And were selected by us, which is more precise and relevant. You can replace "force fed" with just "fed" when it comes to foie gras and be both still correct and missing the key point.
Once again, humans are a part of nature. Chickens exist in a symbiotic relationship with humans. Would you describe the fungus grown by certain ant colonies as having been 'bred' by the ants or as co-evolving with them? Chicken evolution is only artificial if you consider human desires and motivations as being outside of nature.
What I'm saying is that scientists and dictionaries literally define "artificial selection" to mean a process where people (instead of nature) select which organisms get to reproduce [1].
Chicken farmers breeding a fast-growing chicken is a textbook example of artificial selection.
And while humans are part of nature, nobody would call a car crash a "natural disaster" just because it was caused by humans.
Evolution is designed to increase the chances of survival by introducing genetic diversity and adapting to an environment in order to maximize life expectancy.
Selective breeding actually reduces the chances of survival and introduces massive defects. It's much more likely all of the chickens will die of a single disease with selective breeding, while evolution allows them to survive.
> By evolving to
Being selected to by us
> they have convinced humans to feed and house them
No, humans have constructed chickens to meet our requirements, minimising the amount we need to house them (e.g. killing them at a few weeks old).