Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Antoine

Tofi: The Theory of Inevitability

218 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

JasonFascio

There exists as little evidence for the physical body as there exists for the astral. The ideas of past and future along with all of science remain only as physical constructs of a physical observation. To accept inevitability is the purposeful denial of freewill, as well as the denial of the equal possibility of an astral existence.

The theory of inevitablity is a blind man's cop-out.

Edited by JasonFascio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Repoman

About all of this philosophizing about tofi, how can any of it matter?

It is something that can be neither proven nor disproven.

As for whether or not we have free will as opposed to mechanically going through the motions due to events set in place billions of years ago - we all feel as though we have free will. Therefore, we can state that we have free will. If we don't it wouldn't matter because we still feel like we do and we experience each moment as a free-thinking and independant entity.

Imagining a state in which we feel like we have free will but, in fact, don't is nothing but a thought excercise.

I also understand how, if tofi could be proven, it would shatter all religions - that is a part of why I would love to see tofi proven.

Every event is inevitable. Not because it is predictable, but because it wasn't an event until after it happened. Anything that didn't happen isn't an event. Anything that happened is an event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RickyCarmichael

Well after 14 pages of reading (quite exausting really), I decide to post.

I would like to say that I am convinced of your theories, (or theories of others, in whose footsteps you so humbly followed) but unfortunately at this point I cannot.

It would seem that you are caught between a rock and a hard place, in that you wish to refute religion, but you ignore whatever scientific evidence that is presented to you that conflicts with your theory. So you have neither the theologists nor the scientific community on your side.

Now really if you want Tofi to survive (let alone thrive), as science and religion have, you must teach people something of benefit.

But really I would be more interested in the development of this theory...

What led you to it?

Was there some event in your life that seemed out of your control?

Was there some observation you made that "turned the light bulb on", if you will?

I can readily appreciate your distaste for what religion has done to the world. Is this your impetus?

Thank-you for considering this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JasonFascio

The theory of inevitability as you envision it must be trashed due to it's complete lack of evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PriestinMO
TOFI: THE THEORY OF INEVITABILITY

EVERYTHING IS INEVITABLE THEREFORE PREDICTABLE

EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE THEREFORE INEVITABLE

TOFI is described on Internet by its author Derek Brockis. It is simple but describes the

universe as it is, not as we would like it to be.

Criticize and please prove Tofi is wrong - unfortunately no one has done so yet.

I believe you have a logic fallacy here.

To be certain I need your definition of "everything." Until then I will assume, based upon what I have read so far in this thread, "everything" means 'every event.'

Therefore, the statement:

EVERYTHING IS INEVITABLE THEREFORE PREDICTABLE

EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE THEREFORE INEVITABLE...

translates into "Every event is inescapable, unavoidable, and incapable of being evaded. Therefore every event is able to be foretold of in advance of the event's occurrence. Since, every event is able to be foretold of in advance of the event's occurrence every event is inescapable, unavoidable, and incapable of being evaded."

The fallacy is that everything is inevitable.

Not every event is inescapable, unavoidable, or incapable of being avoided. No one on the planet will be ate by a T-rex today, tomorrow, or next week. No one will drink an entire swimming pool of vodka tonight and then drive a Mini Cooper from Hawaii to London in the morning.

The argument may be that these are physically impossible events. The let us try a physically possible event. I will smoke an entire pack of cigarettes before I finish this post. Is it inescapable, unavoidable, or incapable of being evaded that I will smoke an entire pack of cigarettes before I finish this post? No.

Again, the fallacy is that everything is inevitable.

I will give the TOFI this much, all events are predictable, the missing word is "accurately." Examine this... if it were inevitable I would have died yesterday, AND if it were inevitable that yesterday I would live to see another day... ONLY one statement can be true. So, every event is able to be foretold of in advance but not all events can be foretold of correctly every time.

TOFI relates to cause and effect over the distance of time. To clarify... the effect of a cause becomes more accurately predictable as the time of the time of the effect draws closer. Derek Brockis used the example of a bullet hitting its intended mark. Milliseconds away it is highly likely the bullet will hit its mark and therefore the prediction is more accurate than one stating the bullet will hit its mark when the trigger is first pulled at a distance of 1 kilometer from the intended target. Certainly an instant before many events happen almost anyone could accurately predict the outcome. On the other hand, some events defy accurate prediction. Lotteries are an excellent example. Accurately predicting the suit and value of a card randomly drawn from a deck is 1 in 52 even up till the instant the card is turned over to reveal its face.

Sorry, I only smoked one cigarette and I am hitting "Add Reply" now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Repoman
The fallacy is that everything is inevitable.

Not every event is inescapable, unavoidable, or incapable of being avoided. No one on the planet will be ate by a T-rex today, tomorrow, or next week. No one will drink an entire swimming pool of vodka tonight and then drive a Mini Cooper from Hawaii to London in the morning.

I think that the way he defines "everything" is that set of events which can be said to have occurred after every event that will ever occurr has occurred.

Thus, the T-Rex eating a person tomorrow is not part of "everything" because at the end of time you could look back and see that it never happened.

