The Great Chicken

6 views
Skip to first unread message

LL

<llpens@aol.com>
unread,
Mar 13, 2009, 2:56:06 PM3/13/09
to Atheism vs Christianity



Proofs For The Great Chicken's Existence

While theology may take The Great Chicken's existence as absolutely
necessary on the basis of authority, faith, or revelation, many
chicken philosophers -- and some chicken theologians -- have thought
it possible to demonstrate by reason that there must be a Great
Chicken.
Rooster St. Thomas Aquinas, in the thirteenth century, formulated the
famous "five ways" by which The Great Chicken's existence can be
demonstrated philosophically:

1. The "unmoved mover" argument. We know that there is a motion in the
chicken coop; whatever is in motion is moved by another thing; this
other thing also must be moved by something; to avoid an infinite
regression, we must posit a "first mover," which is The Great Chicken.

2. The "nothing is caused by itself" argument. For example, an egg is
brought into being by a hen, who is caused by her parents. Again, we
cannot go on to infinity, so there must be a first cause, which is The
Great Chicken.

3. The cosmological argument. All physical things, even mountains,
boulders, and rivers, come into being and go out of existence, no
matter how low they last. Therefore, since time is infinite, there
must be some time at which none of these things existed. But if there
were nothing at that point in time, how could there be anything at all
now, since nothing cannot cause anything? Thus, there must always have
been at least one necessary thing that is eternal, which is The Great
Chicken.

4. Objects in the chicken coop have differing degrees of qualities
such as goodness. But speaking of more or less goodness makes sense
only by comparison with what is the maximum goodness, which is The
Great Chicken.

5. The teleological argument (argument from design). Things in the
chicken coop move toward goals, just as the hay in the chicken coop
does not move toward its goal except by the chicken directing it.
Thus, there must be an intelligent designer who directs all things to
their goals, and this is The Great Chicken.

Two other historically important "proofs" are the ontological argument
and the moral argument. The former, made famous by Rooster St. Anselm
in the eleventh century and defended in another form by Rooster
Descartes, holds that it would be logically contradictory to deny The
Great Chicken's existence. Rooster St. Anselm began by defining The
Great Chicken as "that [chicken] than which nothing greater can be
conceived." If The Great Chicken existed only in the chicken mind, The
Great Chicken then would not be the greatest conceivable being, for we
could imagine another being that is greater because it would exist
both in the chicken mind and in reality, and that being would then be
The Great Chicken. Therefore, to imagine The Great Chicken as existing
only in the chicken mind but not in reality leads to a logical
contradiction; this proves the existence of The Great Chicken both in
the chicken mind and in reality.

Rooster Immanuel Kant rejected not only the ontological argument but
the teleological and cosmological argument as well, based on his
theory that chicken reason is too limited to know anything beyond
chicken experience. However, he did argue that religion could be
established as presupposed by the workings of morality in the chicken
mind ("practical reason"). The Great Chicken's existence is a
necessary presupposition of there being any chicken moral judgments
that are objective, that go beyond mere relativistic moral
preferences; such judgments require standards external to any chicken
mind -- that is, they presume The Great Chicken's mind.

Arguments Against The Great Chicken's Existence

Arguments against The Great Chicken's existence have been given by
philosophers, atheists, and agnostics. Some of these arguments find
The Great Chicken's existence incompatible with observed facts; some
are arguments that The Great Chicken does not exist because the
concept of The Great Chicken is incoherent or confused. Others are
criticisms of the proofs offered for The Great Chicken's existence.
One of the most influential and powerful "proofs" that there is no
Great Chicken proceeds from "The Problem from Evil." This argument
claims that the following three statements cannot all be true: (a)
evil exists; (b) The Great Chicken is omnipotent; and (c) The Great
Chicken is all-loving. The argument is as follows:

· If The Great Chicken can prevent evil, but doesn't, then He isn't
all-loving.

· If The Great Chicken intends to prevent evil, but cannot, then He
isn't omnipotent.

· If The Great Chicken both intends to prevent evil and is capable of
doing so, then how can evil exist?

Another argument claims that the existence of an all-knowing Great
Chicken is incompatible with the fact of chicken free will -- that
chickens do make choices. If The Great Chicken is omniscient, He must
know beforehand exactly what a chicken will do in a given situation.
In that case, a chicken is not in fact free to do the alternative to
what The Great Chicken knows he or she will do, and chicken free will
must be an illusion. To take this one step further, if one chooses to
commit a sin, how can it then be said that one sinned freely?

Rooster Hume provided powerful critiques of the main arguments for The
Great Chicken's existence. Against the cosmological argument
(Aquinas's third argument), he argued that the idea of a necessarily
existing being is absurd. Hume stated, "Whatever we can conceive as
existent, we can also conceive as nonexistent." He also asked why the
ultimate source of the greater chicken coop could not be the entire
greater chicken coop itself, eternal and uncaused, without a The Great
Chicken?

