A Circular, or Tautalogical Prophecy is simply put a logical argument about the future that cannot be proven wrong. Since it cannot be proven wrong, it has no difference from a trivial statement of self-asserted truth, and can be dismissed as a tautology. It cannot be proven wrong, by the technique of discrediting all logical arguments that prove it wrong. This sounds complicated, but here is the general representation of a statement of tautalogical prophecy:
A: ( X -> ~A ) -> ~X
In speaking terms, any time a statement X disproves statement A, then statement X is false.
Many tautological prophecies are complex logical arguments, but all contain statement A in some form or another. Usually the proof of A is itself a fallacy of some sort, either an ad hominem, or burden of proof, but it does not need to be. The problem is that statement A, whether logically sound or not, states nothing about the nature of X, or the argument.
Here's a fun way to wrangle it:
A: (X -> ~A) -> ~X A: X -> ~A -> ~X contrapositive: A: X -> X -> A A: A
Since the statement A proves its own truth, then it is a tautology, a trivial statement in logic. It argues nothing, and neither proves, nor disproves anything. It is an isolated argument that cannot apply generally.
Examples:
Everything that can go wrong, will go wrong. If you design an experiment to disprove that, you will seem to succeed, but in reality, your experiment just went wrong. X: If incidence of things going wrong, compared to things going right, is statistically insignificant, then A is false. A: If X disproves this statement, then X must be false.
God's hand is on all our lives, He is all knowing, all powerful. If you try to prove this, He will anticipate that and easily evade your detection. X: If God is indistinguishable from random chance on all our lives, then God does not exist. A: If X disproves the existence of God, then God makes X false.
California will shatter into several small islands after a catastrophic earthquake in the future. Any time in which this has not happened, and shows no indication of happening, is simply not time for the prophecy to come true yet. X: If such a large earthquake has never existed, and all California does is shear a few centimeters every year, then that prophecy cannot be true. A: If X disproves that prophecy, then X must not be far enough in the future.
You will fall in love with someone, marry, and contentedly devote the rest of your life to your family. It happens to everybody. If you do not fall in love with anyone, then you just haven't met the right person yet. X: If I don't fall in love with people, I will never start a family that way. A: Anyone who denies the cult of family values has simply not agreed with us yet.
An Invisible Pink Unicorns tapdances on my night stand every day. Her Holy Hoofedness has reasons beyond our understanding to prevent anyone else from seeing, measuring, or otherwise perceiving this miraculous event. X: If nothing tapdances on that nightstand, then an Invisible Pink Unicorn sure as heck isn't doing it! A: Any statement that denies the IPU is based on bad measurements, and the result of Her Holy Trickiness.
Of course, everyone knows that last example is really the truth.
Proof
To argue a circular prophecy, you must establish that the claim A adds nothing to the argument, being a tautology. Usually this is best done using that nice little recursive word in our language: 'why.' Why should experiments go wrong? Why do you say God makes dissenting statements false? Why isn't the billions of years of geological strata enough time for your earthquake prophecy? What makes you think there's someone out there I have yet to fall madly in chaste love with?
Above all, don't let them use their argument as proof of itself. Tautologies are like that. "Because everyone falls in love!" "Why does everyone fall in love?" "It just is!" "Show me why I must."
Comment
Index
Previous
(Fun with Classifieds)
Next
(Evil Commute)