I don't see a fallacy per se, I see circular, self-defining logic that is impossible to test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MarKy090
TOFI: THE THEORY OF INEVITABILITY

EVERYTHING IS INEVITABLE THEREFORE PREDICTABLE

EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE THEREFORE INEVITABLE

TOFI is described on Internet by its author Derek Brockis. It is simple but describes the

universe as it is, not as we would like it to be.

Criticise and please prove Tofi is wrong - unfortunately no one has done so yet.

no, when you predict, it doesnt mean it is inevitable, you can still make a choice. but not everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
industry7

I didn't read every single page of this, so if this already came up then I'm sorry.

First is a question. Is this Tofi idea supposed to replace science? If it's supposed to coexist with science, I don't think it can. Here's why.

If I'm understanding this Tofi idea correctly, it's basically saying that you can only predict future events if the universe is deterministic, and further, if the universe if deterministic then you can predict all future events. Obviously then determinism must be true for any of this to matter. Currently it's impossible to prove that the universe is deterministic, and there's no reason to believe that it will be proven. But let's set that aside for a minute and pretend that it has been proven.

Even assuming the universe is deterministic, there's another problem. Just b/c one certain state of matter while always lead to another certain state of matter doesn't mean you can actually predict it. This is b/c you would first have to be able to determine that some collection of matter was in the prerequisite state to begin with, which isn't possible. According to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, it's impossible to know all the needed information. If you can determine a particle's position, then you can't know its momentum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Antoine

Good Morning Alien Embryo

In your posting of 26 Sept 2007 you point out that Newton had dicussed the mechanical universe hundreds of years ago. True, of course.

Also Darwinism and Determinism have dealt with it, as hve many others. I do not claim Tofi is original but am trying to draw attention to 3 points.

1. The great significance of Tofi is unrecognised.

2. The lack of evidence against Tofi compared with the evidence for Tofi.

3. The fact that predictabiliity implies inevitability and vice versa.

Regards Derek Brockis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Arruda

I think tofi is like, stuff will happen and we can predict it, but our predictions aren't always correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zareste

The greatest minds in the universe can't predict anything with 100% accuracy, and there's a reason. They would need a matrix to account for every wave, particle and distortion in the universe. To store that data, the matrix would need physical particles of its own - several particles to account for each physical particle. It would need more particles than the universe contains, and then it would need to track its own particles using even more particles, which it would have to track. Doesn't work.

What's inevitable is inevitable, but there's no certain way to know what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dest_titor1
The greatest minds in the universe can't predict anything with 100% accuracy, and there's a reason. They would need a matrix to account for every wave, particle and distortion in the universe. To store that data, the matrix would need physical particles of its own - several particles to account for each physical particle. It would need more particles than the universe contains, and then it would need to track its own particles using even more particles, which it would have to track. Doesn't work.

What's inevitable is inevitable, but there's no certain way to know what it is.

Its also impossible to track every single wave and particle because of Heisenberg's`s uncertainty principle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Antoine

Good morning Zareste. Re. your commentss about the practical impossibiliies of perfect prediction. I agree with every word. Nevertheless, Tofi remains as the most likely to be correct of many theories on these subjects.

One explanation of the apparent impossibilites could be that the universe is nothing like we think it is. Tofi could allow for anything with the single proviso that whatever reality is, it is proceding in an inevitable pattern. Carry on criticising! Regards Derek Brockis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Antoine

Good Morning Dest - 1. Referring to your posting of Jan 21, it is noticeable how often Tofi is quoted in comparison to religions. Tofi is not a religion, merely a simple statemt of fact for which there is massive evidence. for and little evidence against. If you drop that brick it will inevitably hit the table. Yhe more you know about the brick and the table the more certain you are of that. The sun will rise tomorrow and if it does not it will be for a reason you can eventually understand (if you are here to understand it)

Compare this with all religions, for none of which is there any evidence, however many books you write, however many cathedrals you build..

It will not be surprising if Tofi develops into Tofism, practised by Tofists. It is surpising how comforting the concept of absolute inevitability can be, for example if you have a serious incurable disease, as I do. It saves you from having always to ask the question 'why me'.

After considering Tofi for 40 years I have still not seen sufficient evidence to reject it as a thoery. I wish I could - the world would be a more exciting place withut it. I do not insist that Tofi is true whereas almost every one of the thousands of religions insists it is the true one. They canot all be true and there is no vidence for any of them anyway.

I think Tofi, or something like it will slowly become part of human phillosophy world - or universe - wide. Derek Brockis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Costas-Lilitsas_GREECE

...and of course, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in action during an experiment. No theory here, but tangible evidence of the Chaotic behaviour that exists in sub-atomic scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
behaviour???

Every thing is predictable but they wont be true...............In such ways I completely question the credibility of Tofis theory

Thanks

UL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jacobstiles

EVERYTHING IS INEVITABLE THEREFORE PREDICTABLE

EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE THEREFORE INEVITABLE

The theory is so flawed it's unbelievable

See, for example, it may be inevitable that my dog is going to die at some point, so i can predict YES, he'll die, in the future.

But if i predict that my dog is going to die because of illness, that isn't inevitable at all now is it? For all i know, he can die of old age or simply an accident.

It's bull****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.