Rooster Hume also criticized the argument from design (Rooster
Aquinas's fifth argument). In particular, he emphasized that there is
no legitimate way we can infer the properties of The Great Chicken as
the creator of the chicken coop from the qualities of His creation.
For instance, Rooster Hume questioned how we can be sure that the
chicken coop was not created by a team; or that this is not one of
many attempts at creations, the first few having been botched; or, on
the other hand, that our chicken coop is not a poor first attempt" of
an infant chicken deity who afterwards abandoned it, ashamed of his
lame performance."
-------------------------
Found this in my old files, so if someone on the group sent it before,
my apologies.

*********************************************

Slinkey

<paul.davis60@ntlworld.com>
unread,
Mar 13, 2009, 3:02:30 PM3/13/09
to Atheism vs Christianity
My question is: cajun or southern fried?

dali_70

<w_e_coyote12@hotmail.com>
unread,
Mar 13, 2009, 3:13:08 PM3/13/09
to Atheism vs Christianity
On Mar 13, 3:02 pm, Slinkey <paul.davi...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> My question is: cajun or southern fried?
>
How about beer can. mmmm I can't wait till BBQ weather!

Dag Yo

<sir_roko2@yahoo.com>
unread,
Mar 13, 2009, 4:02:25 PM3/13/09
to Atheism vs Christianity
Those are some mighty fine arguments there. I can see know that
anyone who believes in God also needs to believe in the Great Chicken
as well.

liveD doG

<pointsturt@gmail.com>
unread,
Mar 14, 2009, 5:01:34 AM3/14/09
to Atheism vs Christianity
It's important that you get the Great Chicken story in order.
There is no dominant chicken because they all end up dead ,
yes sacrificed to man as penance for been so stupid .
Yes ! the chicken is stupid, it lays eggs that are not even
fertile , and it keeps laying eggs every day in the lame hope
hope that just maybe one of its eggs will hatch .
Hey this sounds a bit like a Christian that keeps praying
and praying and just maybe their prayers will be answered.

LJL

<llpens@aol.com>
unread,
Mar 14, 2009, 4:19:09 PM3/14/09
to Atheism vs Christianity


On Mar 14, 2:01 am, liveD doG <pointst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's important that you get the Great Chicken story  in order.
> There is no dominant chicken because they all end up dead ,
> yes sacrificed to man as penance for  been so stupid .
> Yes ! the chicken is stupid, it lays eggs that are not even
> fertile , and it keeps laying eggs every day in the lame hope
> hope that just maybe one of its eggs will hatch .
> Hey this sounds a bit like a Christian that keeps praying
> and praying and just maybe their prayers will be answered.

LL: Actually, humans and all mammals do the same thing. We just don't
lay eggs outside of our bodies. They are present inside the body,
equally waiting for fertilization and "hatching." If your mother's
body didn't do this you, too, would never have been "hatched."

****************************************************************************

LJL

<llpens@aol.com>
unread,
Mar 14, 2009, 4:19:54 PM3/14/09
to Atheism vs Christianity


On Mar 13, 1:02 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Those are some mighty fine arguments there.  I can see know that
> anyone who believes in God also needs to believe in the Great Chicken
> as well.


LL: Yes, I'd like to hear from some theists about this.

****************************************************************************

liveD doG

<pointsturt@gmail.com>
unread,
Mar 14, 2009, 7:42:35 PM3/14/09
to Atheism vs Christianity
LJL that is not quite right , fertilization of the egg happens
after copulation internally , then the egg is laid and incubated .
The silly chicken however keeps laying eggs regardless ,
I'm not sure of it but I think the chicken can lay eggs until
it becomes too old , but it can lay unfertilized eggs during it's
whole viable life .
As for my mother , she was a strict religious psycho,
who did not spare the rod, a real fruit cake , so any
reference to her giving birth to me conjures up all sorts of
memories , especially when she said she had the right to
do anything to me and I quote " I give birth to you "
said in a strong Slavic accent .
But hey what the heck I'm a better parent than she was .


On Mar 15, 6:19 am, LJL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Mar 14, 2:01 am, liveD doG <pointst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It's important that you get the Great Chicken story  in order.
> > There is no dominant chicken because they all end up dead ,
> > yes sacrificed to man as penance for  been so stupid .
> > Yes ! the chicken is stupid, it lays eggs that are not even
> > fertile , and it keeps laying eggs every day in the lame hope
> > hope that just maybe one of its eggs will hatch .
> > Hey this sounds a bit like a Christian that keeps praying
> > and praying and just maybe their prayers will be answered.
>
> LL: Actually, humans and all mammals do the same thing. We just don't
> lay eggs outside of our bodies. They are present inside the body,
> equally waiting for fertilization and "hatching." If your mother's
> body didn't do this you, too, would never have been "hatched."
>
> ***************************************************************************­*
> > > *********************************************- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages