鶏が先か、卵が先か
古くから語り継がれるこの問い
人それぞれ様々な見解があるにせよ
大多数の人を満足させる結論は未だ出ていない
そこで私は新しいアイデアを提供しようと思う
Google検索で上位にはない意見
この議論に疲れてしまった方も
問う事自体に無意味さを感じている方もぜひどうぞ
さぁ、みんなで哲学を楽しみましょう
Chicken or the egg?
The question has been passed down from generation to generation.
Although they have various ideas,
there is no conclusion satisfying most people.
Then I will offer a fresh idea.
The idea doesn’t rank high on Google search engine.
This is for people who are tired of the argument and
spiritless about questioning itself.
Come on! Let’s enjoy philosophy!
最初に一つ確認しておく事があります
それは「正しさ」と「真実」の違いについてです
正しさとは人間が決めた基準に沿って正確であれば正しいと認められます
昔の人は天動説を正しいと認めていました
今は地動説を正しいと認めています
それぞれの時代や、文化、国によって基準は異なりますが
それらは皆正しいと言えます
At first I want to get confirmed about a thing
It is about the difference between “Correctness” and “Truth”.
Actually “Correctness” means if it is accurate along with the standards decided by human beings then it is accepted as “Correctness”
The older generation approved the correctness of a thing by the Ptolemaic theory.
Nowadays they accept the Copernican theory.
The standards keep on changing according to time, culture and country but it may be said that all of them are right.
一方真実とは人間の決めた基準に影響を受けません
仮に全知全能の存在がいた場合その者は真実を決める事が出来ます
しかし、人間はその真実を知る事が出来ません
なぜなら全知全能の者と会話が出来ないからです
「正しさ」：知る事は出来るが答を一つに限定できない
「真実」：答を一つに限定できるが知る事は出来ない
一部例外として「πの値は一つ」等の真実がありますが
今回の議題ではないので無視します
On the other hand I don’t agree with the standards decided by human beings human for the definition of “Truth”. We can only define it with existence of “The Almighty”
But, human beings can’t know the definition, as there is not any possibility to have conversation with the almighty person.
So I sum up the two definitions as:
“Correctness”: Human beings know the meaning of this definition but it is not limited to only one.
“Accurate”: This definition has only one meaning but human beings don’t know it.
But as an exception to the above statement, we find definition of truth in case such as (π has a single value )
But as this is not the point of discussion right now so I ignore it.
では、話を本題に戻しましょう
「鶏が先か、卵が先か」
1鶏
2卵
3その他の答
私たちが求めている答は「真実」それとも「正しさ」？
それについて考えてみませんか？
So now let's return to our main topic of “Is chicken first or the egg?”
1st option chicken
2nd option egg
3 rd option other
Are the answers we seek ”Correct or Accurate”
Don’t you want to think over that?
もし真実の答が知りたいのであれば
鶏や卵の定義を全知全能の者に決めてもらわねばなりません
真実は人間の価値観に影響を受けないので人間が定義を決める事が出来ないのです
そうなると真実の答は全知全能の者に聞くしかありません
でも人間はその者と会話が出来ないので知る事が出来ません
なのでこの様な結論に達します
真実の答は一つに限定できるが、人間はそれを知る事が出来ない
If you want an answer to definition of “Truth”, you must have an almighty knowledgeable person to decide on the definition of the chicken and the egg.
A human being can't decide a definition because I don’t believe that it can be judged on the concept of values by human beings.
But then only an almighty knowledgeable person can give the answer to “Truth”.
But we human beings cannot have conversation with such an almighty knowledgeable person.
So I reach to such a conclusion:” Though there can be more than one answers to the defination of ‘Truth’ human beings do not have the knowledge to define it”.
つぎは正しい答は？を考えてみましょう
この場合鶏や卵の定義を人間が決めて良い事になります
正しさは人間が決めた基準に沿って判断するからです
さらにどのような理論を基準に優劣を判断するか？も決める事が出来ます
進化論、生物学、遺伝学、創世記、語意…etc
但しこの場合「誰が決めるのか？」が問題になります
この問いを作り出した者は既に他界していて聞く事が出来ないからです
Now what about the definition of “Correctness”? Let’s think about it.
It is a good that this time human beings can decide on the definition of chicken or egg.
As they have a judgment to think about a standard to the definition of “Correctness”
In addition it is also possible to decide which of the theory (such as theory of evolution, biology, genetics, Genesis, word meanings ... etc) is used to judge the merits by standards.
But in this case the question is "who will decide?” The reason is because the person who created these questions has already passed away and can't listen to it.
従って我々が導き出せる判断は「誰でも良い」となります
なので定義や判断基準は人それぞれ自由に決めて構わないと言う事です
そしてそれらの基準に合わせて適切であれば
どのような答に辿り着いても全て「正しい答」と認められます
複数ある「正しい答」同士が相反していても、全て正しいのです
なのでこの様な結論に達します
正しい答を我々は知る事が出来る、
しかし答を一つに限定する事は出来ず
相反する答も認めなければならない
なぜなら人間は皆、価値観が違うからである
Therefore, the judgment we derive is like "anyone is good”, so I want to say is, it is ok even if definition and judgment standard is decided at ease of every person.
And if all those standards are altogether appropriate then even if it is any kind of answer it is approved altogether as ” a right answer”.
Many times though we mutually disagree " a right answer" as altogether it is correct so we arrive to such a conclusion.
We know the right answers but without limiting it to only one answer we should also accept the contradictory answer as all human beings have different form of perceptions.
この問いを鶏と卵のみに限定せず他の生き物に適応したり
赤子と成人、種の違い、生命の誕生とは？などに展開する意見が出ても
それらの考えを否定する事は出来ない
なぜなら人間は皆、正しさの基準を考える権利を有しているから
I don’t want to limit this question only to egg and chicken but also want to have views on question of other living things like
Baby first or Adult, Seed first or Tree, Birth first or Life?
And finally I can't deny those thoughts because all the human beings have a right to think about a standard to the definition of “Correctness”
