is a series of choices that we are in control of.
On the contrary, if we are in control of our destiny, (the essence of existentialism), there can then be no such thing as destiny, because destiny is a preordained outcome which can therefore not be controlled. The answer is not that simple though. Let’s consider the following as one of endless possible answers. Accepting that time of death is possibly predetermined (destiny/fate), let’s imagine then, that everything leading up to time of death is indeed influenced by our actions, then could it be possible that time of death might be altered as a result of our choices. In other words, could destiny be flexible? Could destiny invite more than one outcome? Could destiny itself have a choice? Could it possibly become a mutual compromise between us and destiny? A symbiotic relationship, so to speak. We (human) give destiny a purpose to exist, and because we do so, it in turn accommodates and rewards our desires (within reason) if we demonstrate zeal or not. Some people hit the jackpot without breaking a sweat. But such is fate.
Ultimately, choice is the operative word, and is the precursor to destiny. Choice and destiny are perhaps adjoined, schizophrenic twins continually struggling for power. They assume partial control of a random and chaotic existence with or without God. Furthermore, the acceptance of evolution does not deny the existence of God. The two can readily walk hand-in-hand if we open our minds. What if God was disappointed with his human blueprint? Could He/She/It not freely choose to adapt? On the other hand, if man did create God, then I hope for God’s sake, that He/She/It doesn’t exist. I fear the creations of men. But, if God does exist; what a great sense of humour (if not a warped one) He/She/It possesses. God or no God, either way, atheists, agnostics, believers, and existentialists, we are all screwed. Why? Because, we shall never know the supreme truth. Which brings me back to the chicken or the egg mystery; we can never, and shall never know.
According to human belief, either the chicken or the egg must have happened first in order for the other to have happened. And, if that be the case, and God did create the universe, then who in God’s name created God? But why does everything need a beginning? Is it because we are programmed to believe that either the chicken or the egg came first? Would it be absurd to have existence without a beginning? Yes it would, and that’s the very point. It is equally absurd to think that humans can comprehend that which is, by our limited intellect, inconceivable and/or absurd.
The only way we will ever attain the supreme truth is when we ourselves are able to plot, interpret and create the genetic code of the universe. The problem with that statement is, if and when we could achieve that supreme ability, we would then have become the very God we were in search of in the first place. The only feasible answer is perhaps: if you believe in God, don’t ask questions, just believe. If you don’t believe in God, don’t ask questions, just disbelieve. Until man can resolve the mystery that is God, I’ll thank God for atheism, for it balances out our existence. In the meantime, if one is confused by this thesis, then my thesis stands to reason; there is no answer, and we will eternally be in the dark regarding which came first. The egg? Or the chicken?
When it comes to “Existentialism,” which essentially addresses the quandary of us being in control or not of our destiny, the answer lies within the mystery of the chicken or the egg debate. A debate that will test the reasoning and sanity of theologians and learned men forever. The attempted resolution of this mystery, however, is nothing more than speculation validated by philosophical and/or religious rhetoric. There is no single philosophy, ideology or religion that can resolve whether or not God created the chicken or the egg first. Furthermore, is it God that created them and us? Such questions regarding our existence cannot be resolved with one isolated theory. All philosophical theories and religions are plagued with inconsistency, confusion and contradictions. Perhaps the chicken and the egg came into existence simultaneously. More importantly, does it really matter which came first? The existence or non-existence of God, in stark contrast, has a hint more importance than chickens and eggs. But, in both cases, there is no right or wrong answer, for now. Why is there no right or wrong answer? Because, we can neither prove nor disprove either. Concerning God, one either has faith or not.
Existentialism does, needless to say, present some interesting possibilities. There are, nonetheless, as many possibilities in existentialism as there are improbabilities. I believe the solution is hidden between overlapping theories which contradict each other, and which are therefore illogical and incomprehensible. In an attempt to counteract our lack of cosmic understanding, society has come up with numerous theories disguised as philosophy and/or religion, to put our collective conscience to rest. Regrettably, those theories have achieved nothing more than war and conflict! Whichever belief or non-belief one chooses to follow is one’s prerogative. If one claims to be in control of his or her destiny void of God, then so be it. If another chooses to have God plot his or her destiny, then so be that. If one man refers to his God as scientology, then why not? Allah, too, is fine with me. They are all higher powers that probably exist. But, do they control our destiny? I like to think I have some control concerning my lot in life. I do not, however, consider myself the only pilot on the journey, who has total freedom to have things his way. I am a mere co-pilot who makes requests to the senior pilot, a co-pilot who has influence on the same senior pilot, and a co-pilot who collaborates, asks and pushes for what he wants. Where I start is probably in the hands of fate, but God-given talent doesn’t guarantee success. Fate is not that generous -- destiny is earned. Where I end up has to do with my choices. Fate may hand an individual a trump car, but what, when and how that individual does with that trump card, will determine their fate. Many a hand without an ace or a trump card, has won despite the odds. But one could argue that what one does with the ace, is predetermined anyway. Meaning that the choices weren’t really choices, but predestined programs implemented by fate.
