Scott encoding even has a weirder implications (if you're not used to it) if you think about it
0 ≡ λf.λx.x
1 ≡ λf.λx.x (λf.λx.x)
2 ≡ λf.λx.x (λf.λx.x (λf.λx.x))
Or if you allow meta variables in your expression: 0 ≡ λf.λx.x
1 ≡ λf.λx.x 0
2 ≡ λf.λx.x 1
This implies 2 contains 1, 1 contains 0. Bam. Scott encoding also encodes some parts of set theory.Following from this, of course, all ADTs can be encoded following the Scott encoding scheme.
To go a step further, think about how you would implement a predecessor function on the Church encoding of the naturals. It is much more complicated than one might expect, and perfectly motivates the introduction of Scott encodings and the fixed-point function.