The Theory Of Everything, Or Is It?

I've just had a disagreement with a physics/maths undergrad girl I know who has recently been talking on another forum about a Theory of Everything or ToE.Now, I had to bring up the possibility that we may never reach this theory given some big names like Hawking have doubted we can reach it (though trying to avoid Gdel's theorum of incompleteness which doesn't seem to apply). We then went on to the results of such a ToE being found and it seemed that this student thought it would basically end science, that is, we'd effectively have one theory that could explain everything from the Big Bang to sexual selection to fluid dynamics and quantum entanglement.Does this sound right or is this taking it a bit far? I have heard such a theory would certainly help unify quantum and macroscale events and the likes of EM and gravity etc. but I don't see how it could basically explain every single physical phenomena we can see.I may just not be thinking straight, but then I need to read up again on ToE and see for myself. Anyone agree or disagree with this ToE?

Exactly what I thought. But it seems that this girl, who chat to me on AIM about it, could use this one theory to accurately model, say, the human brain or anmy chemical reaction. Now, I could see a mechanical and highly reduced theory maybe linking the fundamental forces etc. which may or may not be useful in practice, but to have one that could not only explain everything in physics which underlies chemistry and therefore biology and then go onto explain the likes of sociology or psychology and so on seems a bit excessive.