If fate is indeed predetermined, then one can only accept that we do, in fact, have no control whatsoever over our destiny. Hence, the theory that God is in complete control. The tragedy of submitting to God’s complete control is the potential abuse of powerlessness. It invites cowardly excuses such as, “God made me so.” I refuse to accept or acknowledge that lack of responsibility.
Please allow a cold, brutal, and border-line insensitive defence of my conviction regarding lack of responsibility. We shall start with addictions for example. Alcoholism, in my opinion, is not a disease. I don’t care what research says. How can one pretend it’s a disease? Alcoholics don’t become possessed and compelled to buy booze. It’s a calculated choice submissive to temptation. Even worse, researchers will one day conclude a theory that sex offenders suffer from a type of genetic disorder that attracts them to children, and it will officially become a disease.
I understand that alcoholics, for example, have a problem that is not necessarily easy to deal with, but one shouldn’t put the blame on a disease. Making the alcohol addiction a disease now makes the addict the victim. They’re not the victim; perhaps addicted victims of their own undoing yes, but not victims. Their loved ones are the victims. If those same alcohol-addicted souls were stuck on a treasure island without booze, would they still be the drunken bastards they are today? No! They’d have no choice but to sober up.
I also have no pity on those who use their painful childhoods as a means to justify their inabilities to succeed or prevail, or as a means to justify cruelty or beastly behaviour towards others. There is neither need nor excuse to inflict pain and misfortune on others because of a challenging life, as have many a criminal. Life is a series of choices that we are in control of.
On the contrary, if we are in control of our destiny, (the essence of existentialism), there can then be no such thing as destiny, because destiny is a preordained outcome which can therefore not be controlled. The answer is not that simple though. Let’s consider the following as one of endless possible answers. Accepting that time of death is possibly predetermined (destiny/fate), let’s imagine then, that everything leading up to time of death is indeed influenced by our actions, then could it be possible that time of death might be altered as a result of our choices. In other words, could destiny be flexible? Could destiny invite more than one outcome? Could destiny itself have a choice? Could it possibly become a mutual compromise between us and destiny? A symbiotic relationship, so to speak. We (human) give destiny a purpose to exist, and because we do so, it in turn accommodates and rewards our desires (within reason) if we demonstrate zeal or not. Some people hit the jackpot without breaking a sweat. But such is fate.
Ultimately, choice is the operative word, and is the precursor to destiny. Choice and destiny are perhaps adjoined, schizophrenic twins continually struggling for power. They assume partial control of a random and chaotic existence with or without God. Furthermore, the acceptance of evolution does not deny the existence of God. The two can readily walk hand-in-hand if we open our minds. What if God was disappointed with his human blueprint? Could He/She/It not freely choose to adapt? On the other hand, if man did create God, then I hope for God’s sake, that He/She/It doesn’t exist. I fear the creations of men. But, if God does exist; what a great sense of humour (if not a warped one) He/She/It possesses. God or no God, either way, atheists, agnostics, believers, and existentialists, we are all screwed. Why? Because, we shall never know the supreme truth. Which brings me back to the chicken or the egg mystery; we can never, and shall never know.
According to human belief, either the chicken or the egg must have happened first in order for the other to have happened. And, if that be the case, and God did create the universe, then who in God’s name created God? But why does everything need a beginning? Is it because we are programmed to believe that either the chicken or the egg came first? Would it be absurd to have existence without a beginning? Yes it would, and that’s the very point. It is equally absurd to think that humans can comprehend that which is, by our limited intellect, inconceivable and/or absurd.
The only way we will ever attain the supreme truth is when we ourselves are able to plot, interpret and create the genetic code of the universe. The problem with that statement is, if and when we could achieve that supreme ability, we would then have become the very God we were in search of in the first place. The only feasible answer is perhaps: if you believe in God, don’t ask questions, just believe. If you don’t believe in God, don’t ask questions, just disbelieve. Until man can resolve the mystery that is God, I’ll thank God for atheism, for it balances out our existence. In the meantime, if one is confused by this thesis, then my thesis stands to reason; there is no answer, and we will eternally be in the dark regarding which came first. The egg? Or the chicken?
Spread The Word
2 Responses to "the egg or the chicken"
|
said this on 29 Jan 2008 5:33:42 PM EST
The answer to your life is found within your eyes. What you see is your reality. Supreme Powers manifest themselves in accordance to your perspective. Demons and Angels can either haunt or guide you depending on the power of fear or love you give. Our lives are mirror images of the internal spirit, that can be bold or subdued, courageous or cowardly, and every other emotion available to the human heart. Humanity is much like the wind or the ocean, it takes no definite form and yet it has distinct elements that create differences and similarities. That is why we can not know the beginning or the end, because we are in a constant transit state which passes us in and out of self-awareness, which thwarts our attempts to reason our existence and the master of creation.
|
Author/Admin)|
said this on 08 Jul 2008 2:46:19 PM EST
I'm not much of an existentialist so I will say the egg came first, because everyone evolved from microscopic organisms. Before you and even say anything, the tree fell and displaced air creating sound waves, reguardless of anyone hearing it.
|