Circular reasoning fallacy is a type of logical error which uses the conclusion of an argument as a premise, thus creating a closed off chain of thought that does not present any new support. This form of reason is also very much so put forth in a way which is deceptive and unconvincing as it does not bring to the table any new or valid evidence.
Introduction to Circular Reasoning: What You Need to Know
Circular error is a term used for a circular reasoning definition argument whose premise includes the conclusion which we are trying to prove at the start; in essence the argument is in a closed loop, the conclusion is what the premise puts forth which then brings us back to the conclusion. Also this fallacy does not really prove anything and is which in everyday talk is easy to miss out; which is why it is important to be aware of the structure of the argument to not be misled.
Breaking Down the Circular Reasoning Fallacy
Circular reasoning has the function of including the element to be proved as already known instead which should be a conclusion of the discussion. For example, "I am always truthful hence you may trust me." In this case we see the assertion I always tell the truth put forth without support, instead the statement is used as the truth to which the argument is shown which is what makes the argument not work. Identifying this form of reasoning is very important in steering clear of broken and non productive arguments, which in turn promotes logical and evidenced based debate.
How Circular Reasoning Affects Logical Arguments?
Circular reasoning weakens circular reasoning examples logical arguments by not putting forth new support for the issue at hand. Instead of bringing in new evidence or a sound logic the argument just loops back to what it has said before which in turn does not allow the audience to truly assess the validity. Also it may present a fallacy to the listeners which in turn may cause them to accept a result without question which in turn weakens the argument as a whole and also deflates its credibility.
Examples of Circular Reasoning in Everyday Conversations
The Bible is the word of God as it states circular reasoning logical fallacy so in the Bible. This argument is of a circular nature which means that the truth of the premise (Bible’s truth) is used as the evidence for the conclusion. Also in this case no outside evidence is put forth and the argument just repeats the claim which does not progress the discussion or prove the point.
Circular Reasoning vs. Other Logical Fallacies
Circular reasoning is a certain circular reasoning vs begging the question type of logical fallacy which in turn is different in key aspects from for example the straw man and red herring. By studying these differences we are better able to identify weak arguments.
Circular Reasoning
This fallacy is of the type which has the conclusion also serves as a premise thus creating a loop which does not have independent support. It may present as a sound argument at first glance but in fact does not in reality advance the argument.
Strawman Fallacy
In this fallacy a false version of the opposition’s position is put forward and easily refuted. This differs from circular reasoning in that we don’t see a repeat of the claim, instead there is a twist which isn’t true.
Red Herring Fallacy
This fallacy puts focus on an irrelevant issue instead of the main point. Also in contrast we have circular reasons which stay on topic but fail at providing new support for the same point.
Why Circular Arguments Fail to Prove a Point?
Circular arguments fall short as what is circular reasoning they put forth no new or valid info which supports the conclusion. They rehash the point in different terms which is not at all the same as presenting independent logic which the audience can grasp. What we see in a good argument is the put forth of separate facts which back up the point, but in circular reasoning the conclusion is just restated which adds no value thus they are not at all persuasive.
Signs You’re Using Circular Reasoning without Realising it
You may be using circular reasoning, circular argument fallacy without even knowing it when you restate the same claim or use the conclusion as a premise. If the reasoning is going in a circle and not presenting any new evidence, that is a sign of circular reasoning. To avoid it, always see that your argument has independent support for its claims instead of just restating the conclusion.
Real-Life Scenarios Where Circular Reasoning Appears
Circular reason goes into play in many real life situations which range from religious debates to political talk. For example a person may put forth that “the government is a trustworthy institution which circular reasoning examples always does what is best for the people. Here the speaker is putting forth that the government has the public’s best interest at heart which is a premise that has not been proven and which is in fact just a restatement of the conclusion, as often highlighted by Assignment in Need.
How to Avoid Circular Logic in Essays and Debates?
Circular argument, which is also known as circular reasoning weakens out cases in talks by putting forth that which is to be proved as the proof. To make a strong point it is vital to put forth sound reasoning and independent support for each of your points.
Use Independent Evidence
Each element of your argument should be supported by facts, data or examples, not just a rehash of your conclusion. This shows critical thinking and improves credibility.
Avoid Using the Conclusion as a Premise
Repeating your conclusion as the basis for support is a tell tale sign of circular logic. Instead have your reasoning lead up to the conclusion in a non dependent way.
Structure Arguments Logically
Organize your flow of thought into a step by step process which in turn will avoid circular reasoning and which also allows your audience to follow your train of thought easily.
Conclusion
Circular argument is a fallacy in which how to avoid circular reasoning weakens arguments through the use of the conclusion as a premise; it gives no real support to the claims. Identifying and refraining from circular reasoning is key to present solid, logical arguments that hold up to criticism. By seeing out this fallacy you can improve the quality of your debate and increase the clear and valid presentation of your reasonings.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q1. How Does Circular Reasoning Weaken an Argument?
Circular arguments break down the strength of an argument which is due to them not presenting independent evidence instead they rely on the conclusion to support itself. This creates a logical cycle which adds no value to the discussion. Thus the argument is not persuasive to the audience.
Q2. How Can I Recognize Circular Reasoning in an Argument?
Circular reasoning is identified when the conclusion supports itself. Watch for arguments that the premise and the conclusion are the same. If the reasoning does not include out of the argument support, it is very likely circular.
Q3. Can Circular Reasoning Be Used in Persuasive Writing?
In which some may find circular reasoning to be a persuasive tool it in fact is not a strong argument. At first it may play to the audience’s ideas, but in the end it does not put forth independent support. To truly persuade, present logic that stands alone.
Q4. Is Circular Reasoning the Same as a Tautology?
In which some may find circular reasoning to be a persuasive tool it in fact is not a strong argument. At first it may play to the audience’s ideas, but in the end it does not put forth independent support. To truly persuade, present logic that stands alone.
Q5. How Does Circular Reasoning Compare to Strawman and Red Herring Fallacies?
Circular reason goes around in circles without presenting evidence, also a straw man fallacy which takes the opponent’s point out of context to easily attack it. Red herring which changes the subject totally is also a type. All these are fallacies which in different ways present flawed arguments.