Circular Argument 

A circular argument, also known as circular reasoning or a circular fallacy, occurs when the conclusion of an argument is essentially the same as one of its premises or presuppositions. In other words, it is an argument in which the proposition being argued for is used to support itself. Circular arguments are logically invalid because they don't provide any new information or evidence, and they rely on an assumption to prove itself.

Examples and Types of Circular Fallacies

• Circular Definitions: In this form of circular reasoning, the term being defined is used in the definition itself.

  • Example: "The Bible is the word of God because God's word is written in the Bible."

• In this case, the conclusion ("The Bible is the word of God") is just a restatement of the premise ("God's word is written in the Bible"), and it doesn't offer any new information to support the argument.

• Circular Justification: In circular justification, the argument relies on the statement it is trying to justify.

  • Example: "I should be hired for the job because I'm the best candidate."

• The argument doesn't provide any evidence or reasons for why the person is the best candidate, essentially saying, "I should be hired because I should be hired."

• Circular Cause and Effect: This occurs when the cause and effect are used interchangeably, making it unclear which came first.

  • Example: "I'm tired because I didn't get enough sleep last night, and the reason I didn't get enough sleep is that I was tired."

• This circular argument doesn't establish a clear cause and effect relationship between being tired and not getting enough sleep.

• Circular Proof: In this form of circular argument, the proof or evidence for a claim is the claim itself.

  • Example: "The Loch Ness Monster exists because there have been countless sightings of the Loch Ness Monster."

• The argument relies on the sightings of the Loch Ness Monster as proof, but those sightings are themselves the claim being questioned.

• Question-Begging Analogies: Circular reasoning can also occur when an analogy or comparison is used in such a way that it assumes the conclusion.

  • Example: "My friend's cooking is the best because it's better than everyone else's."

• This argument doesn't provide any criteria or reasons to judge the friend's cooking, just an assumption that it's the best.

Circular arguments are considered logically invalid because they don't offer any genuine support for their conclusions. In a valid argument, the conclusion should be distinct from the premises and provide new information or insights. Recognizing and avoiding circular reasoning is essential in critical thinking and debate to ensure that arguments are based on sound logic and evidence.