- #1
ShayanJ
Gold Member
- 2,811
- 605
What do you think?
But the fact that a Ph.D. were awarded, means there was a Ph.D. student!With no Ph.D, there would be no need for a Ph.D advisor.
Yeah, but I meant there was a PhD student, so there was an advisor!..and at the time the PhD student was not a PhD, but a student.
Mmm, prove it :)
The advisor wasn't mentored. Just study about the way people like Copernicus or Galilieo. They were educated either in universities to get more elementary degrees or by other scientists. So it seems to me there was only one degree and further experience was gained by their own efforts and thoughts.A tiny problem: who or what mentored the advisor? Were the advisor not competent enough to become a Ph.D themselves, even though, they supposedly had more experience in the field?
Same answer as the original chicken and egg problem: The egg came first, laid by something very similar to, yet not quite, a chicken. The first Ph.D was given by something with credentials very similar to, but not a Ph.D.
That's not a proper answer. Because I can change chicken to egg-laying-animal. Which came first, egg or egg-laying-animal? Then we're back to the first place.Same answer as the original chicken and egg problem: The egg came first, laid by something very similar to, yet not quite, a chicken. The first Ph.D was given by something with credentials very similar to, but not a Ph.D.
The animal, it came to life as a bud that was almost like an egg but doesn't 100% fit the definition, but it had a random mutation which caused it's offspring to fit the definition of an egg 100%. We humans define categories over something as fuzzy as life so it makes it hard to fully categorize. But evolution required a lot of "almost eggs" before it produced the first "egg;" just like there were a lot of "almost chickens" before there was a chicken.That's not a proper answer. Because I can change chicken to egg-laying-animal. Which came first, egg or egg-laying-animal? Then we're back to the first place.
Right, which contradicts the answer in post #10.The animal,
Actually you have a point. Having such sharp categories isn't the right way to go about life. So I guess the question itself isn't a good one.The animal, it came to life as a bud that was almost like an egg but doesn't 100% fit the definition, but it had a random mutation which caused it's offspring to fit the definition of an egg 100%. We humans define categories over something as fuzzy as life so it makes it hard to fully categorize. But evolution required a lot of "almost eggs" before it produced the first "egg;" just like there were a lot of "almost chickens" before there was a chicken.
How does it contradict anything? These are two different questions.. A chicken must come from an egg, it can not have come from anything else. A chicken, however may lay an egg of something that's not a chicken. An egg must come from an animal but an animal doesn't have to come from an egg. Evolution has rules like anything else. But like Shyan said, the question doesn't work because there is no clear boundary between a chicken and a chicken ancestor. There is no clear boundary between an egg and an primitive egg-like structure.Right, which contradicts the answer in post #10.
So Shyan has a point.
But wait! The PhD advisor does not have to have a PhD himself, he just has to supervise a PhD to be a PhD advisor!Same answer as the original chicken and egg problem: The egg came first, laid by something very similar to, yet not quite, a chicken. The first Ph.D was given by something with credentials very similar to, but not a Ph.D.