The contrarians guide to the chicken and egg
This question has baffled smart and dumb thinkers alike since Plutarch. Before anything else, I must make one point clear. If you claim that the egg came first because amniotic eggs formed millions of years before chickens existed, or whatever the hell, you are SUCH A LOSER. What could possibly be so wrong in your Koala brain? We are obviously talking about the Chicken Egg, we have obviously always been talking about the Chicken Egg. Like many similar conundrums, this spirited debate over the answer has become dominated in recent times by STEMlords that refuse to do any thinking for themselves — “Umm actually, I’d take all six people off the train tracks” and the like. The enlightened STEMlord will of course claim that the egg came first, and that Saint Evolution evolved proto-chickens that would create a chicken egg from which a chicken hatched. This is all fine and good, except it really isn’t. Not only is this solution anti-choice, it also attempts to sidestep the real purpose of the question, in much the same way the most annoying friends of friends try to cheat on Would You Rather questions. "What is an egg? A miserable little pile of cells."
The platonic essence of “chicken-ness” is formed through the lived experience of each and every chicken. Thus, a chick may be a “chicken,” but it is not a baby chicken. This “chicken-ness” is becomed through the animal that will grow to form into a chicken, before itself laying an egg, or perhaps being eaten. Thus, we can see that the chicken grows first, and only that chicken will be able to lay an egg. This egg then does not hatch into a chicken. Thus there is only an illusion of an unbroken loop from egg to chicken to egg or chicken to egg to chicken. It is a series of parallel in construction lineages of chicken to egg, and egg that does not unlikely itself form a chicken.
It is actually pretty simple if you pay attention.